Note: This material was scanned into text files for the sole purpose of convenient electronic research. This material is NOT intended as a reproduction of the original volumes. However close the material is to becoming a reproduced work, it should ONLY be regarded as a textual reference. Scanned at Phoenixmasonry by Ralph W. Omholt, PM in May 2007.
GOULD'S HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY
THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
VOLUME II
CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717-23
CHAPTER TWO
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723-60
CHAPTER THREE
FREEMASONRY IN YORK
CHAPTER FOUR
HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND
"ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS"
CHAPTER FIVE
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761-1813
CHAPTER SIX
HISTORY OF THE UNITED GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1814-1930
CHAPTER SEVEN
CHAPTER EIGHT
EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY - SCOTLAND
CHAPTER NINE
FREEMASONRY IN IRELAND
HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND
ILLUSTRATIONS
VOLUME II
H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught, K.G., Grand Master of England since
1901 Frontispiece
FACING PAGE
The Room on the First Floor of the Goose and Gridiron Tavern,
London 2
Anthony Sayer. First Grand Master of the Lodge of England, 1717-18 10
John Theophilus Desaguliers, F.R.S. Grand Master, 1719; Deputy Grand Master, 1722-6 18
Martin Folkes, F.R.S. Deputy Grand Master, 1724 78 The Sword of State of the Grand Lodge of England 86 Frontispiece to the Book of Constitutions, 1756-7 98
William Preston, famous as an instructor in Masonic Ritual and founder
of the lectures bearing his name 128
Seals of Grand Lodge and Grand Chapter of England 140 English Seals 142 Six Silver Jewels (Pierced Type) 208 Frontispiece to the Book of Constitutions, 1784 210 Freemasons' Tavern from 1789 to 1867 222 H.R.H. the Duke of Sussex. Grand Master, 1813-43 232 Clothing of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of England (Colour) 234 Jewels of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of England (Colour) 240
ix
x ILLUSTRATIONS
FACING PAGE
English Provincial Grand Lodge Clothing (Colour) 2.46
England-Private Lodge Jewels and Clothing (Colour) 2.52.
H.R.H. Albert Edward, Prince of Wales, K.G. (Afterwards King Edward VII). Grand Master of England, 1874-1901 254
Regalia of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of Ireland (Colour) 2.66 Jewels of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of Ireland (Colour) 2.72. Ireland - Private Lodge Jewels and Clothing (Colour) 2.88
Clothing and Regalia of the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Scot
land (Colour) 376
Clothing of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of Scotland (Colour) 384 Jewels of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of Scotland (Colour) 390
Jewels of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of Scotland (Continued)
and Scottish Provincial Grand Lodge Regalia (Colour) 396
Typical Examples of Scottish Lodge Aprons (Colour) 400
Scottish Private Lodge Jewels (Being Those of the Lodge of EdinburghMary's Chapel - the Oldest Lodge in the World) (Colour) 404
Signers of the Declaration of Independence, Members of the Masonic Fraternity
Samuel Adams, Josiah Bartlett, William Ellery, Benjamin Franklin, Elbridge Gerry, Lyman Hall, John Hancock, Joseph Hewes, William Hooper, Samuel Huntington, Thomas Jefferson, Francis Lightfoot Lee, Richard Henry Lee, Francis Lewis, Philip Livingston, Thomas McKean, Robert Morris, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Robert Treat Paine, John Penn, George Read, Benjamin Rush, Roger Sherman, Richard Stockton, Matthew Thornton, George Walton, William Whipple, John Witherspoon, Oliver Wolcott At end of volume
GOULD'S HISTORY
OF
FREEMASONRY
THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
VOLUME II
A HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
VOL. II
CHAPTER I
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23
UNFORTUNATELY the Minutes of the Grand Lodge of England, founded June 24, 1717, are not in existence prior to June 24, 1723.
For the history, therefore, of the first six years of the new regime, we are dependent mainly on the account given by Dr. Anderson in the Constitutions of 1738, nothing whatever relating to the proceedings of the Grand Lodge, except the General Regulations of 1721, having been inserted in the earlier edition Of 1723. From this source the following narrative, in which are preserved as nearly as possible both the orthographical and the typographical peculiarities of the original i s derived KING GEORGE I enter'd London most magnificently on 20 Sept. 1714. And after the Rebellion was over A.D. 176, the few Lodges at London finding themselves neglected by Sir Christopher Wren, through fit to cement under a Grand Master as the Center of Union and Harmony, vii. the Lodges that met,
1. At the Goose and Gridiron Ale‑house in St. Paul's Church‑Yard.
2. At the Crown Ale‑house in Parker's‑Lane near Drury‑Lane.
3. At the Apple‑Tree Tavern in Charles‑street, Covent‑Garden.
4. At the Rummer and Grapes Tavern in Channel‑Row, Westminster.
They and some old Brothers met at the said Apple‑Tree, and having put into the Chair the oldest Master Mason (now the Master of a Lodge), they constituted themselves a Grand Lodge pro Tempore in Due Form, and forthwith revived the Quarterly Communication of the Officers of Lodges (call'd the Grand Lodge) resolv'd to hold the Annual ASSEMBLY and Feast, and then to chuse a GRAND MASTER from among themselves, till they should have the Honour of a Noble Brother at their Head.
Accordingly On St. John Baptist's Day, in the 3d year of KING GEORGE I, A.D. 1717, the ASSEMBLY and Feast of the Free and accepted Masons was held at the foresaid Goose and Gridiron Ale‑house.
Before Dinner, the oldest Master Mason (now the Master of a Lodge) in the Chair, proposed a List of proper Candidates ; and the Brethren by a Majority of Hands elected MR. ANTONY SAYER, Gentleman, Grand Master of Masons, who being forthwith invested with the Badges of Office and Power by the said f Mr Jacob Lamball, Carpenter,) Grand oldest Master, and install'd, was! Capt. Joseph Elliot,f Wardens. duly congratulated by the Assembly who pay'd him the Homage.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3
Sayer, Grand Master, commanded the Masters and Wardens of Lodges to meet the Grand Officers every Quarter in Communication,' at the Place that he should appoint in his Summons sent by the Tyler.
ASSEMBLY and Feast at the said Place 24 June 1718.
Brother Saver having gather'd the Votes, after Dinner proclaim'd aloud our Brother GEORGE PAYNE Esqr Grand Master of Masons who being duly invested, install'd, congratulated and homaged, f Mr John Cordwell, City Carpenter, Grand recommended the strict Ob‑ Mr Thomas Morrice, Stone Cutter, Wardens. servance of the Quarterly Com munication ; and desired any Brethren to bring to the Grand Lodge any old Writings and Records concerning Masons and Masonry in order to shew the Usages of antient Times : And this Year several old Copies of the Gothic Constitutions were produced and collated.
ASSEMBLY and Feast at the said Place, 24 June 1719. Brother Payne having gather'd the Votes, after Dinner proclaim'd aloud our Reverend Brother JOHN Theophilus Desaguliers, L.L.D. and F.R. S., Grand Master of Masons, and being duly invested, install'd, congratulated and homaged, forthwith reviv'd the JMr Antony Sayer foresaid,~Grand old regular and peculiar Toasts or l Mr Tho. Morrice foresaid, Wardens. Healths of the Free Masons. Now several old Brothers, that had neglected the Craft, visited the Lodges; some Noblethen were also made Brothers, and more new Lodges were constituted.
ASSEMBLY and Feast at the foresaid Place 24 June 1720. Brother Desaguliers having gather'd the Votes, after Dinner proclaim'd 'aloud GEORGE PAYNE, Esq` ; again Grand Master of Masons; who being duly invested, install'd, congratulated and homag'd, began the usual Mr Thomas Hobby, Stone‑Cutter,! Grand Demonstrations of Joy, Love {Mr Rich. Ware, Mathematician, ~ Wardens. and Harmony.
This Year, at some private Lodges, several very valuable Manuscripts (for they had nothing yet in Print) concerning the Fraternity, their Lodges, Regulations, Charges, Secrets, and Usages (particularly one writ by Mr Nicholas Stone the Warden of Inigo Jones) were too hastily burnt by some scrupulous Brothers ; that those Papers might not fall into strange Hands.
At the Quarterly Communication or Grand Lodge, in ample Form, on St John Evangelist's Day 172o, at the said Place It was agreed, in order to avoid Disputes on the Annual Feast‑Day, that the new Grand Master for the future shall be named and proposed to the Grand Lodge some time before the Feast, by the present or old Grand Master : and if approv'd, that the Brother proposed, if present, shall be kindly saluted; or even if absent, His Health shall be toasted as Grand Master Elect.
1 N.B‑It is call'd the Quarterly Communication, because it should meet Quarterly according to antient Usage. And When the Grand Master is present it is a Lodge in Ample Form; otherwise, only in Due Form, yet having the same Authority with Ample Form.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, I7I7‑23 3
Also agreed, that for the future the New Grand Master, as soon as he is install'd, shall have the sole Power of appointing both his Grand Wardens and a Deputy Grand Master (now found as necessary as formerly) according to antient Custom, when Noble Brothers were Grand Masters.
Accordingly At the Grand ‑Eoage in ample Form on Lady‑Day I72I, at the said Place Grand Master PAYNE proposed for his Successor our most Noble Brother.
John Duke of Montagu, Master of a Lodge; who being present, was forthwith saluted Grand Master Elect, and his Health drank in due Form ; when they all express'd great joy at the happy Prospect of being again patronized by noble Grand Masters, as in the prosperous Times of Free Masonry.
PAYNE, Grand Master, observing the Number of Lodges to encrease, and that the General Assembly requir'd more Room, proposed the next Assembly and Feast to be held at Stationers‑Hall, Ludgate Street; which was agreed to.
Then the Grand Wardens were order'd, as usual, to prepare the Feast, and to take some Stewards to their Assistance, Brothers of Ability and Capacity, and to appoint some Brethren to attend the Tables ; for that no strangers must be there.
But the Grand Officers not finding a proper Number of Stewards, our Brother Mr 3ostah `Jillónau, Upholder in the Burrougb Soutbwark, generously undertook the whole himself, attended by some Waiters, Thomas Morrice, Francis Bailey, &c.
ASSEMBLY and Feast at Stationers‑Hall, 24 June 1721 in the 7th Year of King GEORGE I.
PAYNE, Grand Master, with his Wardens, the former Grand Officers, and the Masters and Wardens of 12 Lodges, met the Grand Master Elect in a Grand Lodge at the King's Arms Tavern St Paul's Church yard, in the Morning ; and having forth with recognized their Choice of Brother MONTAGU they made some new Brothers, particularly the noble PHILIP Lord Stanbope, now Earl of Cbesterfaeld : And from thence they marched on Foot to the Hall in proper Clothing and due Form; where they were joyfully receiv'd by about 15 o true and faithful, all clothed.
After Grace said, they sat down in the antient Manner of Masons to a very elegant Feast, and dined with joy and Gladness. After Dinner and Grace said, Brother PAYNE, the old Grand Master, made the first Procession round the Hall, and when return'd he proclaim'd aloud the most noble Prince and our Brother.
JOHN MONTAGU, Duke of Montagu, GRAND MASTER of Masons ! and Brother Payne having invested his Grace's WORSHIP with the Ensigns and Badges of his Office and Authority, install'd him in Solomon's Chair and sat down on his Right Hand; while the Assembly own'd the 'Duke's Authority with due Homage and joyful Congratulations, upon this Revival of the Prosperity of Masonry.
MONTAGU, G. Master, immediately call'd forth (without naming him before) as it were carelesly, :31ohn !$eal, M.D. as his Deputy Grand Master, whom Brother Payne invested, and install'd him in Hiram Abbiff's Chair on the Grand Master's Left Hand.
In like Manner his Worsbi call'd Mr osiab Villeneau, Grand forth and appointed p {Mr Thomas Morrice,} Wardens. who were invested and install'd by the last Grand Wardens.
Upon which the Deputy and Wardens were saluted and congratulated as usual.
4 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 Then MONTAGU, G. Master, with his Officers and the old Officers, having made the zd procession round the Hall, Brother '‑Desagultórs made an eloquent Oration about Masons and Masonry : And after Great Harmony, the Effect of brotherly Love, the Grand Master thank'd Brother Villeneau for his Care of the Feast, and order'd him as Warden to close the Lodge in good Time.
The Grand ‑Lodge in ample Form on 29 Sept. 1721, at King's‑Arms foresaid, with the former Grand Officers and those of 16 Lodges.
His Grace's Worship and the Lodge finding Fault with all the Copies of the old Gothic Constitutions, order'd Brother James Anderson, A.M., to digest the same in a new and better Method.
The Grand ‑.oa,qe in ample Form on St. JoxN's Day 27 Dec. 1721, at the said King's Arms, with former Grand Officers and those of zo Lodges.
MONTAGU, Grand Master, at the Desire of the Lodge, appointed 14 learned Brothers to examine Brother Anderson's Manuscript, and to make Report. This Communication was made very entertaining by the Lectures of some old Masons.
Some general notes on the foregoing may here be interpolated.
It must be borne carefully in mind, that the revival of the Quarterly Communication was recorded twenty‑one years after the date of the occurrence to which it refers; also, that no such " revival" is mentioned by Dr. Anderson in the Constitutions Of 1723.
In an anonymous and undated work, but which must have been published in 1763 or the following year, we are told that "the Masters and Wardens of six Lodges assembled at the Apple Tree on St John's Day, 1716 and, after the oldest Master Mason (who was also the Master of a Lodge) had taken the Chair, they constituted among themselves a GRAND LODGE pro tempore, and revived their Quarterly Communications and their Annual Feast" (The Complete Free‑mason or, Multa Paucis for Lovers of Secrets, p. 83). All subsequent writers appear to have copied from Anderson in their accounts of the proceedings of 1717, though the details are occasionally varied. The statement in Multa Paucis is evidently a blend of the events arranged by Anderson under the years 1716 and 1717 and that the author of Multa Paucis had studied the Constitutions Of 1738 with some care, is proved by his placing Lambell [Lamball] and Elliot in their proper places as Senior and Junior Grand Warden respectively. The word six can hardly be a misprint, as it occurs twice in the work (pp. 83, III).
On removing from Oxford to London in 1714, Dr. Desaguliers settled in Channel‑Row, Westminster and continued'to reside there until it was pulled down to make way for the new bridge at Westminster. George Payne, his immediate predecessor as Grand Master, lived at New Palace Yard, Westminster, where he died February 23, 1757. Both Desaguliers and Payne were members in 1723 of the Lodge at the Horn Tavern in New Palace Yard, Westminster, which is described in the Constitutions of 1738 (p. 185) as "the Old Lodge removed from the RUMMER and GRAPES, Channel Row, whose Constitution is immemorial." (Now the Royal Somerset House and Inverness Lodge, No. 4.) Although Payne is commonly described as a " learned antiquarian," he does not appear to have been THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 5 a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries. The Gentleman's Maga.Zine, vol. xxvii, 1757, p. 93, has the following: " Deaths.‑Jan. 23. Geo. Payne, Esq., of New‑Palace‑yd. Promotions.‑Arthur Leigh, Esq., secretary to the tax‑office (George Payne, Esq., dec.)." For detailed biography of George Payne by Albert F. Calvert, see Masonic News, April 14, ig28.
Between 1717 and 172o‑both dates inclusive‑there are no allusions in the newspaper files at the British Museum, or in contemporary writings, which possess any bearing on Masonic history. In 1721, however, the Society, owing, it may well have been, to the acceptance by the Duke of Montagu of the office of Grand Master, rose at one bound into notice and esteem.
If we rely upon the evidence of a contem orary witness, Masonry must have languished under the rule of Sayer, Payne and Ksaguliers. An entry in the diary of Dr. Stukeley reads Jan. 6, 1721. I was made a Freemason at the Salutation Tavern, Tavistock Street [London], with M` Collins and Capt. Rowe, who made the famous diving engine.
The Doctor adds I was the first person made a Freemason in London for many years. We had great difficulty to find members enough to perform the ceremony. Immediately upon that it took a run and ran itself out of breath thro' the folly of the members.
Stukeley, who appears to have dined at Stationers' Hall on the occasion of the Duke of Montagu's installation, mentions that Lord Herbert and Sir Andrew Fountaine‑names omitted by Anderson‑were present at the meeting and states that Dr. Desaguliers " pronounced an Oration," also that " Grand Master Pain produced an old MS. of the Constitutions " and " read over a new sett of Articles to be observed." ' The following reasons for becoming a Freemason are given by Dr. Stukeley in his autobiography His curiosity led him to be initiated into the mysterys of Masonry, suspecting it to be the remains of the mysterys of the antients ; when, with difficulty, a number sufficient was to be found in all London. After this it became a public fashion, not only spred over Brittain and Ireland, but [over] all of Europe.
The Diary proceeds Dec. 27th, 1721.‑We met at the Fountain Tavern, Strand and by the consent of the Grand Master present, Dr. Beal [D.G.M.] constituted a lodge there, where I was chose Master.
Commenting on this entry, T. B. Whytehead observes Nothing is named about the qualification for the chair and, as Bro. Stukeley had not been twelve months a Mason, it is manifest that any Brother could be 6 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, I7I7‑23 chosen to preside, as also that the verbal consent of the Grand Master, or his Deputy, was sufficient to authorize the formation of a Lodge. (The Freemason, July 31, I88o.) The statement in the Diary, however, is inconsistent with two passages in Dr. Anderson's narrative, but as the consideration of this discrepancy will bring us up to March 25, I72z, the evidence relating to the previous year will first be exhausted.
This consists of the interesting account by Lyon of the affiliation of Dr. Desaguliers as a member of the Scottish Fraternity. (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 15 I.) Att Maries Chapell the 24 of August I7zI years‑James Wattson present deacon of the Masons of Edinr., Preses. The which day Doctor John Theophilus Desauguliers, fellow of the Royall Societie and Chaplain in Ordinary to his Grace James Duke of Chandois, late Generall Master of the Mason Lodges in England, being in town and desirous to have a conference with the Deacon, Warden and Master Masons of Edinr., which was accordingly granted and finding him duly qualified in all points of Masonry, they received him as a Brother into their Societie.
Likeas, upon the 25th day of the sd moneth, the Deacons, Warden, Masters and several other members of the Societie, together with the sd Doctor Desaguliers, haveing mett att Maries Chapell, there was a supplication presented to them by John Campbell, Esqr., Lord Provost of Edinbr., George Preston and Hugh Hathorn, Baillies ; James Nimo, Thesaurer ; William Livingston, Deacon‑convener of the Trades thereof ; and George Irving, Clerk to the Dean of Guild Court,‑‑and humbly craving to be admitted members of the sd Societie ; which being considered by them, they granted the desire thereof and the saids honourable persons were admitted and receaved Entered Apprentices and Fellow‑Crafts accordingly.
And sicklike upon the 28th day of the said moneth there was another petition given in by Sr. Duncan Campbell of Lochnell, Barronet ; Robert Wightman, Esqr., present Dean of Gild of Edr. ; George Drummond, Esq., late Theasurer therof ; Archibald M'Aulay, late Bailly there ; and Patrick Lindsay, merchant there, craveing the like benefit, which was also granted and they receaved as members of the Societie as the other persons above mentioned. The same day James Key and Thomas Aikman, servants to James Wattson, deacon of the masons, were admitted and receaved entered apprentices and payed to James Mack, warden, the ordinary dues as such. Ro. Alison, Clerk.
Dr. Desaguliers's visit to Edinburgh appears to have taken place at the wish of the magistrates there, who, when they first brought water into that city by leaden pipes, applied to him for information concerning the quantity of water they could obtain by means of a given diameter. (T. Thomson, History of the Royal Society, 1812, bk. iii, p. 4o6.) At this time, says Lyon, a revision of the English Masonic Constitutions was in contemplation ; and the better to facilitate this, Desaguliers, along with Dr. James Anderson, was engaged in the F. II‑10 i It is difficult to reconcile these remarks with some others by the same writer, which appear on the next page of his admirable work, viz.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 7 examination of such ancient Masonic records as could be consulted. Embracing the opportunity which his sojourn in the Scottish capital offered, for comparing what he knew of the pre‑symbolic constitutions and customs of English Masons, with those that obtained in Scotch Lodges and animated, no doubt, by a desire for the spread of the new system, he held a conference with the office‑bearers and members of the Lodge of Edinburgh. That he and his Brethren in Mary's Chapel should have so thoroughly understood each other on all the points of Masonry, shows either that, in their main features, the secrets of the old Operative Lodges of the two countries were somewhat similar, or that an inkling of the novelty had already been conveyed into Scotland. The fact that English versions of the Masonic Legend and Charges were in circulation among the Scotch in the middle of the seventeenth century favours the former supposition ; and if this be correct, there is strong ground for the presumption that the conference in question had relation to Speculative Masonry and its introduction into Scotland. (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, pp. 15 2, 15 3.) Some years ago and when unaware of Desaguliers' visit to Mary's Chapel, we publicly expressed our opinion that the system of Masonic Degrees, which, for nearly a century and a half, has been known in Scotland as Freemasonry, was an importation from England, seeing that in the processes of initiation and advancement, conformity to the new ceremonial required the adoption of genuflections, postures, etc., which, in the manner of their use‑the country being then purely Presbyterian ‑were regarded by our forefathers with abhorrence as relics of Popery and Prelacy.
The same distinguished writer then expresses his opinion that on both the 25th and the 28th of August, 17z1, " the ceremony of entering and passing would, as far as the circumstances of the Lodge would permit, be conducted by Desaguliers himself in accordance with the ritual he was anxious to introduce " and goes on to account for the Doctor having confined himself to the two lesser Degrees, by remarking that " it was not till 1722‑z3 that the English regulation restricting the conferring of the Third Degree to Grand Lodge was repealed." Lyon adds that he " has no hesitation in ascribing Scotland's acquaintance with and subsequent adoption of, English Symbolical Masonry, to the conference which the co‑fabricator and pioneer of the system held with the Lodge of Edinburgh in August 17z1." The affiliation of a former Grand Master of the English Society, as a member of the Scottish Fraternity, not only constitutes a memorable epoch in the history of the latter body, but is of especial value as affording some assured data by aid of which a comparison of the Masonic Systems of the two countries may be pursued with more confidence, than were we left to formulate our conclusions from the evidence of either English or Scottish records, dealing only with the details of the individual system to which they relate.
Two observations are necessary. One, that the incident of Desaguliers's affiliation is recorded under the year 1721‑though its full consideration will occur later 8 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 ‑because, in investigations like the present, dates are the most material facts, yet, unless arranged with some approach to chronological exactitude, they are calculated to hinder rather than facilitate research, by introducing a new element of confusion.
The other, that nowhere do the errors of the " Sheep‑walking School " of Masonic writers stand out in bolder relief than in their annals of the year 1717, where the leading role in the movement, which culminated in the establishment of the Grand Lodge of England, is assigned to Desaguliers.
Laurence Dermott in the third edition of his Ahiman Re.Zon, published in 1778, observes Brother Thomas Grinsell, a man of great veracity (elder brother of the celebrated James Quin, Esq.), informed his lodge No. 3 in London (in 1753), that eight persons, whose names were Desaguliers, Gofton, King, Calvert, Lumley, Madden, De Noyer and Vraden, were the geniusses to whom the world is indebted for the memorable invention of Modern Masonry.
Dermott continues Grinsell often told the author [of the Ahiman ReZon, i.e. himself] that he (Grinsell) was a Free‑mason before Modern Masonry was known. Nor is this to he doubted, when we consider that Grinsell was an apprentice to a weaver in Dublin, when his mother was married to Quin's father and that Quin himself was seventy‑three years old when he died in 1766. (Ahiman Re.Zon, 3rd edit., 1778.) Passing over intermediate writers and coming down to the industrious compilation of Findel, we find the establishment of the first Grand Lodge described as being due to the exertions of " several Brethren who united for this purpose, among whom were King, Calvert, Lumley, Madden," etc. "'At their head," says this author, " was Dr. J. Theophilus Desaguliers." (History of Freemasonry, 136.) Now, it happens, strangely enough, that at an Occasional Lodge held at Kew on November 5, 1737, the eight persons named by Dermott (and no others) were present and took part at the initiation and passing of Frederick, Prince of Wales 1 (Book Constitutions, 1738, p. 137.) Resuming the thread of the narrative, the Constitutions proceed Grand‑Eo6ge at the Fountain, Strand, in ample Form, 75 March 1772, with former Grand officers and those of 24 Lodges.
The said Committee of 14 reported that they had perused Brother Anderson's Manuscript, viz., the History, Charges, Regulations, and Master's Song and, after some Amendments, had approv'd of it: Upon which the Lodge desir'd the Grand Master to order it to be printed. Meanwhile Ingenious Men of all Faculties and Stations being convinced that the Cement of the Lodge was Love and Friendship, earnestly requested to be made Masons, Affecting this amicable Fraternity more than other Societies, then often disturbed by Warm Disputes.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 9 Grand Master MONTAGU'S good Government inclin'd the better Sort to continue him in the Chair another Year; and therefore they delay'd to prepare the Feast.
This conflicts with the entry, already given (December 27, 1721), from Dr Stukeley's Diary. According to Anderson, the Grand Lodge was held at the " King's Arms " in " ample Form "‑i.e. the Grand Master was present‑on December 27, 1721‑the ordinary business, together with the lectures delivered at this meeting, must have taken up some considerable time and it is unlikely that either before or after the Quarterly Communication, the Grand Master, the Deputy and a posse of the brethren, paid a visit to the Fountain.
At this point and with a view to presenting the somewhat scattered evidence relating to the year 1722, with as much chronological exactitude as the nature of the materials available will permit, some further extracts from Dr. Stukeley's Diary are introduced, as the next portion of Dr. Anderson's narrative runs on, without the possibility of a break, from June 24, 1722, to January 17, 1723.
May 25th, 1722.‑Met the Duke of Queensboro', Lord Dumbarton, Hinchinbroke, &c., at Fountain Tavern Lodge, to consider of [the] Feast of St. John's.
Nov. 3rd, 1722.‑The Duke of Wharton and Lord Dalkeith visited our lodge at the Fountain.
Two remarkable entries in Dr. Stukeley's Diary are: " Nov. 7th, 1722.Order of the Book instituted." " Dec. 28th, 1722.‑I din'd with Lord Hertford, introduced by Lord Winchelsea. I made them both members of the Order of the Book, or Roman Knighthood." These current notes by a Freemason of the period merit careful attention, the more so, since the inferences they suggest awaken a suspicion that, in committing to writing a recital of events in which he had borne a leading part, many years after the occurrences he describes, Dr. Anderson's memory was occasionally at fault and, therefore, one should scrutinize very closely the few collateral references in newspapers or manuscripts, which antedate the actual records of Grand Lodge.
The entries in Stukeley's Diary of May 25 and November 3, 1722, are hardly reconcilable with the narrative (in the Constitutions) now resumed.
But Philip, Duke of Wharton, lately made a Brother, tho' not the Master of a Lodge, being ambitious of the Chair, got a Number of Others to meet him at StationersHall 24 June 1722. And having no Grand Officers, they put in the Chair the oldest Master Mason (who was not the present Master of a Lodge, also irregular), and without the usual decent Ceremonials, the said old Mason proclaim'd aloud Philip Wharton, Duke of Wlharton, Grand Master of Masons, and JMr. Joshua Timson, Blacksmith, J Grand but his Grace appointed no lMr. William Hawleins, Mason, Wardens, Deputy, nor was the Lodge opened and closed in due Form. Therefore the noble Brothers and all those that would not countenance Irregularities, disown'd Wharton'so: F. _ __" :~ v 10 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 Authority, till worthy Brother MONTAGu heal'd the Breach of Harmony, by summoning The Grand ‑Co6ge to meet 17 January 1721 at the King's‑Arms foresaid, where the Duke of IY>harton promising to be True and Faithful, Deputy Grand Master Beal proclaim'd aloud the most noble Prince and our Brother.
PHILIP WHARTON, Duke of Vharton, GRAND MASTER of Masons, who appointed Dr. ~ósaa~ultórs the Deputy Grand Master, 1 Joshua Timson, foresaid, Grand for Hawkins demitted as always out of James Anderson, A.M., { Vardens, } Town.
When former Grand Officers, with those of 2 5 Lodges, paid their Homage.
G. Warden Anderson produced the new Book of Constitutions now in Print, which was again approv'd, with the Addition of the antient Manner of Constituting a Lodge. Now Masonry flourish'd in Harmony, Reputation, and Numbers; many Noblemen and Gentlemen of the first Rank desir'd to be admitted into the Fraternity, besides other Learned Men, Merchants, Clergymen, and Tradesmen, who found a Lodge to be a safe and pleasant Relaxation from Intense Study or the Hurry of Business, without Politicks or Party. Therefore the Grand Master was obliged to constitute more new Lodges and was very assiduous in visiting the Lodges every Week with his Deputy and Wlardens ; and his Vorship was well pleas'd with their kind and respectful Manner of receiving him, as they were with his affable and clever conversation.
Grand ‑.oage in ample Form, 25 April 1723, at the White‑Lion, Cornhill, with former Grand Officers and those of 3o Lodges call'd over by G. Warden Anderson, for no Secretary was yet appointed. When WHARTON, Grand Master, proposed for his Successor the Earl of Dalkeitb (now Duke of Buckleugh), Master of a Lodge, who was unanimously approv'd and duly saluted as Grand Master Elect.
The Duke of Wharton, born in 1698, was son of the Whig Marquess, to whom is ascribed the authorship of Lilliburlero. After having, during his travels, accepted the title of Duke of Northumberland from the Old Pretender, he returned to England and evinced the versatility of his political principles by becoming a warm champion of the Hanoverian government; created Duke of Wharton by George I in 1718. Having impoverished himself by extravagance, he again changed his politics and, in 1724, quitted England never to return. He died in indigence at a Bernardine convent in Catalonia, May 31, 1731. The character of Lovelace in Clarissa has been supposed to be that of this nobleman ; what renders the supposition more likely, the True Briton, a political paper in which the Duke used to write, was printed by Richardson.
At this meeting, according to the Daily Post, June 27, 1722, " there was a noble appearance of persons of distinction " and the Duke of Wharton was chosen Grand Master and Dr. Desaguliers Deputy Master, for the year ensuing.
The authority of Anderson, on all points within his own knowledge, is not to be lightly impeached. But it is a curious fact, that the journals of the day (and the Diary of Dr. Stukeley) do not corroborate his general statement,‑e.g. the Daily Post, June 20, 1722, notifies that tickets for the Feast must be taken out " before THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 next Friday " and declares that " all those noblemen and gentlemen that have took tickets and do not appear at the hall, will be look'd upon as false brothers " ; the Veekly journal or British Gazetteer, June 30, 172z, describing the proceedings, says " They had a most sumptuous Feast, several of the nobility, who are members of the Society, being present; and his Grace the Duke of Wharton was then unanimously chosen governor of the said Fraternity." Findel, following Kloss, observes : " Only twenty Lodges, ratified [the Constitutions] ; five Lodges would not accede to, or sign them " (History of Freemasonry, p. 159). This criticism is based on the circumstance, that twenty‑five Lodges were represented at the meeting of January 17, 1723, whilst the Masters and Wardens of twenty only, signed the Approbation of the Constitutions of that year. It must be borne in mind, however, that the Constitutions submitted by Anderson in January 17z3, were in print and that the vicissitudes of the year 1722 must have rendered it difficult to obtain even the signatures of twenty, out of the twenty‑four representatives of Lodges by whom the Constitutions were ordered to be printed on March 25, 1722.
A biography of Dr. James Anderson appears in England's Masonic Pioneers, by Dudley Wright.
Dr. Anderson's great work was his Royal Genealogies (1732 and 1736), produced, it is said, at the cost of twenty years' close study and application (Scots Magazine, vol. i, 1739, p. 236). At the close of his life, he was reduced to very slender circumstances and experienced some great misfortunes, but of what description we are not told. The Pocket Companion for 1754 points out " great defects " in the edition of the Constitutions, published the year before his death (1738) and attributes them either to " his want of health, or trusting [the MS.] to the management of strangers." " The work," it goes on to say, " appeared in a very mangled condition and the Regulations, which had been revised and corrected by GrandMaster Payne, were in many cases interpolated, in others, the sense left very obscure and uncertain." Upon the whole, it is sufficiently clear, that the New Book of Constitutions (1738), which contains the only connected history of the Grand Lodge of England, for the first six years of its existence (1717‑2 3), was compiled by Dr. Anderson at a period when troubles crowded thickly upon him, very shortly before his death. This of itself would tend to detract from the weight of authority with which such a publication should descend to us. Moreover, if the discrepancies between the statements in the portion of the narrative reproduced and those quoted from Multa Paucis, Dr. Stukeley's Diary and the journals of the day, are carefully noted, it will be impossible to arrive at any other conclusion‑without, however, impeaching the good faith of the compiler‑than that the history of the Grand Lodge from 1717 to 1723, as narrated by Anderson, is, to say the least, very unsatisfactorily attested. Dr. Anderson died May z8, 1739 (London Evening Post, May z6 to May 29, 1739; Read's Wleekly journal, June z ; London Daily Post, May 29, 1739). It is a little singular that none of the journals recording his decease, or that of his brother 12‑ THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 Adam (1765), give any further clue to the place of their birth, than the brief statement that they were " natives of Scotland." It is at least a remarkable coincidence‑if nothing more‑that almost the same words are used to describe James Anderson, the compiler of the Laws and Statutes of the Lodge of Aberdeen (1670) and James Anderson, the compiler of the Constitutions of the Grand Lodge of England (1723). Thus the assent of the seventeenth Lodge on the English Roll, in 1723, to the Constitutions of that year, is thus shown XVII. James Anderson, A.M. I Master. The author of this nook, f The assimilation into the English Masonic System of many operative terms indigenous to Scotland, is incontestable. Now, although there are no means of deciding whether Anderson was initiated in, or joined the English Society, there is evidence from which it may be inferred either that he examined the records of the Lodge of Aberdeen, or that extracts therefrom were supplied to him.
However this may be, Dr. Anderson was certainly a Scotsman and to this circumstance must be attributed his introduction of many operative terms from the vocabulary of the sister kingdom into his Book of Constitutions. Of these, one of the most common is the compound word Fellow‑craft, which is plainly of Scottish derivation. Enter'd Prentice also occurs and, though presented as a quotation from an old English manuscript, it hardly admits of a doubt that Anderson embellished the text of his authority by changing the words " new men " into " enter'd Prentices." Allusions to the Freemasonry of Scotland are not infrequent. " Lodges there," with "Records and Traditions "‑" kept up without interruption many hundred years'"‑are mentioned in one place (Constitutions, 1723, p. 37) and in another that " the Masons of Scotland were impower'd to have a certain and fix'd Grand Master and Grand Warden "‑here, no doubt the writer had in his mind the Laird of Udaucht, or William Schaw.
Again, in the " Approbation " appended to his work, Anderson expressly states that he has examined " several copies of the History, Charges, and Regulations, of the ancient FRATERNITY, from Scotland " and elsewhere (Constitutions, 1723, P. 73) The word Cowan, however, is reserved for the second edition of the Constitutions (Preface, p. ix and pp. 54, 74), where also the following passage occurs, relative to the Scottish custom of Lodges meeting in the open air, a usage probably disclosed to the compiler by the records of the Aberdeen Lodge, or by his namesake, their custodian. The words run The Fraternity of old met in Monasteries in foul Weather, but in fair Weather they met early in the Morning on the Tops of Hills, especially on St. JOHN Evangelist's Day, and from thence walk'd in due Form to the Place of Dinner, according to the THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 13 Tradition of the old Scots Masons, particularly of those in the antient Lodges of Killwinning, Sterling, Aberdeen," etc. (Constitutions, 1738, p. 91.) The next task.will be, to compare the Masonic systems prevailing in Scotland and England respectively, at a date preceding the era of Grand Lodges, or, slightly to vary the expression, to contrast the usages of the Craft in the two Kingdoms, as existing at a period anterior to the epoch of transition.
The difficulties of disentangling the subject from the confusion which encircles it are great but not insuperable. Dr. Anderson's narrative of occurrencestermed with lamentable accuracy, " The Basis of Masonic History "‑has become a damnosa hareditas to later historians. Even the prince of Masonic critics, Kloss, has been misled by the positive statements in the Constitutions. It is true that this commentator did not blindly follow (as so many have done) the footsteps of Anderson. For example, he declares that Freemasonry originated in England and thence was transplanted into other countries, but he admits, nevertheless, that it is quite possible, from Anderson's History, to prove that it went out from France to Britain, returning thence in due season, then again going to Britain and, finally, being reintroduced into France in the manner affirmed by French writers. (Geschichte der Freimaurerei in Frankreich (1725‑i83o), Darmstadt, 1852, pp. 13, 14.) Sir David Brewster, in his compilation, alludes to numerous and elegant ruins then still adorning the villages of Scotland, as having been " erected by foreign masons, who introduced into this island the customs of their order." He also mentions, as a curious fact, having often heard‑in one of those towns where there is an elegant abbey, built in the twelfth century‑that it was " erected by a company of industrious men, who spoke a foreign language and lived separately from the townspeople " (Lawrie, History of Freemasonry, 1804, pp. go, cgi). As Brewster had previously observed that the mysteries of the Free Masons were probably the source from which the Egyptian priests derived that knowledge, for which they have been so highly celebrated (ibid., p. 13), it seems that a good opportunity of adding to the ponderous learning which characterizes his book was here let slip. According to the historians of the Middle Ages, the Scots certainly came from Egypt, for they were originally the issue of Scota, who was a daughter of Pharaoh and who bequeathed to them her name. (Buckle, History of Civilization, vol. i, p. 312 ; Lingard, History of England, vol. ii, p. 187.) It would, therefore, have been a very simple matter and quite as credible as nine‑tenths of the historical essay with which his work commences, had Sir David Brewster brought Scottish Masonry directly from Egypt, instead of by the somewhat circuitous route to which he thought fit to accord the preference.
It is not a little singular, that in Lawrie's History of Freemasonry‑to quote the title by which the work is best known‑a Masonic publication, it may be observed, of undoubted merit (Hughan, Masonic Sketches and Reprints, pt. i, p. 7), whilst the traditions of the English Fraternity are characterized as " silly and uninteresting stories," those of the Scottish Masons are treated in a very different manner. Thus, 14 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑2j the accounts of St. Alban, King Athelstan and Prince Edwin, met with ‑in the Old Charges, are described as " merely assertions, not only incapable of proof from authentic history, but inconsistent, also, with several historical events which rest on indubitable evidence." In a forcible passage, which every Masonic writer should learn by heart, Brewster then adds, " those who invent and propagate such tales, do not, surely, consider that they bring discredit upon their order by the warmth of their zeal ; and that, by supporting what is false, they debar thinking men from believing what is true." (See Lawrie, History of Freemasonry, pp. 91, 92.) Findel, following Kloss, remarks, " The inventors of Masonic Legends were so blind to what was immediately before their eyes and so limited in their ideas, that, instead of connecting them with the period of the Introduction of Christianity and with the monuments of Roman antiquity, which were either perfect or in ruins before them, they preferred associating the Legends of their Guilds with some tradition or other. The English had the York Legend, reaching back as far as the year g26. The German Mason answers the question touching the origin of his Art, by pointing to the building of the Cathedral of Magdeburg (876) ; and the Scottish Mason refers only to the erection of Kilwinning‑i 140 " (History of Freemasonry, pp. 105, io6).
A speculation might be advanced, though it rests on no shadow of proof, but is nevertheless a somewhat plausible theory, that the Italian workmen imported by Benedict Biscop and Wilfrid, may have formed Guilds‑in imitation of the Collegia, which perhaps still existed in some form in Italy‑to perpetuate the art among the natives ; hence the legend of Athelstan and the Grand Lodge of York. But unfortunately, Northumbria was the district most completely revolutionized by the Danes and again effectually ravaged by the Conqueror.
The legend pointing to Kilwinning as the original seat of Scottish Masonry, based as it is upon the story which makes the institution of the Lodge and the erection of the Abbey (1140) coeval, is inconsistent with the fact that the latter was neither the first not second Gothic structure erected in Scotland. (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 242.) Moreover, there is the assurance on good authority that a minute inspection of its ruins proves its erection to have been antedated by some eighty or ninety years. Still, whether at Kilwinning or elsewhere, it is tolerably clear that the Scottish stone‑workers of the twelfth century came from England. The English were able to send them and the Scots required them. Also, it is a fair presumption from the fact of numerous Englishmen of noble birth having, at the instance of the King, settled in Scotland at this period, that Craftsmen from the South must soon have followed them. (See The Freemason, June i g, 1869.) Indeed, late in the twelfth century, " the two nations, according to Fordun, seemed one people, Englishmen travelling at pleasure through all the corners of Scotland; and Scotsmen in like manner through England." (Rev. G. Ridpath, Border History of England and Scotland, 1810, p. 76; Sir D. Dalrymple, Annals of Scotland, vol. i, p. 158.) When the Legend of the Craft, or, in other words, the Masonic traditions THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 15 enshrined in the Old Charges, was or were introduced into Scotland, it is quite impossible to decide. If, indeed, a traditionary history existed at all in Britain, before the reign of Edward III, as it seems to have done, this, for several reasons, would seem the most likely period at which such transfusion of ideas occurred. It is true that probability in such decisions will often prove the most fallacious guide. Le vraisemblable n'est pas toujours vrai, and le vrai n'est pas toujours vraisemblable. Yet it is free from doubt that after the war of independence in the thirteenth century, the Scottish people, in their language, their institutions and their habits, gradually became estranged from England. (J. H. Burton, History of Scotland, 1853, vol. i, p. 516.) A closer intercourse took place with the French and " the Saxon institu tions in Scotland were gradually buried under foreign importations." " The earliest ecclesiastical edifices of England and Scotland show the same style of architecture ‑in many instances the same workmen. When, after the devastations of the war of independence, Gothic architecture was resumed, it leaned, in its gradual development from earlier to later styles, more to the Continental than the English models ; and, when the English architects fell into the thin mouldings and shafts, depressed arches and square outlines of the Tudor‑Gothic, Scotland took the other direction of the rich, massive, wavy decorations and high‑pointed arches of the French Flamboyant " (Burton, p. 518).
But, even if we go the length of believing that English Masons, or, at least, their customs, had penetrated into Scotland in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the circumstances of that unfortunate kingdom from izc96 to 140o have yet to be considered. Throughout this period, Scotland was continually ravaged by the English. In izc96, they entered Berwick, the richest town Scotland possessed and, not only destroyed all the property, but slew nearly all the inhabitants, after which they marched on to Aberdeen and Elgin and completely desolated the country. (Buckle, History of Civilization, vol. iii, pp. 13, 14.) In i z98 the English again broke in, burnt Perth and St. Andrews and ravaged the whole country, south and west. (Ibid.) In 1322, Bruce, in order to baffle an English invasion, was obliged to lay waste all the, districts south of the Firth of Forth. In 1336, Edward III destroyed everything he could find, as far as Inverness whilst, in 1355, in a still more barbarous inroad, he burnt every church, every village and every town he approached. Nor did the country fare better at the hands of his successor, for Richard II traversed the southern counties to Aberdeen, scattering destruction on every side and reducing to ashes the cities of Edinburgh, Dunfermline, Perth and Dundee. (Ibid., vol. iii, pp. 15, 16.) It has been estimated, that the frequent wars between Scotland and England since the death of Alexander III (1286), had occasioned to the former country the loss of more than a century in the progress of civilization. (Pinkerton, History of Scotland, vol. i, pp. 166, 167.) In the fifteenth century, even in the best parts of Scotland, the inhabitants could not manufacture the most necessary articles, which they imported largely from Bruges. (Mercer, History of Dunfermline, p. 61.) At Aberdeen, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, there was not a mechanic in the town capable to execute the ordinary repairs 16 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 of a clock. (W. Kennedy, Annals of Aberdeen, 1818, vol. i, p. 99.) Lyon, in chap. xxiv of his History, prints the Seal of Cause, incorporating the Masons and Wrights of Edinburgh, A.D. 1475 and observes (p. 233), " The reference which is made to Bruges in the fourth item, is significant, as indicating one of the channels through which the Scottish Crafts became acquainted with customs obtaining among their brethren in foreign countries." He adds, " the secret ceremonies observed by the representatives of the builders of the medixval edifices of which Bruges could boast, may have to some extent been adopted by the Lodges of Scotch Operative Masons in the fifteenth century " (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. z34).
Dunfermline, associated with so many historic reminiscences, at the end of the fourteenth century was still a poor village, composed of wooden huts. (Mercer, op. cit., p. 6z.) At the same period, the houses in Edinburgh itself were mere huts thatched with boughs and, even as late as 16oo, they were chiefly built of wood. (G. Chalmers, Caledonia, vol. i, p. 8oz ; Buckle, History of Civilization, vol. iii, p. 30.) Down, or almost down, to the close of the sixteenth century, skilled labour was hardly known and honest industry was universally despised. (Buckle, op. cit., p. 31.) If it be conceded, therefore, that prior to the war of independence the architecture of Scotland and, with it, the customs of the building trades, received an English impress, the strong improbability‑to say no more‑of the influence thus produced having survived the period of anarchy which has been briefly described must also be admitted. Neither is it likely that French or other Continental customs became permanently engrafted on the Scottish Masonic system. Indeed, it is clear almost to demonstration, that the usages wherein the Masons of Scotland differed from the other trades of that country were of English derivation. The Old Charges here come to our aid and prove, if they do no more, that in one feature, at least, the Scottish ceremonial was based on an English prototype. The date when the Legend of the Craft was introduced into Scotland is indeterminable. The evidence will justify an inference, that a copy of our manuscript Constitutions was in the possession of the Melrose Lodge in '1581. Still, it is scarcely possible, if this date is accepted, that it marks the introduction into Scotland of a version of the Old Charges. From the thirteenth century to the close of the sixteenth, the most populous Scottish cities were Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Perth and St. Andrews. (Buckle, op. cit., vol. iii, p. z9.) English craftsmen, or English craft usages, it may be supposed, passed into Scotland by way of the great towns rather than of the smaller ones. Melrose, it is true, stands on the border line of the two countries and its beautiful Abbey, as previously stated, is also betwixt the two in style. But even were we to accept the dates of erection of the chief ecclesiastical buildings, as those of the introduction of Masonry into the various districts of Scotland, it would be found, says the historian of the Lodge of Melrose, that Kelso stood first, Edinburgh second, Melrose third, Kilwinning fourth. (Masonic Magazine, February i88o.) On the whole we shall, perhaps, not go far astray, in assuming that the lost exemplars of the Old Charges extant in both kingdoms, or, to speak more correctly, those of the normal or ordinary versions, were in substance identical. This would carry THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 17 back the ceremony of " reading the Charges," as a characteristic of Scottish Masonry, to the period when our manuscript Constitutions assumed the coherent and, as it were, stereotyped form, of which either the Lansdowne (3) or the Bucbanan (15) MSS. affords a good illustration. As against this view, however, it must not escape recollection that the only direct evidence pointing to the existence in Scotland of versions of the Old Charges before the seventeenth century, consists of the memorandum or attestation, a copy of which is appended to Melrose MS., No. 2 (ig) now given in full. It runs Be it knouen to all men to whom these Extracted be me presents shall come that Robert Wincester upon hath lafuly done his dutie to the science the i 2 3 and 4 of Masonrie in witnes wherof J. [I] John dayes of Wincester his Master frie mason have December subscribit my name and sett to my mark anno in the Year of our Lord 15 81 and in the raing MDCLXXIIII. of our most Soveraing Lady Elizabeth the (22) Year.
If it is considered that more has been founded on this entry than it will safely bear, or, in other words, that it does not warrant the inference, with regard to MS. i g being a copy of a sixteenth‑century version, a further supposition presents itself. It is this. All Scottish copies of the Old Charges may then date after the accession of James I to the English throne (1603), and the question arises, Can the words " leidgeman to the King of England " be understood as referring to this monarch ? If so, some difficulties would be removed from the path, but only, alas, to give place to others.
When James at the death of Queen Elizabeth proceeded to England, the principal native nobility accompanied him. (Irving, History of Dumbartonsbire, 1860, pp. 137, 166 ; Bishop Guthry, Memoirs, 1702, pp. 127, 128.) Nor was this exodus restricted to the upper classes. Howell, writing in 1657, assigns as a reason for the cities of London and Westminster, which were originally far apart, having become fully joined in the early years of the seventeenth century, the great number of Scotsmen who came to London on the accession of James I and settled chiefly along the Strand. (Londinopolis, p. 346.) It may, therefore, be contended that if, about the close of the sixteenth century, the Masons' Lodges in England had ceased to exist, the great influx of Scotsmen just alluded to, might reasonably account for the Warrington meeting of 1646, before which there is no evidence of living Freemasonry in the south. This, of course, would imply either that the Scottish Lodges, which existed in the sixteenth century, then possessed versions of the Old Charges, or that, for some period of time, at least they were without them.
The latter supposition would, however, be weakened by the presumption of the English Lodges having died out, since it would be hardly likely that from their fossil remains the Scotch Masons extracted the manuscript Constitutions, which they certainly used in the seventeenth century.
18 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 It is not improbable that William Schaw, the Master of Work and General Warden, had a copy of the Old Charges before him when he penned the Statutes of 1598 and 1599 and, with regard to the Warrington Lodge (1646), that it was an outgrowth of something essentially distinct from the Scotch Masonry of that period.
On both these points a few final words remain to be expressed, but before doing so, it will be convenient to resume and conclude the observations on the general history of Scotland, which have been brought down to the year 1657 and show the possibility of the legislative Union of 1707 having conduced in some measure to the (so‑called) Masonic Revival of 1717.
At the accession of William III (1689) every Scotsman of importance, who could claim alliance with the revolutionary party, proffered his guidance to the new King through the intricacies of his position. But the clustering of these gratuitous advisers became so troublesome to him, that the resort of members of the Convention to London was prohibited. (Burton, History of Scotland, vol. i, P. 19.) After the Union of the two Kingdoms (1707), the infusion of English ideas was very rapid. Some of the most considerable persons in Scotland were obliged to pass half the year in London and, naturally, came back with a certain change in their ideas. (Lecky, History of England in the Eighteenth Century, vol. ii, p. 85.) The Scotch nobles looked for future fortune, not to Scotland but to England. London became the centre of their intrigues and their hopes. (Buckle, History of Civilization, vol. iii, p. 165.) The movement up to this period, it may be remarked, was entirely in one direction. The people of Scotland knew England much better than the people of England knew Scotland‑indeed, according to Burton, the efforts of the pamphleteers to make Scotland known to the English, at the period of the Union, resemble the missionary efforts to instruct the people about the policy of the Caffres or the Japanese. (History of Scotland, 18 5 3, vol. i, p. 523.) A passing glance at the Freemasonry of the South in 1707‑the year of the Union between the two kingdoms‑has been afforded by the essay of Sir Richard Steele. Upon this evidence, it is argued with much force, that a Society known as the Freemasons, having certain distinct modes of recognition, must have existed in London in 1709 and for a long time before.
This position, with the reservation that the words " signs and tokens," upon which Steele's commentator has relied‑like the equivalent terms cited by Aubrey, Plot, Rawlinson and Randle Holme‑do not decide the vexata quaestio of Masonic Degrees, will be generally conceded. But we are here concerned with the date only of Steele's first essay (1709). Whether the customs he attests were new or old will be considered later. It will be sufficient for the present purpose to assume, that about the period of the Union, there was a marked difference between the ceremonial observances of the English and of the Scottish Lodges. This conclusion, it is true, has yet to be reduced to actual demonstration, but the further proofs‑notably the Lodge procedure of Scotland‑will presently be cited, when every reader will be able to form an independent judgment with regard to the proposition laid down.
v r THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 19 r~ It seems a very natural deduction from the evidence, that during the ten years which intervened between the Treaty of Union (1707) and the formation of the Grand Lodge of England (1717), the characteristics of the Masonic systems, which existed, so to speak, side by side, must frequently have been compared by the members of the two brotherhoods. Among the numerous Scotsmen who flocked to London, there must have been many Geomatic Masons, far more, indeed, than, at this lapse of time, can be identified as members of the Craft. This is placed beyond doubt by the evidence that has been handed down. To retrace our steps somewhat, we find that the Earl of Eglinton, Deacon of Mother Kilwinning in 1677, having " espoused the principles which led to the Revolution, enjoyed the con fidence of William the Third." (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 52.) Sir Duncan Campbell, a member of the Lodge of Edinburgh, was the personal friend and one of the confidential advisers of Queen Anne. Sir John Clerk and Sir Patrick Hume, afterwards Earl of Marchmont, were also members of this Lodge. (Lyon, op. Cit., pp. 90, 117.) The former, one of the Barons of the Exchequer for Scotland, from 1707 to 1755, was also a Commissioner for the Union, a measure, the success of which was due in no small degree to the tact and address of the latter, who was one of the foremost Scottish statesmen of his era. (See Burton's History of Scotland, vol. i.) The Treaty of Union also found an energetic supporter in the Earl of Findlater, whose name appears on the roll of the Lodge of Aberdeen in 1670. Inasmuch as the names just cited are those of persons at one end of the scale, whilst the bulk of the Scottish Craft were at the other end, it is plainly inferential, that many Masons of intermediate degree in social rank must also have found their way to the English metropolis.
Let the next endeavour be, by touching lightly on the salient features of Scottish Masonry, to show what the ideas and customs were, from which the founders or early members of the Grand Lodge of England could have borrowed. In so doing, however, there is no notion of entering into any rivalry with the highest authority upon the subject under inquiry. Great assistance has, however, been derived from notes freely supplied by Lyon and it must be remembered, as Mackey points out, that the learned and laborious investigations of the Historian of Mother Kilwinning and Mary's Chapel, refer only to the Lodges of Scotland. He adds, " There is not sufficient evidence that a more extensive system of initiation did not prevail at the same time, or even earlier, in England and Germany." " Indeed," he continues, " Findel has shown that it did in the latter country." (Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry, s.v. " word.") Passing over the alleged identity of the Steinmetzen with the Freemasons, the remarks of the veteran encyclopxdist will be generally acquiesced in. They are cited, however, because they justify the conclusion, that some statements by Lyon, with regard to the Freemasonry of England, are evidently mere obiter dicta and may be passed over, therefore, without detracting in the slightest degree from the value of his work as an authentic history of Scottish Masonry. Among these is the allusion to Desaguliers as " the pioneer and co‑fabricator of symbolical Masonry," a popular delusion, the origin of which has been explained.
zo THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 Turning to the Schaw Statutes, which seem to be based upon the Old (English) Charges or Manuscript Constitutions, we find ordinances of earlier date referred to. These, if not the ancient writings with which they have been identified, must have been some regulations or orders now lost. However this may be, the Schaw Statutes themselves present an outline of the system of Masonry peculiar to Scotland in 1598‑99, which, to a great extent, can be filled in by aid of the further documentary evidence supplied from that kingdom, dating from the succeeding century.
The Schaw Statutes have been given, though not in their vernacular idiom. For this reason a few literal extracts from the two codices, upon which some visionary speculations have been based, become essential. Many of the clauses are in close agreement with some which are to be found in the Old Charges, whilst others exhibit a striking resemblance to the regulations of the Steinmetzen and of the craft guilds of France. Schaw, there can hardly be a doubt, had ancient writings from which to copy. That trade regulations, all over the world, are characterized by a great family likeness may next be affirmed and, for this reason, the points of similarity between the Scottish and the German codes appear to possess no particular significance, though with regard to the influence of French customs upon the former, it may be otherwise.
Lyon's dictum, that the rules ordained by William Schaw were applicable to Operative Masons alone, will be regarded by most persons as a verdict from which there is no appeal. This point is one of some importance, for, although addressed ostensibly to all the Master Masons within the Scottish realm, the Statutes have special reference to the business of Lodges, as distinguished from the less ancient organizations of the Craft known as Incorporations, holding their privileges direct from the Crown, or under Seals of Cause granted by burghal authorities. (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 16.) The purposes for which the old Scottish Lodges existed are partly disclosed by the documents of 1598 and 1599, though, as the laws then framed or codified were not always obeyed, the items of the Warden‑General point, in more than one instance, to customs that were more honoured in the breach than in the observance. Of this, a good illustration is afforded by the various passages in the two codes which appear to regulate the status of apprentices. Thus, according to the Statutes of 1598, no apprentice was to be made Brother and Fellow Craft until the period of his servitude had expired. That is to say, on being made free, or attaining the position of a full Craftsman, he was admitted or accepted into the fellowship, or, to use a more modern expression, became a member of the Lodge.
That the apprentices in Schaw's time, stood on quite a different footing from that of the Masters and fellows, is also attested by the second code and that their status in the Lodge during the seventeenth century was still one of relative inferiority to the members (see Lyon, op. cit., p. 413) in some parts of Scotland, is as certain as that in others they laboured under no disability whatever, and were frequently THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 11 elected to the chair. (Freemasons' Magazine, July to December, 1863, pp. 95, 154, 236.) Beyond providing for the " orderlie buiking " of apprentices, the Schaa Statutes are silent as to the constitution of the Lodge at entries. On the other hand, care is taken to fix the number and quality of Brethren necessary to the reception of Masters or Fellows of Craft, viz., six masters and two entered apprentices. (Lyon, op. cit., p. io.) The presence of so many Masters was doubtless intended as a barrier to the advancement of incompetent Craftsmen, not for the communication of secrets with which entered apprentices were unacquainted ; for the arrangement referred to proves beyond question that whatever secrets were imparted in and by the Lodge were, as a means of mutual recognition, patent to the intrant. The " trial of skill in his craft " (Lyon, p. 12), the production of an " essay‑piece " (ibid., p. 13) and the insertion of his name and mark in the Lodge Book, with the names of his " six admitters " and " intendaris " as specified in the act, were merely practical tests and confirmations of the applicant's qualifications as an apprentice and his fitness to undertake the duties of journeyman or master in Operative Masonry; and the apprentice's attendance at such an examination could not be otherwise than beneficial to him, because of the opportunity it afforded for increasing his professional knowledge. (Lyon, p. 17.) No traces of an annual " tryall of the art and memorie and science thairof of everie fallow of craft and everie prenteiss " were found by Lyon in the recorded transactions of Mary's Chapel or in those of the Lodge of Kilwinning. But, as already mentioned, the custom was observed with the utmost regularity by the Lodge of Peebles (see Masonic Magazine, vol. vi, p. 3 5 5) and is alluded to with more or less distinctness in the proceedings of other Lodges. (Masonic Magazine, vol. vii, p. 369.) It has been shown that the presence of Apprentices at the admission of Fellows of Craft was rendered an essential formality by the Schaw Statutes of 1598. This regulation appears to have been duly complied with by the Lodges of Edinburgh and Kilwinning (Masonic Magazine, vol. i, p. 11 o) and, in the former, at least, the custom of Apprentices giving or withholding their consent to any proposed accession to their own ranks was also recognized. But, whether the latter prerogative was exercised as an inherent right, or by concession of their superiors in the Craft, the records do not disclose. The earliest instance of the recognition of Apprentices as active members of the Lodge of Edinburgh is furnished by a Minute of June i 2, i 6oo, whence it appears that at least four of them attested the entry of William Hastie, (Lyon, OP. cit., p. 74), whilst, in those of slightly later date, certain Entered Prentices are represented as " consenting and assenting " to the entries to which they refer. The presence of Apprentices in the Lodge during the making of Fellow‑Crafts is also affirmed by Lyon, on the authority of Minutes which he cites,‑a " fact," in his opinion, utterly destructive of the theory which has been advanced, " that Apprentices were merely present at the constitution of the Lodge for the reception of Fellows of Craft or Masters, but were not present during the time the business was going on." (Lyon, op. cit., Freemasons' Alagazine, July to December 1863, Zz THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 PP. 95, 237.) A Minute of 1679 shows, however, very plainly, ,that whether in or out of the Lodge, the Apprentices were, in all respects, fully qualified to make up a quorum for the purposes either of initiation or the reception of Fellows.
December the 27, 1679: Maries Chappell. The which day Thomas Wilkie deacon, and Thomas King, warden and the rest of the brethren convened at that tyme, being represented unto them the great abuse and usurpation committed be John Fulltoun, mason, on [one] of the friemen of this place, by seducing two entered prentises belonging to our Lodge, to witt, Ro. Alison and John Collaer and other omngadrums, in the moneth of august last, within the sheraffdome of Air: Has taken upon himself to passe and enter severall gentlemen without licence or commission from this place : Therfore for his abuse committed the deacon and maisters hes forthwith enacted that he shall receave no benefit from this place nor no converse with any brother; and lykwayes his servants to be discharged from serving him in his imployment ; and this act to stand in force, ay and whill [until] he give the deacon and masters satisfaction. (See Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 99.) It has been sufficiently demonstrated, though the evidence is not yet exhausted, that the Apprentice, at his entry, was placed in full possession of the secrets of the Lodge. But one must be careful not to confuse the Masonic nomenclature pre vailing in the two kingdoms respectively. The term Free Mason, of which, in Scotland, except in the Old Charges, the use first appears in the records of Mary's Chapel, under the year 1636 and does not reappear until 1725, was, in that country, until the eighteenth century, a mere abbreviation of Freemen Masons. (Lyon, p. 8o.) Thus, David Dellap, on being made an Entered Apprentice at Edinburgh in 1636, must have had communicated to him whatever of an esoteric character there was to reveal, precisely as we are justified in believing must have happened in Ashmole's case, when made a Free Mason at Warrington in 1646. Yet, though the latter became a Free Mason at admission, whilst the former did not, both were clearly made Brethren of the Lodge. (Lyon, p. 23.) The bond of brotherhood thus established may have been virtually one and the same thing in the two countries, or it may, on the other hand, have differed toto calo. But unless each of the Masonic systems be taken as a whole, it is impossible adequately to bring out the distinction between the two. Consulted in portions, dates may be verified and facts ascertained, but the significance of the entire body of evidence escapes us‑we cannot enjoy a landscape reflected in the fragments of a broken mirror.
Proceeding, therefore, with our examination of Scottish Masonry, it may confidently be asserted, that though the admissions of gentlemen into the Lodge of Edinburgh, both before and after the entry of David Dellap (1636), are somewhat differently recorded, the procedure, at least, so far as the communication of anything to be kept secret, was the same.
Believers in the antiquity of the present Third Degree are in the habit of citing the records of the Lodge of Edinburgh, as affording evidence of Gentlemen Masons having, in the seventeenth century, been denominated Master Masons. The entries of General Hamilton and Sir Patrick Hume are cases in point. But though each F. II‑I I THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 23 of these worthies was enrolled as a Fellow and Master, their Masonic status did not differ from that of Lord Alexander and his brother Henry, who were enrolled, the one as a Fellow of Craft, the other as a Fellow and Brother. The relative position, indeed, of the incorporation and the Lodge placed the making of a Master Mason beyond the province of the latter. (Lyon, p. Zio.) " Only in four of the Minutes, between December 28, 1598 and December 27, 1700, is the word Master employed to denote the Masonic rank in which intrants were admitted in the Lodge of Edinburgh; and it is only so used in connexion with the making of theoretical Masons, of whom three were gentlemen by birth, two master wrights." It is worthy of observation, also, as Lyon forcibly points out, " that all who attest the proceedings of the Lodge, practical and theoretical Masons alike, are in the earliest of its records in general terms designated Masters‑a form of expression which occurs even when one or more of those to whom it is applied happen to be Apprentices." The same historian affirms that " if the communication of Mason Lodges of secret words or signs constituted a Degree‑a term of modern application to the esoteric observances of the Masonic body‑then there was, under the purely Operative regime, only one known to Scotch Lodges, viz., that in which, under an oath, Apprentices obtained a knowledge of the Mason Word and all that was implied in the expression." (Lyon, op. cit., p. 23.) Two points are involved in this conclusion. One, the essentially operative character of the early Masonry of Scotland; the other, the comparative simplicity of the Lodge ceremonial. Taking these in their order, it may be necessary to explain that a distinction must be drawn between the character and the composition of the Scottish Lodges. In the former sense all were Operative, in the latter, all, or nearly all, were more or less Speculative. By this must be understood that the Lodges in Scotland discharged a function, of which, in England, no trace is met, save in the manuscript Constitutions, until the eighteenth century. It is improbable that the Alnwick Lodge (1701) was the first of its kind, still, all the evidence of an earlier date (with the exception noted) bears in quite a contrary direction. The Scottish Lodges, therefore, existed, to fulfil certain operative requirements, of which the necessity may have passed away, or at least has been unrecorded in the south.
There are to be found some allusions to the presence, side by side, of the Operative and Speculative elements, in the Lodges of Scotland. The word Specu lative has been turned to strange uses by Masonic historians. It is argued that the Speculative ascendancy which, in 1670, prevailed in the Lodge of Aberdeen, might be termed, in other words, Speculative Freemasonry. This is true, no doubt, in a sense, but the horizon advances as well as recedes. " The idea in the mind is not always found under the pen, any more than the artist's conception can always breathe in his pencil." Without doubt, the Earls of Findlater and Errol and the other noblemen and gentlemen who formed a majority of the members of the Lodge of Aberdeen (1670), were Speculative or Honorary, not Operative or practical Masons. The same 24 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 may be said of the entire bead‑roll of Scottish worthies whose connexion with the Craft has been already glanced at. But the Speculative element within the Lodges was a mere excrescence upon the Operative. From the earliest times, in the cities of Scotland, the burgesses were accustomed to purchase the protection of some powerful noble by yielding to him the little independence that they might have retained. Thus, for example, the town of Dunbar naturally grew up under the shelter of the castle of the same name. (G. Chalmers, Caledonia, vol. ii, p. 416.) Few of the Scottish towns ventured to elect their chief magistrate from among their own people; but the usual course was to choose a neighbouring peer as provost or bailie. (Tytler, History of Scotland, vol. iv, p. 416.) Indeed, it often happened that his office became hereditary and was looked upon as the vested right of some aristocratic family. (Buckle, op. cit., vol. iii, p. 33‑) In the same way the Lodges eagerly courted the countenance and protection of the aristocracy. Of this, many examples might be given, if, indeed, the fact were not sufficiently established by the evidence. (Lyon, op. cit., p. 81.) But the hereditary connexion of the noble house of Montgomerie with the Masonic Court of Kilwinning must not be passed over, as it shows, that to some extent at least, the Mother Lodge of Scottish tradition grew up under the shelter of Eglinton Castle. (Lyon, pp. 11, 52, 245 ; R. Wylie, History of Mother Lodge, Kilwinning, 1878.) " The grafting of the non‑professional element on to the stem of the Operative system of Masonry," is said to have had its commencement in Scotland about the period of the Reformation (Lyon, p. 78), nor are we without evidence that will justify this conclusion. According to the solemn declaration of a church court in 165 2, many Masons having the " word " were ministers and professors in " the purest tymes of this kirke," which may mean any time after the Reformation of 156o, but must, at least, be regarded as carrying back the admission of honorary members into Masonic fellowship, beyond the oft‑quoted case of John Boswell, in 16oo. But as militating against the hypothesis, that honorary membership was then of frequent occurrence, the fact must be noted, that the records of Lodge of Edinburgh contain no entries relating to the admission of gentlemen between 16oo and 1634,‑the latter date, moreover, being thirty‑eight years before the period at which the presence of Geomatic Masons is first discernible in the Lodge of Kil winning. But, whatever may have been the motives which animated the parties on either side‑Operatives or Speculatives‑the tie which united them was a purely honorary one. (Lyon, p. 82.) In the Lodge of Edinburgh, Geomatic Masons were charged no admission fee until 1727. The opinion has been expressed that a difference existed between the ceremonial at the admission of a theoretical and that observed at the reception of a practical mason. This is based upon the inability of non‑professionals to comply with tests to which Operatives were sub jected ere they could be passed as Fellows of Craft. (Lyon, p. 82.) Such was probably the case and the distinction is material, as arising naturally from the presumption that the interests of the latter class of intrants would alone be considered in a court of purely Operative Masonry.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 25 Passing, however, to the second point‑the simplicity of the Lodge ceremonial ‑this expression is used in the restricted sense of the Masonic reception common to both classes alike‑the Operative tests from which gentlemen presumably were exempt are of no further interest in this inquiry. The Geomatic class of intrants, if we follow Lyon, were " in all likelihood initiated into a knowledge of the legendary history of the Mason Craft and had the Word and such other secrets communicated to them, as was necessary to their recognition as Brethren, in the very limited Masonic circle in which they were ever likely to move‑limited, because there was nothing of a cosmopolitan character in the bond which [then] united the members of Lodges, nor had the Lodge of Edinburgh as yet become acquainted with the dramatic Degrees of Speculative Masonry." (Lyon, pp. 82, 83.) Subject to the qualification, that the admission of a joining member from the Lodge of Linlithgow, by the Brethren of the Lodge of Edinburgh, in 1653 (see Freemasons' Magazine, September 18, 1869, p. 222) attests that the bond of fellowship was something more than a mere token of membership of a particular Lodge, or of a Masonic Society in a single city, the proceedings at the entry or admission of candidates for the Lodge are well outlined by the Scottish historian. The ceremony was doubtless the same‑i.e. the esoteric portion of it, with which alone we are concerned‑whether the intrant was an Operative Apprentice, or a Speculative Fellow‑Craft, or Master. The legend of the Craft was read and " the benefit of the Mason Word " conferred. The Schaw Statutes throw no light on the ceremony of Masonic initiation, beyond justifying the inference, that extreme simplicity must have been its leading characteristic. The Word is the only secret referred to throughout the seventeenth century in any Scottish records of that period. The expression " Benefit of the Mason Word " occurs in several statutes of the Lodge of Aberdeen (1670). The AtchesonHaven records (1700) mention certain " disorders of the Lodge " which it was feared would " bring all law and order and, consequently, the Mason Word, to contempt." The Haughfoot Minutes (1702) mention a grip.
The same records detail the admission of two members in 1710, who " received the word in common form" (Freemasons' Magazine, Oct. 2, 1869, p. 3o6), an expression which is made clearer by the laws of the Brechin Lodge (1714), the third of which runs‑" It is statute and ordained that when any person that is entered to this lodge shall be receaved by the Warden in the common form," etc. (Masonic Magazine, vol. i, 1873‑74, p. iio.) Liberty to give the Mason Word was the principal point in dispute between Mary's Chapel and the journeymen, which was settled by Decreet Arbitral in 1715, empowering the latter " to meet together as a society for giving the Mason Word." (Lyon, p. 142.) The secrets of the Mason Word are referred to in the Minutes of the Lodge of Dunblane and what makes this entry the more remarkable is, that the secrets in question were revealed, after due examination, by two Entered Apprentices from the Lodge of Kilwinning‑in which latter body the ceremony of initiation was of so simple a character, down at least to 1735 (Freemasons' Magazine, August 29, 1863, p. 154), as to be destructive altogether of the construction which has been placed 26 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 upon the report of the examiner deputed by the former Lodge, to ascertain the Masonic qualifications of the two applicants for membership. In the last‑named year (1735), two persons who had been severally received into Masonry by individual operators at a distance from the Lodge, being found " in lawful possession of the Word," were recognized as members of Mother Kilwinning " in the station of Apprentices." The custom of entering persons to the Lodge‑in the observance of which one Mason could unaided make another‑has been already cited as suggesting a total indifference to uniformity in imparting to novitiates the secrets of the Craft. (Freemasons' Ma gaZine, July to December 1869, p. 409.) The Masonic ceremonial, therefore, of a Lodge addicted to this practice will not carry much weight as a faithful register of contemporary usage. For this reason, as well as for others, the evidence of the Dunblane records seems wholly insufficient to sustain the theory for which they have served as a foundation.
In this view of the case, there will only remain the Minutes of the Lodge of Haughfoot as differing in any material respect from those of other Lodges of earlier date than 1736. From these we learn that in one Scottish Lodge, in the year 1702, both" grip" and "word" were included in the ceremony. Unfortunately the Minutes commence abruptly, at page i i, in continuation of other pages now missing, which, for an evident purpose, viz. secrecy, have been torn out. The evidence from this source is capable of more than one interpretation; while to the gloss already put upon it, another may be added. The passage‑" of entrie as the apprentice did" ‑may imply that the candidate was not an Apprentice, but a Fellow‑Craft. " Leaving out (the common judge)‑they then whisper the word as before and the Master Mason grips his hand in the ordinary way." (Lyon, pp. 175, 213.) But if the candidate already possessed the Apprentice or Mason Word, this Word must have been a new one. " As before " could hardly apply to the identity of the Word, but to the manner of imparting it, i.e. whispered, as in the former Degree. So also the ordinary way must mean in the manner usual in that Degree.
Of the two conjectures with regard to the singular entries in the Haughfoot Minutes, either may possibly be true; but, as they stand without sufficient proof, it must be granted likewise that they may both possibly be false. At least they cannot preclude any other opinion, which, advanced in like manner, will possess the same claim to credit and may, perhaps, be shown by resistless evidence to be better founded.
Under any view of the facts, however, the procedure of the Lodge of Haughfoot (1702) must be regarded as being of an abnormal type and, as it derives no corroboration whatever from that of other Lodges of corresponding date, the impossibility of determining positively whether both grip and word were communicated to Scottish Brethren in the seventeenth century must be admitted.
The old Scottish Mason Word is unknown. It has not as yet been discovered, either what it was, or to what extent it was in general use. Neither can it be determined whether, at any given date prior to 1736, it was the same in Scotland as THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 z7 it was in England. Each nation, indeed each different locality, may have had a word (or words) of its own. If the use of any one word was universal, or to speak with precision, if the word in Scotland was included among the words which, we are justified in believing, formed a portion of the secrets disclosed in the early English Lodges, it was something quite distinct from the familiar expressions which, at the introduction of Degrees, were imported into Scotland.
The minutes of Canongate Kilwinning contain the earliest Scottish record extant of the admission of a Master Mason under the modern Masonic Constitution. This occurred on March 31, 173 5 . But it is believed by Lyon that the Degree in question was first practised north of the Tweed by the Edinburgh Kilwinning Scots Arms. This, the first speculative Scotch Lodge, was established February 14, 1729 and, with its erection came, so he conjectures, " the formal introduction of the Third Degree, with its Jewish Legend and dramatic ceremonial." This Degree is for the first time referred to in the Minutes of Mother Kilwinning in 1736, in those of the Lodge of Edinburgh in 1738. The Lodges of Atcheson's Haven, Dunblane, Haughfoot and Peebles were unacquainted with it in 176o and the Degree was not generally worked in Scottish Lodges until the seventh decade of the eighteenth century.
But the love of mystery being implanted in human nature never wholly dies out. A few believers in the great antiquity of Masonic Degrees still linger. Some cherish the singular fancy that the obsolete phraseology of the Schaw Statutes reveals evidence confirmatory of their hopes, whilst others, relying on the axiom‑" that in no sense is it possible to say, that a conclusion drawn from circumstantial evidence can amount to absolute certainty," find in the alleged silence of the Scottish records, with regard to any alteration of ritual, a like consolation. Some rays of light may be shed on the general subject, in the following extracts from the Minutes of the Lodge of Kelso, which seem to reduce to actual demonstration, what the collateral facts or circumstances satisfactorily proved have already warranted us in believing, viz. that the system of three Degrees was gradually introduced into Scotland in the eighteenth century.
Kelso, 18th June 1754.‑The Lodge being ocationaly met and opened, a petition was presented from Brother Walter Ker, Esq. of Litledean and the Rev. Mr. Robert Monteith, minister of the Gospel at Longformacus, praying to be passed fellow‑crafts, which was unanimously agreed to and the Right Worshipful Master, deputed Brother Samuel Brown, a visiting Brother, from Canon gate, from Leith, to officiate as Master and Brothers Palmer and Fergus, from same Lodge, to act as wardens on this occasion, in order yt wee might see the method practiced in passing fellow crafts in their and the other Lodges in and about Edr. [Edinburgh] and they accordingly passed the above Brothers Ker and Monteith, Fellow Crafts, who gave their obligation and pay'd their fees in due form. Thereafter the Lodge was regularly closed.
Eodem Die.‑The former Brethren met as above, continued sitting, when upon conversing about Business relating to the Craft, and the forms and Practice of this Lodge in particular, a most essential defect of our Constitution was discovered, viZ.‑that 2.8 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 this lodge had attained only to the two Degrees of Apprentices and Fellow Crafts, and knowing nothing of the Master's part, whereas all Regular Lodges over the World are composed of at least the three Regular Degrees of Master, Fellow Craft, and Prentice. In order, therefor, to remedy this defect in our Constitution, Brothers Samuel Brown, Alexander Palmer, John Fergus, John Henderson, Andrew Bell, and Francis Pringle, being all Master Masons, did form themselves into a Lodge of Masters‑Brother Brown to act as Master, and Brothers Palmer and Fergus as Wardens, when they proceeded to raise Brothers James Lidderdale, William Ormiston, Robert Pringle, David Robertson, and Thomas Walker, to the rank of Masters, who qualified and were receiv'd accordingly.
" In the above minute," says the historian of the Lodge (W. F. Vernon, History of the Lodge of Kelso, pp. 47, 48), " we have clearly the origin of a Master Mason's Lodge in Kelso." Indeed, is it not possible to go further and to contend, that the second Degree was also introduced at the same meeting ? But without labouring this point, which the evidence adduced will enable every reader to determine in his own mind, there is one further quotation.
December 21, 1741.‑Resolved that annually att said meeting [on St. John's day, in the Councill house of Kellso], there should be a public examination by the Master, Warden and other members, of the last entered apprentices and oyrs [others], that it thereby may appear what progress they have made under their respective Intenders, that they may be thanked or censured conform[able] to their respective Demeritts.
The cumulative value of the evidence just presented is greater than would at first sight appear. Quoting the traditionary belief of the Melrose Masons, who claim for their Lodge an antiquity coeval with the Abbey there, which was founded in 1136, Vernon considers he has at least as good authority‑in the absence of documents‑for dating the institution of Masonry in Kelso, at the time when David I brought over to Scotland a number of foreign operatives to assist in the building of the Abbey of Kelso (1128). " The very fact," he urges, "that the Abbey was dedicated to St. John the Evangelist and the Virgin Mary and that the Kelso Lodge was dedicated to the same saint, would seem to bear out this idea." (Op. it., p. 5.) But, whatever the measure of antiquity to which St. John's Lodge, Kelso, can justly lay claim, its existence is carried back by the evidence of its own records, to 1701, from which we also learn that it preserved its independence‑i.e. did not join the Grand Lodge of Scotland‑until 1753‑ (Op. cit., p. 38.) We find, therefore, an old Operative Lodge, one working by inherent right‑in which, rather than in those subordinate to a new organization, we might naturally expect that old customs would remain for the longest time unmodified‑testing, in 1741, the Craftsmen and Apprentices " according to their vocations," in strict conformity with the Schaw Statutes of 15 99. The continuance of this practice up to so late a period, coupled with the circumstance that the Third Degree was introduced into the procedure of the Lodge, after its acceptance of a Charter, prove therefore, to demonstration, that the tests and " tryalls " enjoined by William Schaw were not the preliminaries THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 29 to any such ceremony (or ceremonies) as the Brethren of St. John's Lodge were made acquainted with, in 1754. Thus, two facts are established. One, that the examinations which took place periodically in the old Lodges of Scotland were entirely of an Operative character. The other, that the alleged silence of the Scottish records with regard to the introduction of degrees is not uniform and unbroken. If we may believe " a Right Worshipful Master, S. C." [Scottish Constitution], the Lodge of Melrose, in 1871, " was carrying on the same system that it did nearly zoo years before." He states, " I entered into conversation with an old Mason, whose father belonged to the Lodge and he told me, that his father told him, his grandfather was a member of the Melrose Lodge and their style of working was the same as at present. I made a calculation from this and it took me back nearly Zoo years " 1 (The Freemason, December 30, 1871). Without accepting the fanciful conjecture above quoted, it is highly probable, that the Lodge of Melrose, which did not surrender its independence for many years, was longer in becoming indoctrinated with the English novelties than the other Lodges‑whose acceptance of the Speculative system, as they successively joined the Grand Lodge, may be inferred from the example of the Lodge of Kelso.
The Kelso Minutes, which have been strangely overlooked, indicate very clearly the manner in which the English novelties must frequently have become engrafted on the Masonry of Scotland, viz., by radiation from the northern metropolis. No other records are equally explicit, those of the Lodge of Edinburgh, especially, leave much to be desired. The office of clerk to this body, during the transition period of the Lodge's history, was held by Robert Alison, an Edinburgh writer, who, by the guarded style in which he recorded its transactions, has contributed to veil in a hitherto impenetrable secrecy, details of the most important epoch in the history of Scottish Freemasonry, of which from his position he must have been cognizant. (Lyon, p. 43.) But the silence‑or comparative silence of these early records with respect to Degrees, will satisfy most minds that they could have been known, if at all, but a short while before being mentioned in the Minutes which have come down to us. The Lodge of journeymen, then composed exclusively of Fellow‑Crafts, took part in the erection of the Grand Lodge in 1736, by which body it was recognized as a lawful Lodge, dating from 1709. The historian of the Lodge, who expresses a well‑grounded doubt whether the grades of Apprentice and Fellow‑Craft were identical with the Degrees of the same nameinforms us, that it contented itself for forty years with the two grades or Degrees referred to, as no indication of its connexion with the Master's Degree is found until 1750. On St. John's Day of that year, it made application to the Lodge of Edinburgh, to raise three of its members to the dignity of Master Masons. The application was cordially received and the three journeymen were admitted to that Degree " without any payment of composition, but only as a brotherly favour." For the same privilege, a fee of fourpence was imposed on two Brothers in the following year; but on August 16, 1754, the Master announced, that their Mother Lodge of Mary's Chapel had made an offer to raise every member of the journeymen Lodge 30 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 at the rate of twopence per head. (William Hunter, History of the Lodge of fourngmen Masons, No. 8, 1884, pp. 68, 69.) Whether the two grades, into which the members of journeymen and the Kelso Lodges were divided, were identical with the Degrees of the same name, is immaterial to the point under consideration. If the Degree of Fellow‑Craft was incorporated with the procedure of the Kelso Lodge prior to June 18, 1754, the Minute of that date sufficiently attests how imperfectly it had taken root. The secrets communicated in the journeymen Lodge‑at least during that portion of its history which is alone interesting to the student of our antiquities‑‑can be gauged with even greater precision.
The Decreet Arbitral of 1715 has been happily termed the Charter of the Journeymen Lodge. By this instrument, the Incorporation of Masons are absolved from accounting to the journeymen, " for the moneys received for giveing the Masson Word (as it is called), either to freemen or journeymen," as well before the date of the Decreet Arbitral as in all time to come. Next, " for putting an end to the contraversaries aryseing betwixt the said ffreemen and journeymen of the said Incorporation of Massons, anent the giveing of the Masson Word and the dues paid therefore," the arbiters decide that the Incorporation are to record in their books an Act and Allowance, allowing the journeymen " to meet togeither by themselves as a Society for giveing the Masson Word and to receive dues therefor." But " the whole meetings, actings and writeings " of the latter were to be confined to the collecting and distributing of their funds obtained from voluntary offerings, or from " giveing the Masson Word." Also, it was laid down, that all the money received by the journeymen, either by voluntary donations or " for giveing the Masson Word," was to be put into a common purse and to be employed in no other way than in relieving the poor and in burying the dead. In the third place the journeymen were to keep a book and to strictly account for " all moneys received for giveing the Masson Word " or otherwise. The Deed of Submission and the Decreet Arbitral, together with the Letters of Horning, which complete the series of these interesting, though not euphonious documents, are printed by Provost Hunter in the work already referred to and, with the exception of the last named and most mysterious of the three‑which is rather suggestive of a popular superstition‑also by Lyon in his admirable history.
It is a singular fact, that the differences thus settled by arbitration were between the journeymen and the Incorporation, not the Lodge of Mary's Chapel. Nor is the Lodge ever referred to in the proceedings. If, therefore, the idea is tenable that incorporations and guilds were custodians of the Mason Word, with the privilege or prerogative of conferring it, or of controlling its communication, quite a new line of thought is opened up to the Masonic antiquary. The practice at Edinburgh, in 1715, may have been a survival of one more general in times still further remote from our own. The Scottish Lodges may, at some period, have resembled agencies or deputations, with vicarious authority, derived in their case from the incorporations and guilds.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 31 Leaving, therefore, this point an open one, we learn from the Decreet Arbitral of 1715, in which it is six times mentioned, that there was only one word.
The same conclusion is brought home to us by a Scottish law case reported in 1730. In this, the Lodge at Lanark sought to interdict the Masons at Lesmahagow from giving the Mason Word to persons resident there. (Lord Kames, Remarkable Decisions of the Court of Sessions, Edinburgh, vol. ii, p. 4.) In each of these instances, only one word‑the Mason Word‑is alluded to. It is sufficiently apparent that the ancient formulary of the Scottish Lodges consisted of the communication of the Word and all that was implied in the expression.
The form of oath and some portions of the catechism given in Sloane MS., 3329 ‑a writing which, in the opinion of some high authorities, is decisive as to the antiquity and independence of the three Degrees‑savour so much of the Scottish idiom that they are here introduced.
THE OATH The mason word and every thing therein contained you shall keep secrett you shall never put it in writing directly or Indirectly you shall keep all that we or your attend=s [companions, associates] shall bid you keep secret from Man Woman or Child Stock or Stone and never reveal it but to a Brother or in a Lodge of Freemasons and truly observe the Charges in a y░ Constitucion all this you promise and swere faithfully to keep and observe without any manner of Equivocation or mentall resarvation directly or Indirectly so help you god and by the Contents of this book.
So he kisses the book, etc.
The following are extracts from the catechism: (Q.) What is a just and perfect or just and Lawfull Lodge ? (A.) A just and perfect Lodge is two Interprintices, two fellow Craftes, and two Mast's, more or fewer, the more the merrier, the fewer the betty chear, but if need require five will serve, that is two Interprintices, two fellow Craftes and one Mast= on the highest hill or Lowest Valley of the World without the crow of a Cock or the bark of a Dogg.
(Q.) What were you sworne by? (A.) By God and the square.
Although it is tolerably clear that Degrees‑as we now have them‑were grafted upon Scottish Masonry in the eighteenth century, a puzzle in connexion with their English derivation still awaits solution. It is this. The Degrees in question‑or to vary the expression, the only Degrees comprised within the old landmarks of Freemasonry‑viz. those of Master Mason, Fellow Craft and Entered Apprentice, bear titles which are evidently borrowed from the vocabulary of Scotland. Master Mason, it is true, was a term common in both kingdoms, but viewed in conjunction with the others, the three expressions may be regarded as having been taken en bloc from the operative terminology of the northern 32 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 kingdom. Thus, we find England furnishing Scotland with Masonic Degrees, which, however, bear titles exactly corresponding with those of the grades of Operative Masonry in the latter country. This is of itself somewhat confusing, but more remains behind.
If the Degrees so imported into Scotland had a much earlier existence than the date of their transplantation, which is fixed by Lyon at the year 1721, but may, with greater probability, be put down at 1723 or 1724, then this difficulty occurs. Either the Degrees in question existed, though without distinctive titles, or they were re‑named during the epoch of transition and, under each of these suppositions, we must suppose that the English (Free) Masons, who were familiar with Symbolical Degrees, borrowed the words to describe them from the Scottish Masons who were not! It is true, evidence may yet be forthcoming, showing that Degrees under their present appellations are referred to before the publication of the Constitutions of 1723. But the conclusions must be based upon evidence and the silence of all extant Masonic records of earlier date, with regard to the three Symbolical Grades of Master Mason, Fellow Craft and Apprentice, will be conclusive to some minds that they had then no existence. This, however, does not imply that Degrees or grades in Speculative Masonry had their first beginning in 1723. It is almost demonstrably certain that they did not. But they are first referred to in unequivocal terms in the Constitutions of that year and the titles with which they were then labelled cannot be traced (in conjunction) any higher, as Speculative or nonOperative terms.
In the Schaw Statutes (1598) will be found all the Operative terms, which, so far as the evidence extends, were first turned to Speculative uses by the Freemasons of the south. Master Mason, Fellow Craft and Entered Apprentice, as grades of Symbolical Masonry, are not alluded to in any book or manuscript of earlier date than 1723. Indeed, with the exception of the first named, the expressions themselves do not occur in the printed or manuscript literature preceding the publication of Dr. Anderson's Boob of Constitutions (1723). The title, Master Mason, appears, it is true, in the Halliwell Poem and, though not used in the MS. next in seniority (the Cooke), will also be found in several versions of the Old Charges. The term or expression is also a very common one in the records of the building trades and is met with occasionally in the Statutes of the Realm, where its earliest use‑in the Statute of Labourers 035o)‑has somewhat perplexed historians. The words mestre mason de franche pere were cited by Papworth as supporting his theory‑" that the term Freemason, is clearly derived from a mason who worked free‑stone, in contradistinction to the mason who was employed in rough work." (Transactions R.I.B.A., 1861‑62, pp. 37‑6o.) Upon this and the commentary of Dr. Kloss, Findel founds a conclusion that " the word Free‑Mason occurs for the first time in the Statute 25, Edward 1110350)," (History of Freemasonry, p. 79) which is next taken up and again amplified by Steinbrenner, who, although he leaves out the word Mason, in his quotation from the statute, attaches to mestre de franche .P‑ ere a most arbitrary and illusory signification. " Here," he says, Free‑mason‑how he THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 33 gets at the second half of the compound word is not explained‑" evidently signifies a Free‑stone‑mason‑one who works in Free‑stone, as distinguished from the rough mason, who merely built walls of rough unhewn stone." (Origin and Early History of Masonry, 1864, p. III.) "This latter sort of workmen," observes Mackey‑who, after quoting the passages just given, in turn takes up the parable and, it may be remarked, accords to Steinbrenner the entire merit of the research, out of which it arises‑" was that class called by the Scotch Masons ` Cowans,' whom the Freemasons were forbidden to work with, whence we get the modern use of that word." (Encyclopaedia, s.v. " Freemason.") But nowhere, except in the documents of the Scottish Craft, do we meet with the names, which have been employed from the year '1723, to describe the Freemasons of the two lower Degrees. " Fellows " and " Apprentices "‑‑or more commonly " Prentices "‑are constantly referred to, but not " Fellow‑Crafts," or " Entered Apprentices "‑titles apparently unknown, or at least not in use, in the south. " Cowns " are also alluded to by the Warden General, but English Masons were not familiarized with this expression until it was substituted by Anderson in the Constitutions of 1738 for the terms " layer," " lyer," " lowen," " loses," etc., where they are used in the Old Charges to distinguish the ordinary workman from the sworn Brother.
The terms or expressions, Master Mason, Fellow Craft, Entered Apprentice and Cowan, appear, from documentary evidence, to have been in common use in Scotland, from the year 1598 down to our own times. These operative titles now conferred on the recipients of Degrees‑are named in the Schaw Statutes (1598), the records of Mary's Chapel (16oi) and the laws of the Aberdeen Lodge (1670). (Lyon, pp. 73, 423, 425.) There, so to speak, they are presented en bloc, which makes the references the more comprehensive and significant, but all three titles occur very frequently in the early Minutes of Scottish Lodges, though that of Master Mason is often curtailed to Master.
The word Cowan has been previously referred to, but in support of the argument that the operative vocabulary of the sister kingdom furnished many of the expressions of which we find the earliest southern use in the publications of Dr. Anderson, a few additional remarks will be offered.
According to Lyon‑" of all the technicalities of Operative Masons that have been preserved in the nomenclature of their Speculative successors, that of Cowan, which is a purely Scotch term, has lost least of its original meaning." (Lyon, p. 24.) By Dr. Jamieson, it is described as " a word of contempt; applied to one who does the work of a mason, but has not been regularly bred "‑i.e. brought up in the trade. (Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Languages, 1808.) But the term is best defined in the Kilwinning Records, viz. a mason without the word‑or, to vary the expression‑an irregular or uninitiated operative mason. (Lyon, p. 412 ; Freemasons' Magazine, August 29, 1863.) That it was commonly used in this sense, in the early documents of the Scottish Craft, is placed beyond doubt.
We find it so employed in the Minutes of the Lodge of Edinburgh‑I 5 99‑ 34 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 of the Glasgow Incorporation of Masons‑16oo, 16z3‑of Mother Kilwinning 1645, 1647, 1705‑and of the Lodge of Haddington‑1697. (Lyon, pp. 24, 25, 411.) Possibly, however, from the fact, that so simple and natural an explanation affords no scope for the exercise of learned credulity, there is hardly any other word, except, perhaps, Essenes and Mason, which has been traced to so many sources by etymologists.
Thus, its origin has been found in the chouans of the French Revolution, " of which the h was omitted by the English, who failed to aspirate it conformably to cockney pronunciation." (Oliver, Historical Landmarks, 1846, vol. i, p. 142.) Again, in Egypt, we are informed, cohen was the title of a priest or prince, a term of honour. Bryant, speaking of the harpies, says, they were priests of the Sun and, as cohen was the name of a dog as well as a priest, they are termed by Apollonius, " the dogs of Jove." (Oliver, op. cit., p. 349.) " Now, St. John cautions the Christian brethren that ` without are dogs ' (KVVes), cowans or listeners (Rev. xxii. 15) ; and St. Paul exhorts the Christians to `beware of dogs, because they are evil workers' (Phil. iii. 2). Now, KVWV, a dog, or evil worker, is the Masonic Cowan. The above priests or metaphorical dogs were also called Cercyonians, or Cer‑cowans, because they were lawless in their behaviour towards strangers." So far Dr. Oliver, whose remarks reappear in the arguments of very learned men, by whom the derivation of cowan has been more recently considered. (See The Freemason, 1871, pp. 43, 73, 121 and 441.) Dr. Carpenter, who examines and rejects the reasoning of Dr. Oliver, thinks the meaning of the word may be found in the Anglo‑Saxon cowen, which signifies a herd, as of kine, but which we use metaphorically, to denote a company of thoughtless people, or a rabble.
By an earlier writer (Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1835, p. 4z8), it has been traced to the Greek word aKOVW, to hear, hearken, or listen to, of which the present participle aKOVwv, would‑so thinks Dr. Viner Bedolfe‑signify a " listening person." In a good sense, a " disciple "‑in a bad sense, an " eavesdropper." Kvcev, a dog, in the opinion of this writer, is also doubtless from the same root, in the sense of one who listens‑as dogs do‑and the two ideas combined, he believes, would probably give us the true meaning of the word.
After the subject had been debated for nearly seven months in the columns of the Masonic press, Dr. Carpenter thus sums up the whole matter. " I think," he says, " we have got pretty well at the meaning of the word cowan, as it is used in the Craft. D. Murray Lyon will not take offence at my saying, that I much prefer Dr. Bedolfe's conjecture to his, although the phrase ` cowans and eavesdroppers,' in the old Scottish ritual, shows that cowan was not synonymous with listener or eavesdropper there. We have cowans‑and intruders, however‑the intruder being a person who might attempt to gain admission without the word and the cowan something else. I got listener through the Anglo‑Saxon; Dr. Bedolfe, through the Greek ; but we agree in the import of the word, and in its use amongst Masons." (The Freemason, 1871, p. 4570 The preceding observations, in conjunction with others from the pen of THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 35 the same writer, indicate, that without questioning the use of the word cowan by the Operative Fraternity in the sense of a clandestine or irregular mason, the doctor demurs to this having anything whatever to do with the origin and use of the word by the Speculative Society. " The Operatives," he says, " sometimes admitted a Cowan‑the Speculatives never." (Ibid., p. 425.) In the original edition of Jamieson's Dictionary, two meanings only of the word are given. One has been cited, the other is a dry‑diker, or a person who builds dry walls. After these, a third meaning, or acceptation, is found in the edition of 1879, " Cowan‑one unacquainted with the secrets of Freemasonry." Its derivation is thus given :‑Suio‑Gothic (the ancient language of Sweden)‑kujon, kughjon, a silly fellow : hominem imbellem, et cujus capiti omnes tuto illudunt, kujon, appellare moris est. (Ihre, Lexicon La pponicum, Holmix, 1780.) French‑coyon, coyon, a coward, a base fellow. (Cotgrove, French and English Dictionary, 1650) qui fait profession de lachete, ignavus‑Dict. Trev. (Trevoux, Dictionnaire Universelle FranFois et Latin, 175 2.) The editors of this dictionary deduce it from Latin quietus.
But the term is evidently Gothic. It has been imported by the Franks ; and is derived from kufiv‑a, supprimere, insultare. But the same etymology was given in the first edition of the work and in connexion with the two purely operative (and only) explanations of the word. For this reason the quotations from the original dictionary and its modern representative have been separately presented, that the etymological subtleties for which the term under examination has served as a target may appropriately be brought to a close, by citing the new uses to which the old derivation has been applied.
It is true that Cowns were sometimes licensed to perform masons' work, but always under certain restrictions. Their employment by Master Masons, when no regular Craftsmen could be found within fifteen miles, was allowed by the Lodge of Kilwinning in the early part of the eighteenth century. It was also the custom of Scotch Incorporations in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to license cowans‑Masters and journeymen (see The Freemason, 1871, p. 409)‑who were at once thatchers, wrights and masons. Liberty to execute hewn work was, however, invariably withheld. Maister Cowands were, under restrictions, admitted to membership in some Masonic Incorporations, but their reception in Lodges was strictly prohibited. (Lyon, p. 24 ; Masonic Magazine, 188o, pp. 113, 114.) Among the regulations enjoined by the Warden General, there are some which must be considered. The customs to which these gave rise, or assisted in perpetuating, partly reappear in the Free‑masonry of the south. But inasmuch as there are no English Minutes or Lodge records of earlier date than the eighteenth century, the clue, if one there be, to usages which, with slight modifications, have lasted, in some instances, to our own times, must be looked for ex necessitate rei in the Statutes, promulgated by William Schaw, after‑we may suppose, as in the somewhat parallel case of Etienne Boileau‑satisfying himself, by the testimony of representative craftsmen, that they were usual and customary in the trade.
A general or head meeting day was named by the Master of Work, upon which 36 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 the election of Warden was to be conducted. This, in the case of Kilwinning and its tributary Lodges, was to take place on December 2o, but in all other instances on the day of St. John the Evangelist. The latter fact, it is true, is not attested by the actual Statutes, but that both dates of election were fixed by William Schaw may nevertheless be regarded as having been satisfactorily proved by evidence aliunde.
The order of the Warden General for the election of Lodge Wardens, or what at all events is believed by the highest authority (Lyon, pp. 38, 39), to be his‑except within the bounds of Kilwinning, the Nether Ward of Clydesdale, Glasgow, Ayr and Carrick‑is as follows : " xvij Novembris, 15 99. First, it is ordanit that the haill Wardenis salbe chosen ilk yeir preciselie at Sanct Jhoneis day, to wit the xxvij day of Dcember." This Minute, assumed to be a memorandum of an order emanating from the Warden General, is followed by another: " xviij Decembees, 15 99. The qlk day the dekin & maisteris of the ludge of Edr. [Edinburgh] electit & chesit Jhone Broun in thair Warden be monyest of thair voitis for ane zeir [year] to cum." It may be observed, that elections frequently took place on the twenty‑eighth instead of the twenty‑seventh of December. The Minutes of the Melrose (1674) and other early Scottish Lodges afford examples of this apparent irregularity, though its explanation‑if, indeed, not simply arising in each case from the festival of St. John the Evangelist falling upon a Sunday (Masonic Magazine, vol. vii, p. 365)may be found in an old guild‑custom. Every guild had its appointed day or days of meeting. At these, called morn‑speeches (in the various forms of the word), or " dayes of Spekyngges tokedere [together] for here [their] comune profyte," much business was done such as the choice of officers, admittance of new brethren, making up accounts, reading over the ordinances and the like. One day, where several were held in the year, being fixed as the " general day." (L. Toulmin Smith, English Gilds, p. xxxiii.) The word morning‑speech (morgen‑spat) is as old as Anglo‑Saxon times. Morgen signified both morning and morrow; and the origin of the term would seem to be that the meeting was held either in the morning of the same day, or on the morning (the morrow) of the day after that on which the guild held its feast and accompanying ceremonies.
However this may have been, the custom of meeting annually upon the day of St. John the Evangelist, in conformity with the order of the Warden General, with the exception of Mother Kilwinning (December 2o) appears to have been observed with commendable fidelity by such of the early Lodges whose Minutes have come down to us. It was the case at Edinburgh‑1599 ; Aberdeen‑1670 ; Melrose‑1674; Dunblane‑1696 ; and Atcheson Haven‑1700. In each instance the earliest reference to the practice afforded by the documents of the Lodge is quoted. The usage continued and survives at this day, but of the celebration of St. John the Baptist's day‑or St. John's day in Harvest (Smith, English Gilds, pp. 313, 3 2 5), as distinguished from St. John's day in Christmas‑by any Fraternity THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 3 7 exclusively Masonic, we have the earliest evidence in the York Minute of June 24, 1713. Both days, it is true, were observed by the Gateshead sodality of 1671 ; but though the Freemasons were the leading craft of this somewhat mixed corporation, there is nothing to show, or from which it might be inferred, that the custom of meeting on Midsummer day had its origin in a usage of the Lodge, rather than in one of the guild. Indeed, the reverse of this supposition is the more credible of the two.
The objects of all guilds alike have been well defined by Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, in one of his Capitularies. (Cf. Wilda, Das Gildwesen im Mittelalter, 1831, pp. 2z, 35, 41.) He says, in omni obsequio religionis conjungantur‑they shall unite in every exercise of religion. By this was meant, before all things, the associations for the veneration of certain religious mysteries and in honour of saints. Such guilds were everywhere under the patronage of the Holy Trinity, or of certain saints, or of the Holy Cross, or of the Holy Sacrament, or of some other religious mystery. In honour of these patrons they placed candles on their altars and before their images, whilst in some statutes this even appears as the only object of the guild. (Brentano, p. ig.) But the definition given above must not be restricted to the social or religious guilds. It applies equally well to the town‑guilds or guilds‑merchant and the trade‑guilds or guilds of crafts. None of the London trades appear to have formed fraternities without ranging themselves under the banner of some saint and, if possible, they chose one who bore a fancied relation to their trade. Thus the fishmongers adopted St. Peter; the drapers chose the Virgin Mary, mother of the Holy Lamb or fleece, as the emblem of that trade. The goldsmiths' patron was St. Dunstan, reputed to have been a brother artisan. The merchant tailors, another branch of the draping business, marked their connexion with it by selecting St. John the Baptist, who was the harbinger of the Holy Lamb so adopted by the drapers. In other cases, the companies denominated themselves fraternities of the particular saint in whose church or chapel they assembled and had their altar. (Herbert, Companies of London, 1837, vol. i, p. 67.) Eleven or more of the guilds, whose ordinances are given us by Toulmin Smith, had John the Baptist as their patron saint and several of these, whilst keeping June 24 as their head day, also assembled on December 27, the corresponding feast oú the Evangelist. (Smith, English Gilds, p. loo.) Among the documents brought to light by this zealous antiquary, there are, unfortunately, none relating directly to the Masons, though it is somewhat curious that he cites the records of a guild, which, it is possible, may have comprised members of that trade, as affording almost a solitary instance of the absence of a patron saint. The guild referred to is that of the smiths (ffabrorum) of Chesterfield. (English Gilds, p. 168.) An explanation of this apparent anomaly is furnished by Brentano (On the History and Development of Gilds, p. 19) ; but leaving the point an open one, whether in the case before us Smith or his commentator has the best title to confidence, it may be remarked that the guild of the joiners and carpenters at Worcester also 38 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 appears not to have been under any saintly patronage; yet, on the other hand, we find the carpenters' guild of Norwich dedicated to the Holy Trinity, whilst the brotherhood of barbers in the same town and the fraternity of tailors at Exeter, were each under the patronage of St. John the Baptist. (Smith, English Gilds, PP. 27, 40, 209, 310.) The general head‑meeting day of the Alnwick Lodge, in 1701, was the Feast of St. Michael, but this, however, we find shortly afterwards changed to that of St. John the Evangelist.
The records of Mary's Chapel and Kilwinning are sufficiently conclusive of the fact, that the holding of Lodge assemblies on the day of St. John the Baptist was never a custom of the Scottish Fraternity until after the erection of their Grand Lodge. By the original regulations of this body, the election of a Grand Master was to take place on St. Andrew's day for the first time and " ever thereafter " upon that of St. John the Baptist. In accordance therewith, William St. Clair of Roslin was elected the first Grand Master on November 30, 1736, which day, in preference to December 27, was fixed for the annual election of officers by resolution of the Grand Lodge, April 13, 1737, as being the birthday of St. Andrew, the tutelar saint of Scotland. (Lyon, pp. 170, 235, 236.) Of all the meetings of the Lodge of Edinburgh that were held between the years 15 99 and 175 6, only some half‑a‑dozen happened to fall on June 24 ; and the first mention of the Lodge celebrating the festival of St. John the Baptist is in 175 7. (History of the Lodge of Kelso, p. 15 .) It will be quite unnecessary, in these days, to lay stress on the circumstance that the connexion of the Saints John with the Masonic Institution is of a symbolic and not of an historical character. The custom of assembling on the days of these saints is, apparently, a relic of sun‑worship, combined with other features of the heathen Paganalia. The Pagan rites of the festival at the summer Solstice may be regarded as a counterpart of those used at the winter Solstice at Yule‑tide. There is one thing which proves this beyond the possibility of a doubt. In the old Runic Fasti a wheel was used to denote the festival of Christmas. This wheel is common to both festivities. (Brand, Popular Antiquities of Great Britain, 1870, vol. i, p. 169.) In the words of one authority " the great prehistoric midsummer festival to the sun‑god has diverged into the two Church feasts, Eucharist and St. John's Day " ; whilst " the term Yule was the name given to the festival of the winter Solstice by our northern invaders, and means the Festival of the Sun." (James Napier, Fok Lore, or Superstitious Beliefs in the Lest of Scotland, 1879, pp. 149, 175.) Sir Isaac Newton tells us that the heathen were delighted with the festivals of their gods and unwilling to part with those ceremonies ; therefore Gregory, Bishop of Neo‑Cxsarea in Pontus, to facilitate their conversion, instituted annual festivals to the saints and martyrs. Hence the keeping of Christmas with ivy, feasting, plays and sports came in the room of the Bacchanalia and Saturnalia ; the celebrating May Day with flowers, in the room of the Floralia ; and the festivals F. II‑I2 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, I7I7‑23 39 to the Virgin Mary, John the Baptist and divers of the Apostles, in the room of the solemnities at the entrance of the Sun into the Signs of the Zodiac in the old Julian Calendar. (Observations upon the Prophesies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. john, =733, Pt. i, c. xiv, pp. 204, 205.) In the same way, at the conversion of the Saxons by Austin the monk, the heathen Paganalia were continued among the converts, with some regulations, by an order of Gregory I to Mellitus the Abbot, who accompanied Austin in his mission to this island. His words are to this effect : On the Day of Dedication, or the Birth Day of the Holy Martyrs, whose relics are there placed, let the people make to themselves booths of the boughs of trees, round about those very churches which had been the temples of idols and, in a religious way, to observe a feast. " Such," remarks Brand (Popular Antiquities, vol. ii, p. 2), after quoting from Bede, as above, " are the foundations of the Country Wake." But his observations are cited, not so much to record this curious circumstance, as to point out that the festival enjoined by the Pope may have become, for a time at least, associated with the memory of the Quatuor Coronati or Four Crowned Martyrs‑the earliest legendary saints of the Masons.
This will depend upon the meaning which should be attached to the word " martyrium." Dr. Giles, in his edition of Bede's Ecclesiastical History, gives us under the year 61g‑" The Church of the Four Crowned Martyrs (martyrium beatorum quatuor coronati) was in the place where the fire raged most." The fire alluded to laid waste a great part of the city of Canterbury and was suddenly arrested on its reaching the martyrium of the Crowned Martyrs, owing, we are led to suppose, partly to the influence of their relics and, in a greater measure, to the prayers of Bishop Mellitus. Now, Bede's account of the circumstance has been held by a learned writer to demonstrate one of two facts‑either the martyrium contained the bodies of the saints, or the martyrdoms had taken place upon the spot where the church was afterwards built. (Coote, The Romans of Britain, 1878, p. 420.) In a certain sense, the former of these suppositions will exactly meet the case. According to canon xiv of the ‑19th Council of Carthage, no church could be built for martyrs except there were on the spot either the body or some certain relics, or where the origin of some habitation or possession or passion of the martyr had been transmitted from a most trustworthy source. (Sir Isaac Newton, op. cit., pt. i, g. 230 ; COOte, op cit., p. 419.) Martyrium, which is derived from the Greek JaapnipLov, as used in the context, would seem to mean " a church where some martyr's relics are " ; and if this signification is adopted the instructions given by Pope Gregory I to Mellitus and the words in which the latter is associated by Bede, with the miraculous stoppage of the fire at Canterbury, A.D. Gig, are more easily comprehended.
" The chief festivals of the Stone‑masons," says Findel, " were on St. John the Baptist's Day and the one designated the Day of the Four Crowned Martyrsthe principal patron saints of the Stone‑masons." (History of Freemasonry, p. 63.) Yet although the Quatuor Coronati are specially invoked in the Strasburg (1459) 40 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 and Torgau (146z) Ordinances, in neither of these, or in the later code‑the BrotherBook of 1563‑do we meet with any reference to St. John.
On the other hand, there existed in 1430, at Cologne, a guild of stonemasons and carpenters, called the Fraternity of St. John the Baptist; but, although the records from which this fact is gleaned extend from 1396 to the seventeenth century, the Four Martyrs are not once named.
The claims of Jolm the Baptist to be considered the earliest patron saint of the German masons are minutely set forth by Krause in his Kunsturkunden, to which learned work readers who are desirous of pursuing the subject at greater length than the limit of these pages will allow must be referred.
Before, however, parting with the Saints John, there is one further aspect under which their assumed patronage of guilds and fraternities may be regarded. This we find in the heathen practice of Minne‑drinking, that is, of honouring an absent or deceased one, by making mention of him at the assembly or banquet and draining a goblet to his memory. Among the names applied to the goblet was minnisveig‑‑hence swig or draught. The usage survived the conversion‑and is far from being extinct under Christianity‑but instead of Thor, Odin and the rest, the minne was drunk of Christ, Mary and the saints. (Cf. Fort, c. xxxiii.) During the Middle Ages the two saints most often toasted were John the Evangelist and Gertrude. Both St. Johns were, however, frequently complimented in this way. Luitprand, by the words potas in amore beati Johannis pracursoris, evidently referring to the Baptist, whilst in numerous other cases cited by Grimm the allusion is as distinctly to the Evangelist. Minne‑drinking, even as a religious rite, apparently still exists in some parts of Germany. At Otbergen, a village of Hildesheim, on December 27 every year, a chalice of wine is hallowed by the priest and handed to the congregation in the church to drink as Johannis segen (blessing). (Jacob Grimm, Teutonic Mythology, 188o, vol. i, pp. 59‑6z.) Among the remaining customs, the observance of which was strictly enjoined by the Schaw Statutes, there are some that must not be passed over without further notice. Usages first met with in the Masonic system of one country will be more satisfactorily considered in connexion therewith, than by postponing their examination until they reappear in that of another country.
It is, indeed, in the highest degree probable, that most of the regulations ordained by the Warden General were based on English originals, though not exclusively of a Masonic character. Clauses zo and 21 of the earlier code (1598) are clearly based on corresponding passages in the Old Charges. The examination of journeymen before their " admission " as masters may have been suggested by a custom with which we are made familiar by the Cooke MS. (z) (lines 711‑719) ; and clause 1o of the same code is, strange to say, almost identical in phraseology with the tenth ordinance of the Guild of Joiners and Carpenters, Worcester, enacted in 1692, but doubtless a survival of a more ancient law. It imposes " a penalty of ,C5 for takeing an apprentice, to sell him again to ano= of the same trade." (Smith, English Gilds, p. zog.) THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, I717‑23 41 But the immediate task is, not so much to speculate upon the supposed origin of customs, first met with in Masonry in the sixteenth century, as to realize with sufficient distinctness the actual circumstances of the early Scottish Craft, before proceeding with the comparison for which we have been preparing.
The Schaw Statutes mention two classes of office‑bearers, which were wholly unknown, or, at least, are not mentioned, in any Masonic records of the south. These are quartermasters and intenders. The latter were represented in the majority of Scottish Lodges, but the former, though for a century holding a place among the Mlwinning fraternity, were never introduced into the Lodge of Edinburgh, nor is there any allusion to them (at first‑hand) elsewhere than in the Items of the Warden General and the Minutes of Mother Kilwinning. Whether either or both were survivals of English terms, which lapsed into desuetude, cannot be decided, though, at least, it merits passing attention that " Attendant," " Attender " and " Intendant," though shown as English words by Dr. Johnson, do not occur in the Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language by Dr. Jamieson. " Intender " is not given by either of these lexicographers. From the same source the Schasv Codices‑we learn that oaths were administered; one, the " great oath," apparently at entry‑and the other, the " oath of fidelity," at yearly intervals. The administration of an oath, the reception of fellows, the presentation of gloves, the custom of banqueting and the election of a Warden, as features of the Scottish system, demand attention, because, with the exception of the one referring to the choice of a Warden‑which officer, however, was present, teste Ashmole at the Warrington Lodge in 1646‑all of them reappear in the Masonic customs of the Staffordshire moorlands, so graphically depicted by Dr. Plot.
The references in the Schaw Statutes to gloves, banquets and the election of wardens, invite a few observations.
A high authority has laid down that the use o the gloves in Masonry is a symbolical idea, borrowed from the ancient and universal language of symbolism and was intended, like the apron, to denote the necessity of purity of life. (Mackey, Encyclopaedia, s.v. " gloves.") " The builders," says Mackey, " who associated in companies, who traversed Europe and were engaged in the construction of palaces and cathedrals, have left to us, as their descendants, their name, their technical language and the apron, that distinctive piece of clothing by which they protected their garments from the pollutions of their laborious employment." He adds, " did they also bequeath to us their gloves ? " (Mackey, op. cit., p. 314.) This is a question which the following extracts and references‑culled from many sources‑may enable us to solve. Gloves are spoken of by Homer as worn by Laertes and, from a remark in the Cyropadia of Xenophon, that, on one occasion, Cyrus went without them, there is reason to believe that they were used by the ancient Persians. According to Favyn, the custom of throwing down the glove or gauntlet was derived from the Oriental mode of sealing a contract or the like, by giving the purchaser a glove by way of delivery or investiture and, to this effect, he quotes 4z THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 Ruth iv. 7, and Psalm cviii. 9‑passages where the word commonly translated " shoe " is by some rendered " glove." (Le Thddtre d' honneur, Paris, 1623.) In the Life of St. Columbanus, written in the seventh century, gloves, as a protection during manual labour, are alluded to and A.D. 749 (circa), Felix, in his Anglo‑Saxon Life of St. Guthlac, Hermit of Crowland (chap. xi) mentions their use as a covering for the hand.
According to Brand, the giving of gloves at marriages is a custom of remote antiquity ; but it was not less common, so we are told by his latest editor, at funerals than at weddings. A pair of gloves is mentioned in the will of Bishop Riculfus, who died A.D. 915 ; and Matthew Paris relates that Henry II (1189) was buried with gloves on his hands.
A.D. 13oz. In the Year Book of Edward I it is laid down, that in cases of acquittal of a charge of manslaughter, the prisoner was obliged to pay a fee to the justices' clerk in the form of a pair of gloves, besides the fee to the marshal.
1321.‑The Bishop of Bath and Wells received from the dean and chapter a pair of gloves with a gold knot. (H. E. Reynolds, Statutes of Dells Cathedral, p. 1470 In the Middle Ages, gloves of white linen‑or of silk beautifully embroidered and jewelled‑were worn by bishops or priests when in the performance of ecclesiastical functions. (Planche, Cyclopadia of Costume.) 15 5 7.‑Tusser, in his Five Hundred Good Points of Husbandry, informs us, that it was customary to give the reapers gloves when the wheat was thistly (reprinted in the British Bibliography, I8Io‑I8I4, vol. iii) and Hilman, in his Tusser Kedevivus, 1710, observes, that the largess, which seems to have been usual in the old writer's time, was still a matter of course, of which the reapers did not require to be reminded. (Brand, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 12 .) 158.‑A passage in Hall's Virgidemarium seems to imply that a Hen was a usual present at Shrove‑tide ; also a pair of Gloves at Easter.
According to Dr. Pegge, the Monastery of Bury allowed its servants two pence a piece for glove‑silver in autumn, but though he duly quotes his authority, the date of its publication is not given.
The allusions, so far, bear but indirectly upon the immediate subject, but some others of a purely Masonic character are now advanced which, for convenience sake, are grouped together in a chronological series of their own.
i 3th Century.‑An engraving copied from the painted glass of a window in the Cathedral of Chartres is given by M. Didron in his Annales Archdologiques. It represents a number of operative masons at work. All of them wear gloves. Further evidence of this custom will be found in the Life of Icing Off a, written by Matthew Paris, where a similar scene is depicted.
13 5 5.‑According to the records of York Cathedral, it was usual to find tunics [gowns], aprons, gloves and clogs and to give occasional potation and remuneration for extra work. Gloves were also given to the carpenters. From the same source of information we learn that aprons and gloves were given to the masons in 1371 ; THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 43 and the latter, in the same year, to the carpenters and, in 1403, to the setters. The last‑named workmen received both aprons and gloves (naprons et cirotecis) in 1404. Further entries elucidatory of the same custom appear under the years 1421‑22, ‑143z‑33, and 1498‑99, ending with the following in 1507 :‑For approns and glovys for settyng to the masons, 16d. (The Fabric Rolls of York, Minster (Publications of the Surtees Society, vol. xxxv).) 1372.‑The Fabric Rolls of Exeter Cathedral inform us that in this year six pairs of gloves were bought for the carpenters for raising the timber, i zd. (Oliver, Lives of the Bishops of Exeter, 1861, p. 385.) ‑1381.‑The chatelain of Villaines en Duemois bought a considerable quantity of gloves to be given to the workmen, in order, as it is said, " to shield their hands from the stone and lime." (Journal British Archceological Association, vol. i, 1845, P. 23.) 1383.‑Three dozen pairs of gloves were bought and distributed to the masons when they commenced the buildings at the Chartreuse of Dijon. (Ibid.) 1432.‑A lavatory was erected in the cloisters at Durham and the accounts show that three pairs of gloves at ild. each were given to the workmen. (J. Raine, A Brief Account of Durham Cathedral, 18 3 3, p. 91 .) 1486, 7.‑Twenty‑two pairs of gloves were given to the masons and stonecutters who were engaged in work at the city of Amiens. (journal British Archaeological Association, loc. cit.) The custom existed as late as 1629, under which year we find in the accounts of Nicoll Udwart, the treasurer of Heriot's Hospital,‑" Item, for sex pair of gloves to the Maissones at the founding of the Eist Quarter, xxs." (Transactions Archaeological Institute of Scotland, vol. ii, 18 5 2, pp. 34‑40.) Gloves are mentioned by William Schaw in 1599 and here we enter upon a new phase of the inquiry. Hitherto, as will be seen above, they were given to and not by the Masons, or any one or more of their number. The practice, of which we see the earliest account in the code of 1599, became‑if it did not previously exist‑a customary one in the old court of Operative Masonry, the proceedings of which, perhaps more than those of any other body of the same kind, the statutes in question were designed to regulate. Early in the seventeenth century it was a rule of the Lodge of Kilwinning that intrants should present so many pairs of gloves on their admission, but as the membership increased there was such an inconvenient accumulation of this article of dress that glove‑money came to be accepted in its stead. (Lyon, p. 47.) Gloves were required from Fellow‑Crafts at their passing and from Apprentices at their entry, in the Scoon and Perth (165 8) and the Aberdeen (1670) Lodges respectively ; but whether the custom extended to those who were entered in the former Lodge or passed in the latter it is difficult to decide. (See Masonic Magazine, vol. vii, 1879‑80, p. 134.) The largess expected was, however, more liberal in one case than in the other, for, according to the Aberdeen Statutes, intrants‑except the eldest sons and those married to the eldest daughters of the Fellow‑Crafts and Masters 44 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 by whom they were framed‑were obliged to present not only a pair of good gloves, but an apron also, to every member of the Lodge.
A regulation not unlike the above was enacted by the Melrose fraternity in 1675, requiring a " prentice " at his " entrie," also when " mad frie masson," to pay a certain number of " pund Scots & suficient gloves." In the former case, as we learn from a subsequent Minute (1695), the gloves were valued at four shillings and, in the latter, at five shillings a pair. (Masonic Maga.Zine, vol. vii, 188o, pp. 366, 367.) A similar usage prevailed in the Lodge of Kelso, as we learn by the Minute for St. John's Day, 1701. (Vernon, History of the Lodge of Kelso, P. 15.) This codifies the existing laws and we find that the Brethren, who as entered apprentices were mulct in the sum of " eight pound Scots with their gloves," were further required, in the higher station of " master and fellow of the craft," to pay five shillings sterling to the company's stock and " neu gloves to the members." (Vernon, op. cit., p. 16.) The obligation imposed upon intrants of clothing the Lodge‑a phrase by which the custom of exacting from them gloves and, in some instances, aprons, was commonly described, was not abolished in the Lodge of Kelso until about 175 5. The material point, however, for consideration is, that the practice, in Scottish Lodges, overlapped that portion of English Masonic history termed the " epoch of transition," since, from the point of view we are surveying these ancient customs, it matters very little how common they became after they were " digested " by Dr. Anderson in his Book, of Constitutions. In this we find, as No. VII of the General Re gulations‑‑" Every new Brother at his making is decently to cloath the Lodgethat is, all the Brethren present," etc. (Constitutions, 17z3, p. 6o.) Here, it would seem, as in so many other instances, Dr. Anderson must have had in his mind the Masonic usages of his native country, though we should not lose sight of the fact that the presentation of gloves by candidates to Freemasons and their wives was a custom which prevailed in the Staffordshire Lodges in 1686.
But, whatever were the authorities upon which Anderson relied‑and by the suggestion that the leading features of Scottish Masonry were not absent from his thoughts whilst fulfilling the mandate he received from the Grand Lodge of England, it is not meant to imply that he closed his eyes to evidence proceeding from any other quarter‑it is certain that the old Masonic custom, which, in 1723, had become a law, came down from antiquity in two distinct channels. This it is necessary to bear in mind, because whilst in the one case (Scotland) we must admit that the Speculative Masons have received from their Operative predecessors the gloves as well as the apron, in the other case (England) this by no means follows as a matter of course, since among the Freemasons of 1686 were " persons of the most eminent quality," from whose Speculative‑not Operative‑predecessors the custom which Plot attests may have been derived. Indeed, passing over the circumstance that until the sixteenth century‑at least so far as there is evidence to guide us‑gloves were presented to rather than by the Operative Masons, the stream of authority THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 45 tends to prove that the usage itself was one of great antiquity and there is absolutely nothing which should induce the conviction that its origin must be looked for in a custom of the building trades.
Indeed, the probability is rather the other way. The giving of gloves at weddings was common in early times, as already seen. Lovers also presented them to their mistresses and the very common notion that, if a woman surprises a man sleeping and can steal a kiss without waking him, she has a right to demand a pair of gloves‑has been handed down with a very respectable flavour of antiquity. Thus, Gay, in the sixth pastoral of his Shepherd's leek, published in 1714, has Cic'ly brisk Maid, steps forth before the Rout, And kiss'd with smacking Lip the snoring Lout For Custom says, who'er this venture proves, For such a kiss demands a pair of Gloves.
It might plausibly be contended, that the origin of the practice thus mentioned by Gay in 1714, must be looked for at a period of time at least equally remote with that of the Masonic usage, on which Dr. Anderson based the Seventh General Regulation of '1723.
Although banquets are not among the customs or regulations, ratified or ordained by the Warden General in 1598, they are mentioned in no fewer than three clauses of the Statutes of 1599. This, of itself, would go far to prove that the practice of closing the formal proceedings of a meeting with a feast or carousal was then of old standing. But a minute of Mary's Chapel (Lyon, p. 39), preceding by ten days the date of Schaw's second code, shows, at all events, that the banquet was a well‑established institution at the time when the latter was promulgated.
In the Lodge of Aberdeen ('1670) both initiation (or entry) and passing were followed by feasting and revelry, at the expense of the Apprentice and Fellow respectively. Nor did the exemption with regard to gloves and aprons, which, as seen, prevailed in the case of sons and sons‑in‑law of the " Authoires " and " Subscryuers " of the " Book," hold good as to banquets. From each and all a " speacking pynt," a " dinner " and a " pynt of wyne," were rigorously exacted.
The festival of St. John the Evangelist was especially set apart by the Aberdeen Brethren, as a day of feasting and rejoicing. A similar usage prevailed at Melrose, from at least 1670 and, in all probability, from times still more remote. The records of the old Lodge there first allude to the " feast of the good Saint John," in 1685, when for " meat and drink, and making it ready " was expended úi 1 os. 1od. Entries of the same character appear under later years, of which the following will suffice: " 1687‑for Meat & Drink & Tobacco, C,7 17s. 6d. 1698‑for ale, white bread, two legs of mutton, a pound of tobacco and pipes, and a capful of salt, úI I 5s. 7d." (Masonic Magazine, vol. vii, pp. 324, 325, 369.) A dinner on St. John's day, at the expense of the box, was indulged in by the Brethren of Atcheson's Haven and Peebles, at the beginning of the last century and a like custom obtained in the Lodge of Edinburgh down to 1734, in which year, 46 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 though the members resolved to meet as usual on the festival of the Evangelist, they decided that in future, those attending should pay half‑a‑crown towards the cost of the entertainment. (Lyon, p. 45 .) It has been observed with truth, that during a great part of the eighteenth century, hard drinking and other convivial excesses were carried among the upper classes in Scotland to an extent considerably greater than in England and not less than in Ireland. (Lecky, England in the Eighteenth Century, vol. ii, p. 89.) Of this evil, the case of Dr. Archibald Pitcairne affords a good illustration. He was a man of great and varied, but ill‑directed ability. Burton styles him the type of a class, not numerous but influential from rank and education (History of Scotland, vol. ii, p. 5 5 9) ; and we learn from Wodrow that " he got a vast income, but spent it upon drinking and was twice drunk every day." (Analecta, vol. ii, p. 255.) Yet it is doubtful whether these habits had any real root among the poorer and middle classes. Indeed, it has been said that the general standard of external decorum was so far higher than in England, that a blind man travelling southwards would know when he passed the frontier by the increasing number of blasphemies he heard. (Lecky, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 89.) We now pass to the election of Wardens, for, though the subject of banqueting or feasting is far from being exhausted, further observations on this custom will more appropriately be introduced in another chapter. It forms, however, a leading feature of the early Masonry practised in North Britain and, as such, has been briefly noticed in connexion with other characteristics of the Scottish Craft, which reappear in the more elaborate svstem afterwards devised‑or found to be in existence‑in the south. The Schan, Statutes enjoin, as already seen, that a Warden‑who was to be chosen annually‑should " have the charge over every lodge." This regulation was complied with by the Lodge of Edinburgh in 1598, but, in the following year, the Deacon sat as president, with the Warden as Treasurer. This was in accordance with the ordinary usage which prevailed in the early Scottish Lodges, that when there was a Deacon as well as a Warden, the latter acted as treasurer or box‑master (Hunter, History of the Lodge of Journeymen Masons, p. 67.) Frequently, however, both offices were held by the same person, who we find designated in the Minutes of Mary's Chapel as" Deacon of the Masons and Warden of the Lodge." (Lyon, p. 41.) We meet with the same titles‑Deacon and Warden‑in the records of the Kilwinning (1643), the Atcheson Haven (17oo) and the Peebles (1716) Lodges, though they are there used disjunctively and apart. (Lyon, pp. 179, 418.) In each of these instances the Deacon was the chief official. Such was also the case in the Haddington Lodge in 1697, where, apparently, there was no Warden; whilst, on the other hand, the Lodge of Glasgow, in 1613, was ruled by a Warden and there was no such officer as Deacon. The wording of the Schaw Statutes may have led to this diversity of usage, as the two codes are slightly at variance in the regulations they respectively contain with regard to the functions of Wardens and Deaconsthe earlier set implying that the titles denoted separate offices, while, in the later one, the same expressions may be understood in precisely an opposite sense.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 47 According to Herbert, the Alderman was the chief officer, whilst the trade fraternities of London were called guilds. Eschevins, Elders and other names succeeded and were, in some instances, contemporaneous. The merchant tailors were unique in styling their principal, " Pilgrim," on account of his travelling for them. Bailiffs, Masters, Wardens, Purveyors and other names, became usual designations when they were chartered. From Richard H to Henry VII their chief officers are styled Wardens of the Craft, Wardens of the said Mystery, Masters or Wardens, of such guild as they presided over, Wardens and Purveyors, Guardians or Wardens, Bailiffs and Custodes or Keepers. (Companies of London, vol, i, p. 51.) In the Cooke MS. (z), we meet with the expression‑Warden under a Master. This takes us back to the early part of the fifteenth century and, about the same date, at York, as we learn from the Fabric Rolls of that cathedral, viz. in 14zz, John Long was Master Mason and William Waddeswyk the guardian (Warden] or second Master Mason. The same records inform us that William Hyndeley, who became the Master Mason in 147z, had previously received, in the same year, the sum of ,,C4 in wages, as Warden of the Lodge of Masons, for working in the office of the Master of the Masons, it being vacant by the death of Robert Spyllesby, for twentyfour weeks, at 3s. 4d. each week. (Transactions R.LB.A., 1861‑6z, pp. 37‑6o; Raine, The Fabric Rolls of York Minster, 18 5 8, pp. 46, 77.) These examples might be multiplied, but one more will suffice, which is taken from the oft‑quoted essay of Papworth. From this, we learn that whilst the great hall at Hampton Court was in course of erection, in 15 31, for King Henry VIII, John Molton was Master Mason at 1s. per day; William Reynolds, Warden at Ss. per week; the setters at 3s. 6d. per week; and lodgemen‑a somewhat suggestive term‑at 3s. 4d. per week. (Transactions R.LB.A., loc. cit.) From the preceding references, it will be seen that the employment of a Warden under a Master (or Master Mason) was a common practice in the building trades of the south, at a period anterior to the promulgation by William Schaw of the Statutes which have been so frequently alluded to. This fact may be usefully noted, as the next attempt will be to show that to a similar usage in Scottish Lodges, during the seventeenth and the early part of the eighteenth century, we are indebted for the highest of the three Operative titles used by Dr. Anderson in his classification of the Symbolic or Speculative Society of 1723. The Scoon and Perth (1658), the Aberdeen (1670), the Melrose (1675) and the Dunblane (1696) Lodges, were in each case ruled by the Master Mason, with the assistance of a Warden. (Masonic Magazine, vol. vii, 1879‑89, pp. 133, 134, 323, 366.) The latter officer appears, in every instance, to have ranked immediately after the former and is frequently named in the records of Lodges (e.g. those of Aberdeen and Dunblane) as his deputy or substitute. It is singular, however, that in those of Mother Kilwinning, where the practice was, in the absence of the Deacon or Master, to place in the chair, with full authority, some Brother present‑not in any one case, for more than a hundred years, do we find the Warden, by virtue of ranking next after the 48 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑z3 Master, to have presided over the Lodge. (Freemasons' Magazine, September z6, 1863, p. 267.) The instances are rare, where a plurality of Wardens is found to have existed in the early Lodges of Scotland, anterior to the publication of Dr. Anderson's Book of Constitutions (1723). Subsequently to that date, indeed, the transition from one Warden to two was gradually but surely effected.
We find that copies of the English Constitutions referred to were presented to the Lodges of Dunblane in 1723, of Peebles in 1725 (Lyon, pp. 416, 419) ; and, doubtless, these were not solitary instances of the practice. That the permeation of southern ideas was very thorough in the northern capital, as early as 1727, may be inferred from a Minute for St. John's Day (in Christmas) of that year. In this, the initiation of several creditable citizens, whose recognition as members of the Lodge of Edinburgh had been objected to by the champions of Operative supremacy‑is justified on the broad ground that " their admissions were regularly done, conform to the knowen lawes of this and all other weall Governed Lodges in Brittain." Ashmole's description of his initiation (see Dudley Wright's England's Masonic Pioneers), coupled with the indorsement on No. 25 of the Old Charges, point to the existence of a Warden, in two English Lodges at least, during the seventeenth century, who was charged with very much the same functions as those devolving upon the corresponding official under the regulations of William Schaw. It is tolerably clear, that Richard Penket in the one case (1646), and Isaac Brent in the other (1693), were the virtual presidents of their respective Lodges. But this is counterbalanced by other evidence, intermediate in point of time. Sloane MS. 3323 (14)‑dating from 1659 forbids a Lodge being called without "the consent of Master or Wardens " ; and the same officers are mentioned in two manuscripts of uncertain date‑the Harleian 1942 (i i) and the Sloane 3329, as well as in the earliest printed form of the Masons' Examination (The Freemason, October z, 188o) which has comedown to us. The Gateshead (1671) and Alnwick (1701) fraternities elected four and two Wardens each respectively ; and, in the latter, there was also a Master. The existence of a plurality of Wardens under a Master, in the Alnwick Lodgeif its records will bear this interpretation‑demands careful attention, as it tends to rebut the presumption of a Scottish derivation, which arises from the propinquity of Alnwick to the border and the practice of affixing marks to their signatures, a custom observed by the members of no other English Lodge whose records pre‑date the epoch of transition.
The scanty evidence relating to the Masonry of the south during the prehistoric period has been given in full detail. To the possible objection that undue space has been accorded to this branch of our inquiry, it may be said that the existence of a living Freemasonry in England before the time of Randle Holme (1688) rest on two sources of authority‑the Diary of Elias Ashmole and the Natural History of Dr. Plot. If the former of these antiquaries had not kept a journal‑and which, unlike most journals, was printed‑and if the latter had not undertaken the task THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1717‑23 49 of describing the phenomena of Staffordshire, we should have known absolutely nothing of the existence of Freemasons' Lodges at Warrington in 1646, at London in 1682, or in the moorlands of Staffordshire and, indeed, throughout England, in 1686. Now, judging by what light we have, is it credible for an instant that the attractions which drew Ashmole into the Society‑and had not lost their hold upon his mind after a lapse of thirty‑five years‑‑comprised nothing more than the benefit of the Mason Word, which in Scotland alone distinguished the Lodge‑Mason from the cowan ? The same remark will hold good with regard to Sir William Wise and the others in 1682, as well as to the persons of distinction who, according to Plot, were members of the Craft in 1686.
At the period referred to, English Freemasonry must have been something different, if not distinct, from Scottish Masonry. Under the latter system, the Brethren were Masons, but not (in the English sense) Freemasons. The latter title, to quote a few representative cases, was unknown‑‑or, at least, not in usein the Lodges of Edinburgh, Kilwinning and Kelso, until the years 1725, 1735 and 1741 respectively. It has, therefore, been essential to examine with minuteness the scanty evidence that has been preserved of English Masonic customs during the seventeenth century and, although the darkness which overspreads this portion of our annals may not be wholly removed, it is to be hoped that some light, at least, has been shed upon it. Yet, as Dr. Johnson has finely observed One generation of ignorance effaces the whole series of unwritten history. Books are faithful repositories, which may be a while neglected or forgotten, but, when they are opened again, will again impart their instruction : memory, once interrupted, is not to be recalled. Written learning is a fixed luminary, which, after the cloud that had hidden it has passed away, is again bright in its proper station. Tradition is but a meteor, which, if once it falls, cannot be rekindled.
CHAPTER II THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o HE year 1723 was a memorable one in the annals of English Masonry and affords a convenient halting‑place for the discussion of many points of interest which cannot properly be assigned either to an earlier or a later period. The great event of that year was the publication of the first Book, of Constitutions. The entire work deserves perusal; from this, together with a glance at the names of the members of Lodges in 1724 and 1725, may be gained a very good outside view of the Freemasonry existing at the termination of the epoch of transition.
The story of the formation of the Grand Lodge of England has been briefly told, but the history of that body would be incomplete without some further allusion to the " Four Old Lodges " by whose exertions it was called into existence.
ORIGINAL No. i met at the Goose and Gridiron, in St. Paul's Churchyard, from 1717 until 1729, removing in the latter year to the King's (or Queen's) Arms, in the same locality, where it remained for a long period. In 176o it assumed the title of the West India and American Lodge, which, ten years later, was altered to that of the Lodge of Antiquity. In 1794 it absorbed the Harodim Lodge, No. 467, a mushroom creation of the year 1790. Among the members were Thomas Harper and William Preston. Harper‑Deputy Grand Master of the Atholl Grand Lodge at the time of the Union‑was also a member of the Lodge of Antiquity from 1792 and served as Grand Steward in 1796. He was for some time Secretary to the Chapter of Harodim. Cf. Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, p. 3 5 5 ; and Free. masons' Magazine, January to June, 1861, p. 449. At the Union, in 1813, the first position in the new roll having devolved by lot upon No. i of the Atholl Lodges, it became and has since remained No. 2.
According to the Engraved List of 1729, this Lodge was originally constituted in 1691. Thomas Morris and Josias Villeneau, both in their time Grand Wardens, were among the members‑the former being the Master in 1723, the latter in 1725. Benjamin Cole, the engraver, belonged to the Lodge in 1730; but, with these three exceptions, the names, so far as they are given in the official records, do not invite any remark until after Preston's election to the chair, when the members suddenly awoke to a sense of the dignity of the senior English Lodge and became gradually impressed with the importance of its traditions. From Preston's time to the present the Lodge of Antiquity has maintained a high degree of pre‑eminence, as well for its seniority of constitution, as for the celebrity of the names which have graced its roll of members. The Duke of Sussex was its Master for many years ; 50 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 51 and the lamented Duke of Albany, in more recent days, filled the chair throughout several elections.
ORIGINAL No. z met at the Crown, Parker's Lane, in 17 17 and was established at the Queen's Head, Turnstile, Holborn, in 17,23 or earlier. Thence it moved in succession to the Green Lettice, Rose and Rummer, and Rose and Buffalo. In 1730 it met at the Bull and Gate, Holborn; and, appearing for the last time in the Engraved List for 1736, was struck off the roll at the renumbering in 1740. An application for its restoration was made in 1752, but, on the ground that none of the petitioners had ever been members of the Lodge, it was rejected. (Grand Lodge Minutes, March 16, 175 2). According to the Engraved List for 1729, the Lodge was constituted in 1712.
ORIGINAL No. 3, which met at the Apple Tree Tavern in Charles Street, Covent Garden, in 1717, moved to the Queen's Head, Knave's Acre, in 1723 or earlier; and, after several intermediate changes‑including a stay of many years at the Fish and Bell, Charles Street, Soho Square‑appears to have settled down, under the title of the Lodge of Fortitude, at the Roebuck, Oxford Street, from 1768 until 1793. In 1818 it amalgamated with the Old Cumberland Lodge‑constituted 1753‑and is now the Fortitude and Old Cumberland Lodge, No. iz.
Dr. Anderson informs us that, after the removal of this Lodge to the Queen's Head, " upon some difference, the members that met there came under a New Constitution [in 17z31 tho' they wanted it not " (Constitutions, 173 8, p. 18 5) ; and accordingly, when the Lodges were arranged in order of seniority in 1729, Original No. 3, instead of being placed as one of the Four at the head of the roll, found itself relegated by the Committee of Precedence to the eleventh number on the list. This appears to have taken the members by surprise‑as well it might, considering that the last time the Four were all represented at Grand Lodge‑April icy, 17z7before the scale of precedence was adjusted in conformity with the New Regulation enacted for that purpose, their respective Masters and Wardens answered to their names in the same order of seniority as we find to have prevailed when the Book of Constitutions was approved by the representatives of Lodges in 1723. But although the officers of No. I I " represented that their Lodge was misplaced in the printed book, whereby they lost their Rank and humbly prayed that the said mistake might be regulated,"‑" the said complaint was dismiss'd." (Grand Lodge Minutes, July II, 1729). It is probable that this petition would have experienced a very different fate had the three senior Lodges been represented on the Committee of Precedence.
As Original No. 2‑also so numbered in 1729‑‑" dropt out " about 1736, the Lodges immediately below it each went up a step in 1740; and Original No. 3 moved from the eleventh to the tenth place on the list. If the Minutes of the Committee of Charity covering that period were extant, we should find, possibly, a renewed protest by the subject of this sketch against its supersession, for one was certainly made at the next renumbering in 1756‑not altogether without success, as will be seen by the following extract from the Minute Book of one of the Lodges Sz THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o ‑George, No. 4‑above it on the list. The George Lodge was then meeting at the George and Dragon, Grafton Street, St. Ann's. In 1767, when removed to the Sun and Punch Bowl, its warrant was " sold, or otherwise illegally disposed of," to certain Brethren, who christened it the Friendship, which name it still retains (now No. 6). Among the offenders were the Duke of Beaufort and Thomas French, shortly afterwards Grand Master and Grand Secretary respectively of the Grand Lodge of England.
July z2, 1755.‑Letter beiiag [read] from the Grand Secy : Citing us to appear att the Committee of Charity to answer the Fish and Bell Lodge [No. io] to their demand of being plac'd prior to us, viz. in No. 3. Whereon our R' Wors' Mas` attended & the Question being propos'd was answer'd against [it] by him with Spirit and Resolution well worthy the Charector he assum'd, and being put to Ballot was card in favour of us. Report being made this night of the said proceedings thanks was Return'd him & his health drank with hearty Zeal by the Lodge present.
But although defeated in this instance, the officers of No. i o appear to have satisfied the committee that their Lodge was entitled to a higher number than would fall to it in the ordinary course, from two of its seniors having " dropt out " since the revision of 1740. Instead, therefore, of becoming No. 8, it passed over the heads of the two Lodges immediately above it and appeared in the sixth place on the list for 1756 ; whilst the Lodges thus superseded by the No. 10 of 175 5, themselves changed their relative positions in the list for 1756, with the result that Nos. 8, 9 and io in the former list severally became 8, 7 and 6 in the latter‑or, to express it in another way, Nos. 8 and 10 of 1755 change places in 1756.
Elsewhere it has been stated : " The supercession of Original No. 3 by eight junior Lodges in 1729, together with its partial restoration of rank in 1756, has introduced so much confusion into the history of this Lodge, that for upwards of a century its identity with the `old Lodge,' which met at the Apple Tree Tavern in 1717, appears to have been wholly lost sight of." (Gould, The Four Old Lodges, P. 42.) The age of this Lodge cannot even be determined approximately. It occupied the second place in the Engraved Lists for 1723 and 1725 and, probably, continued to do so until 1728. The position of the Lodge in 1729 must have been wholly determined by the date of its warrant and, therefore, affords no clue to its actual seniority. It is quite impossible to say whether it was established earlier or later than original No. 2 (171z), nor pace Preston can one altogether be sure‑if the precedency in such matters to be regulated by dates of formation is assumed‑that the Fortitude and Old Cumberland Lodge would be justified in yielding the pas, even to the Lodge of Antiquity itself.
Alluding to the meeting at the Goose and Gridiron Ale‑house, on St. John the Baptist's day, 1717, Findel observes This day is celebrated by all German Lodges as the day of the anniversary of THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 53 b the Society of Freemasons. It is the high‑noon of the year, the day of light and roses, and it ought to be celebrated everywhere. (History of Freemasonry, p. 137.) It seems, however, that, not only is this remarkable incident in the history of the Lodge of Antiquity worthy of annual commemoration, but that the services of the Fortitude and Old Cumberland Lodge, in connexion with what may be termed the most momentous event in the history of the Craft, are, at least, entitled to a similar distinction. The first Grand Master, it is true, was elected and installed at the Goose and Gridiron, under the banner of the Old Lodge there, but the first Grand Lodge was formed and constituted at the Apple Tree, under similar auspices. Also the Lodge at the latter tavern supplied the Grand Master‑Sayer‑who was elected and installed in the former.
ORIGINAL No. 4 met at the Rummer and Grapes Tavern, in Channel Row, Westminster, in 1717 and its representatives‑George Payne, Master; Stephen Hall and Francis Sorell, Wardens‑joined with those of nineteen other Lodges, in subscribing the Approbation of the Constitutions in January 1723. The date of its removal to the tavern with which it became so long associated and whose name it adopted, is uncertain. It is shown at the Horn in the earliest of the Engraved Lists, ostensibly of the year 1723, but there are grounds for believing that this appeared towards the close of the period embraced by the Grand Mastership of the Earl of Dalkeith, which would render it of later date than the following extract from a newspaper of the period There was a great Lodge of the ancient Society of the Free Masons held last week at the Horn Tavern, in Palace Yard : at which were present the Earl of Dalkeith their Grand Master ; the Deputy Grand Master, the Duke of Richmond ; and several other persons of quality, at which time, the Lord Carmichael, Col. Carpenter, Sir Thomas Prendergast, Col. Paget and Col. Saunderson, were accepted Free Masons and went home in their Leather Aprons and Gloves. (Veekly journal or British Gazetteer, March z8, 1724.) The names of these five initiates, two of whom were afterwards Grand Wardens, are shown in the earliest list of members furnished by the Lodge at the Horn‑in conformity with the order of Grand Lodge, February 19, 1724. From this we learn that in 1724 the Duke of Richmond was the Master; George Payne, the Deputy Master; with Alexander Hardine and Alexander Choke (Senior Grand Warden, 17z6; Deputy Grand Master, 1727), Wardens. Among the private members were Desaguliers and Anderson, neither of whom in the years 17z4‑z5 held office in the Lodge. Unfortunately, the page allotted to Original No. 4‑‑or No. 3 as it became from 1729‑in the Grand Lodge Register for 1730, is a blank ; and, after that year, there is no list to consult for nearly half a century, when we again meet with one in the official records, where the names of the then members are headed by that of Thomas Dunckerley, " a member from 1768." Alexander Hardine was Master in I7z5, the office becoming vacant by the Duke 54 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o of Richmond's election as Grand Master. There is little doubt, however‑to use the quaint language of " Old Regulation XVII "‑by virtue of which the Duke was debarred from continuing in the chair of the Horn Lodge, whilst at the head of the Craft‑that " as soon as he had honourably discharg'd his Grand Office, he returned to that Post or Station in his particular Lodge, from which he was call‑'d to officiate above." At all events he was back there in 17zc9, for, on July i i of that year, the Deputy Grand Master (Blackerly) informed Grand Lodge, by desire of the Duke of Richmond, Master of the Horn Lodge, as an excuse for the members not having brought charity, like those of the other Lodges, that they " were, for the most part, persons of Quality and Members of Parliament," therefore out of town at that season of the year. The Duke was very attentive to his duties in the Lodge. He was in the chair at the initiation of the Earl of Sunderland, on January 2, 1730, on which occasion there were present the Grand Master, Lord Kingston, the Grand Master elect, the Duke of Norfolk, together with the Duke of Montagu, Lords Dalkeith, Delvin, Inchiquin and other persons of distinction. (IYreeo journal or British Gazetteer, January 3, I73o.) Later in the same year he presided over another important meeting, when many foreign noblemen, also William Cowper (Deputy Grand Master, 1726), were admitted members. He was supported by the Grand Master (Duke oú Norfolk) ; the Deputy (Blackerly) ; Lord Mordaunt ; and the Marquesses of Beaumont and Du Quesne. (Rawlinson MSS, fol. 29, Bodleian.) The Duke of Richmond resigned the Mastership in April 173 8 and Nathaniel Blackerly was unanimously chosen to fill his place. (London Daily Post, April z z, 173 8.) Original No. 4 was given the third place in the Engraved List for 1729 and, in 1740, became No. 2‑which number it retained till the Union.
On April 3, 1747, it was erased from the list, for non‑attendance at the Quarterly Communications, but was restored to its place September 4, 1751. According to the official records Bro. Lediard informed the Brethren that the Right Worshipful Bror. Payne, L.G.M., and several other members of the Lodge lately held at the Horn, Palace Yard, Westminster, had been very successful in their endeavours to serve the said ' Lodge and that they were ready to pay z guineas to the use of the Grand Charity; and, therefore, moved that out of respect to Bro. Payne and the several other L.G.M. [Late Grand Masters] who were members thereof, the Said Lodge might be restored and have its former rank and Place in the List of Lodges‑which was ordered accordingly.
Earl Ferrers was Master of the Horn Lodge when elected Grand Master in 1762.
On February 16, 1766, at an Occasional Lodge, held at the Horn Tavern, the Grand Master, Lord Blayney, presiding, H.R.H., William Henry, Duke of Gloucester, " was made an Entered Apprentice, passed a Fellow Craft and raised to the degree of a Master Mason." (Grand Lodge Minutes.) F. II‑I 3 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 55 This Prince and his two brothers, the Dukes of York and Cumberland, eventually became members of the New Lodge at the Horn, No. 313, the name of which, out of compliment to them, was changed to that of the Royal Lodge. At the period, however, of the Duke of Gloucester's admission into the Society (1766), there were two Lodges meeting at the Horn Tavern: the Old Lodge, the subject of the present sketch and the New Lodge, No. 313, constituted April 4, 1764. The Duke was initiated in neither, but in an Occasional Lodge, at which, for all we know to the contrary, members of both may have been present. But, at whatever date the decadence of the Old Horn Lodge may be said to have first set in, whether directly after the formation of a new Lodge at the same tavern, or later, it reached its culminating point about the time when the Duke of Cumberland, following the example of his two brothers, became an honorary member of No. 313. This occurred March 4, 1767 and, on April i of the same year, the Dukes of Gloucester and Cumberland attended a meeting of the junior Lodge, when the latter was installed its W.M., an office he also held in later years.
The Engraved List for 1767 shows the Old Horn Lodge to have removed from the tavern of that name, to the Fleece, Tothill Street, Westminster. Thence, in 1772, it migrated to the King's Arms, also in Westminster and, on January 1o, 1774, " finding themselves in a declining state, the members agreed to incorporate with a new and flourishing Lodge, entitled the Somerset House Lodge, which immediately assumed their rank." (Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, P. 255.) SO far Preston, in the editions of his famous Illustrations, published after the schism was healed, of which the privileges of the Lodge of Antiquity had been the origin. But in those published whilst the schism lasted (1779‑89), he tells us, that " the members of this Lodge tacitly agreed to a renunciation of their rights as one of the four original Lodges, by openly avowing a declaration of their Master in Grand Lodge. They put themselves entirely under the authority of Grand Lodge ; claimed no distinct privilege, by virtue oú an Immemorial Constitution, but precedency of rank, considered themselves subject to every law or regulation oú the Grand Lodge, over whom they could admit of no control and to whose determination they and every Lodge were bound to submit." The value, indeed, of this evidence is much impaired by the necessity of reconciling with it the remarks of the same writer after 1790, when he speaks of the two old Lodges then extant, acting by immemorial constitution. (Illustrations of Masonry, 1792 and subsequent editions.) But the status of the junior of these Lodges stood in no need of restoration at the hands of Preston, or of any other person or body. In all the official lists, published after its amalgamation with a Lodge lower down on the roll, from 1775 to the present year, the words " Time Immemorial " in lieu of a date are placed opposite its printed title. Not is there any entry in the Minutes of Grand Lodge, which will bear out the assertion that at the fusion of the two Lodges there was any sacrifice of independence on the part of the senior. The junior of the parties to this alliance‑in 1774, the Somerset House Lodge, No. 2ig‑was originally con‑ 56 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o stituted May zz, 1762, is described in the Engraved List for 1763 as " On Board H.M. Ship the Prince, at Plymouth " ; in 1764‑66 as " On Board H.M. Ship the Guadaloupe ; and, in 1767‑73, as " the Sommerset House Lodge (No. z 19 on the numeration of 1770‑80) at ye King's Arms, New Bond Street." Thomas Dunckerley, a natural son of George II, was initiated into Masonry, January io, 1754, whilst in the naval service, in which he attained the rank of gunner ; and his duties afloat seem to have come to an end at about the same date on which the old Sea Lodge in the Prince and, lastly, in the Guadaloupe, was removed to London and christened the Somerset House, most probably by way of compliment to Dunckerley himself, being the name of the place of residence where quarters were first of all assigned to him on his coming to the Metropolis. In 1767 the king ordered him a pension of Cioo a year, which was afterwards increased to c8oo, with a suite of apartments in Hampton Court Palace.
The official records merely inform us that Dunckerley was a member of the Somerset House Lodge after the fusion, that he had been a member of one or both of them from 1768, beyond which year the Grand Lodge Register does not extend, except longo intervallo, viz. at the returns for 1730, a gap already noticed, which it is as impossible to bridge over from one end as the other.
After Dunckerley we meet with the names of Lord Gormanstone, Sir Joseph Bankes, Viscount Hampden, Rowland Berkeley, James Heseltine and Rowland Holt, later still of Admiral Sir Peter Parker, Deputy Grand Master. In 1828 the Lodge again resorted to amalgamation and absorbed the Royal Inverness Lodge, No. 648. The latter was virtually a military Lodge, having been formed by the officers of the Royal North British Volunteer Corps, of which the Duke of Sussex (Earl of Inverness) was the commander. Among the members of the Royal Inverness Lodge were Sir Augustus D'Este, son of the Duke of Sussex; Lord William Pitt Lennox ; Charles Matthews the elder, comedian; Laurence Thompson, painter, the noted Preceptor: and in the Grand Lodge Register, under the date of May 5, 18z5, is the following entry,‑" Charles James Matthews, Architect, Ivy Cottage, aged z4." The Old Lodge at the Horn, dropped from the second to the fourth place on the roll at the Union ; and, in 1828, assumed the title of the Royal Somerset House and Inverness Lodge, by which it is still described. A History of this Lodge, compiled by the Rev. Dr. A. W. Oxford, Past Grand Chaplain, was published in 1928.
Of the three Grand Officers, whose names have alone come down to us in connexion with the great event of 1717, there is very little said in the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge, over whose deliberations it was their lot to preside for the first year of its existence. Captain Elliot drops completely out of sight; Jacob Lamball almost so, though he reappears on the scene in 1735, on March 31 of which year he sat as Grand Warden, in the place of Sir Edward Mansell ; not having been present, so far as can be determined from the official records, at any earlier period over which they extend (i.e. between June 24, 1723 and March 31, 1735). He THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 57 subsequently attended very frequently and, in the absence of a Grand Warden, usually filled the vacant chair. Anderson includes his name among those of the " few Brethren " by whom he was " kindly encouraged " whilst the Constitutions of 1738 were in the press ; and if, as there seems ground for believing, the Doctor was not himself present at the Grand Election of 1717, it is probable that he derived his account of it from the Brother who was chosen Grand Senior Warden on that occasion. Lamball, it is sad to relate, in his latter years fell into decay and poverty and, at a Quarterly Communication, held April 8, 1756, was a petitioner for relief, when the sum of ten guineas was voted to him from the Fund of Charity, " with liberty to apply again." Even of Sayer himself there occurs only a passing mention, but from which we are justified in inferring that his influence and authority in the councils of the Craft did not long survive his term of office as Grand Master. It is probable that poverty and misfortune so weighed him down as to forbid his associating on equal terms with the only two commoners‑Payne and Desaguliers who, besides himself, had filled the Masonic throne; but there is also evidence to show that he did not scruple to infringe the laws and regulation, which it became him, perhaps more than any other man, to set the fashion of diligently obeying. He was one of the Grand Wardens under Desaguliers in 1719 and a Warden of his private Lodge, Original No. 3, in January 1723, but held no office in the latter at the close of the same year or in 1725, though he continued a member until 1730, possibly later ; but, from the last‑named date until some way into the second half of the eighteenth century, there is unfortunately no register of the members of Lodges. After 1730 Sayer virtually disappears from the scene. In that year we first meet with his name, as having walked last in a procession‑arranged in order of juniority ‑‑of past Grand Masters, at the installation of the Duke of Norfolk. He next appears as a petitioner for relief, finally in the character of an offender against the laws of the Society. With regard to his pecuniary circumstances, the Minutes of Grand Lodge show that he was a petitioner‑presumably for charity‑on November 21, 1724 ; but whether he was then relieved or not from the General Fund, the records do not disclose. A second application was attended with the following result April 21, 1730.‑Then the Petition of Brother Anthony Sayer, formerly Grand Master, was read, setting forth his misfortune and great poverty and praying Relief. The Grand Lodge took the same into their consideration and it was pro posed that he should have úZo out of the money received on acct of the general charity ; others proposed ú1o and others C15.
The Question being put, it was agreed that he should have ú15, on acct of his having been Grand Master.
He appears to have received a further sum of two guineas from the same source on April 17, 1741, after which date no allusion in the records, or elsewhere, to the first Grand Master of Masons is found.
George Payne is generally described as a " learned antiquarian," though 58 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o possibly on no other foundation of authority than the paragraph into which Dr. Anderson has compressed the leading events of his Grand Mastership. It may be that the archaeological tastes of a namesake who died in 1739 (Scots Magazine, vol. i, 1739, p. 423 ; George Payne, of Northumberland, F.R.S. ; Member of the Royal Academy at Berlin, of the Noble Institute of Bologna, etc.) have been ascribed to him ; but however this may be, his name is not to be found among those of the fellows or members of the Society of Antiquaries, an association established, or, to speak more correctly, revived, at about the same date as the Grand Lodge of England. Unfortunately there is very little to be gleaned concerning Payne's private life. His will is dated December 8, 175 5, was proved March 9, 1757, by his wife, the sole executrix, the testator having died on January 23 in the same year. He is described as of the parish of St. Margaret, Westminster and appears to have been a man of good worldly substance. Among the various bequests are legacies of Czoo each to his nieces, Frances, Countess of Northampton; and Catherine, Lady Francis Seymour. Payne died at his house in New Palace Yard, Westminster, being at the time Secretary to the Tax Office. (Gentleman's Magazine, vol. xxvii, 1757, p. 93.) How long he had resided there it is now impossible to say ; but it is curious, to say the least, that when we first hear of the Lodge to which both Payne and Desaguliers belonged, it met at Channel Row, where the latter lived; also that it was afterwards removed to New Palace Yard, where the former died.
Payne, probably, was the earlier member of the two and the date of his joining the Lodge may be set down at some period after St. John the Baptist's Day, 1717 and before the corresponding festival of 1718. He was greatly respected both by the Brethren of the Old Lodge at the Horn and the Craft at large. The esteem in which he was held by the latter, stood the former in good stead in 1751, when, at his intercession, the Lodge in question, which had been erased from the list in 1747, was restored to its former rank and place.
During his second term of office as Grand Master, Payne compiled the General Regulations, which were afterwards finally arranged and published by Dr. Anderson in 17z3. He continued an active member of Grand Lodge until 1754 on April 27 of which year he was appointed a member of the committee to revise the Constitutions (afterwards brought out by Entick in 1756). According to the Minutes of Grand Lodge, he was present there for the last time in the following November.
John Theophilus Desaguliers, the son of a French Protestant clergyman, born at Rochelle, March 12, 1683, was brought to England by his father when about two years of age, owing to the persecution which was engendered by the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. He was educated at Christ Church College, Oxford, where he took the degree of B.A. and entered into deacon's orders in 171o. The same year he succeeded Dr. Keill as lecturer on Experimental Philosophy at Hart Hall. In 17I z he married Joanna, daughter of William Pudsey and proceeded to the degree of M.A. The following year he removed to the metropolis and settled in Channel THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 59 Row, Westminster, where he continued his lectures. On July z9, 1714, he was elected F.R.S., but was excused from paying the subscription, on account of the number of experiments which he showed at the meetings. Subsequently he was elected to the office of curator and communicated a vast number of curious and valuable papers between the years 1714 and 1743, which are printed in the Transactions. He also published several works of his own, particularly his large Course of Experimental Philosophy, being the substance of his public lectures and abounding with descriptions of the most useful machines and philosophical instruments. He acted as curator to within a year of his decease and appears to have received no fixed salary, being remunerated according to the number of experiments and communications which he made to the Society, sometimes receiving a donation of 'Cio, and occasionally ú30, ú40, or C50. (See Dudley Wright's England's Masonic Pioneers.) His lectures were delivered before George I at Hampton Court in 1717, also before George II and other members of the Royal Family, at a later period.
There is some confusion with regard to the church preferment which fell in the doctor's way. According to Lysons, he was appointed by the Duke of Chandos to the benefice of Whitchurch‑otherwise termed Stanmore Parva‑in 1714 (The Environs of London, 18oo‑11, vol. iii, p. 674), but Nichols says he was presented by the same patron, in the same year, to the living of Edgeware. (Literary Anecdotes, vol. vi, p. 81.) It is not easy to reconcile the discrepancy and the description of a Lodgewarranted April 25, 1722‑in the Engraved Lists for 1723, 1725, and 1729 viz. The Duke of Chandos's Arms, at Edgeworth, tends to increase rather than diminish the difficulty of the task.
In 1718 he accumulated the degrees of Bachelor and Doctor of Laws and, about the same period, was presented‑through the influence of the Earl of Sunderlandto a small living in Norfolk, the revenue of which, however, only amounted to ,C70 per annum. This benefice he afterwards exchanged for a crown living in Essex, to which he was nominated by George II. He was likewise appointed chaplain to Frederick, Prince of Wales, an office which he had already held in the household of the Duke of Chandos and was destined to fill still later (1738) in Bowles (now the i Zth) Regiment of Dragoons.
When Channel Row, where he had lived for some years, was taken down to make way for the new bridge at Westminster, Dr. Desaguliers removed to lodgings over the Great Piazza in Covent Garden, where he carried on his lectures till his death, which took place on February 29, 1744. He was buried March 6 in the Chapel Royal of the Savoy. In personal attractions the doctor was singularly deficient, being short and thick‑set, his figure ill‑shaped, his features irregular and extremely near‑sighted. In the early part of his life he lived very abstemiously, but, in his later years, was censured for an indulgence in eating to excess, both in the quantity and quality of his diet. The following anecdote is recorded of his respect for the clerical character.
6o THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o Being invited to an illustrious company, one of whom, an officer, addicted to swearing in his discourse, at the period of every oath asked Dr. Desaguliers' pardon ; the doctor bore this levity for some time with great patience, but at length silenced the swearer with the following rebuke : " Sir, you have taken some pains to render me ridiculous, if possible, by your pointed apologies ; now, sir, I am to tell you, that if God Almighty does not hear you, I assure you I will never tell Him." (Literary Anecdotes, loc. cit.) He left three sons‑Alexander, the eldest, who was bred to the Church and had a living in Norfolk, where he died in 1751 ; John Theophilus, to whom the doctor bequeathed all that he died possessed of ; and Thomas, also named in the testator's will as " being sufficiently provided for "‑for a time equerry to George III‑who attained the rank of Lieutenant‑General and died March 1, 178o, aged seventy‑seven.
Lieutenant‑General Desaguliers served in the Royal Artillery‑in which regiment his memory was long fondly cherished as that of one of its brightest ornaments‑for a period of fifty‑seven years, during which he was employed on many active and arduous services, including the battle of Fontenoy and the sieges of Louisbourg and Belleisle. The last named is the only one of Desaguliers' sons known to have been a Freemason. He was probably a member of the Lodge at the Horn and, as we learn from the Constitutions of 1738, was‑like Jacob Lamball ‑among the " few Brethren " by whom the author of that work " was kindly encouraged while the Book was in the Press." In the pamphlet mentioned, Dr. Desaguliers is mentioned as being (in 1718) specially learned in natural philosophy, mathematics, geometry and optics, but the bent of his genius must subsequently have been applied to the science of gunnery, for, in the same work which is so eulogistic of the son, we find the father thus referred to, in connexion with a visit paid to Woolwich by George III and his consort during the peace of 1763‑71 It was on this occasion that their Majesties saw many curious firings ; among the rest a large iron cannon, fired by a lock like a common gun ; a heavy i z‑pounder fired twenty‑three times a minute and spunged every time by a new and wonderful contrivance, said to be the invention of Dr. Desaguliers, with other astonishing improvements of the like kind. (Duncan's History of the Koyal Regiment of Artillery, vol. i, 1872, p. zz8.) It is possible that the extraordinary prevalence of Masonic Lodges in the Royal Artillery, during the last half of the eighteenth century, may have been due, in some degree, to the influence and example of the younger Desaguliers.
The latter days of Dr. Desaguliers are said to have been clouded with sorrow and poverty. De Feller, in the Biographie Universelle, says that he attired himself sometimes as a harlequin, sometimes as a clown, that in one of these fits of insanity THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 17z3‑6o 61 he died‑whilst Cawthorne, in a poem entitled The Vanity of Human Enjoyments, laments his fate in these lines permit the weeping muse to tell How poor neglected DESAGULIERS fell 1 How he who taught two gracious kings to view All Boyle ennobled and all Bacon knew, Died in a cell, without a friend to save, Without a guinea and without a grave.
But, as Mackey justly observes (Eneyelop&dia of Freemasonry, p. z16), the accounts of the French biographer and the English poet are most probably both apocryphal, or, at least, much exaggerated. Desaguliers was present in Grand Lodge on February 8, 174z ; his will‑apparently dictated by himself‑is dated November 2.9, 1743. He certainly did not die " in a cell," but in the Bedford Coffee House. His interment in the Savoy also negatives the supposition that he was " without a grave," whilst the terms of his will, which express a desire to " settle what it has pleased God to bless him with, before he departs," are altogether inconsistent with the idea of his having been reduced to such a state of abject penury, as Cawthorne's poem would lead us to believe. Moreover, passing over John Theophilus, of whose circumstances we know nothing, is it conceivable that either Alexander, the eldest son, then a beneficed clergyman; or Thomas, then a captain in the artillery, would have left their father to starve in his lodgings, or even have grudged the expense of laying him in the grave ? These inaccuracies, however, are of slight consequence, as compared with those in which the historians of the Craft have freely indulged. Mackey styles Desaguliers " the Father of Modern Speculative Masonry " and expresses a belief " that to him, perhaps, more than to any other man, are we indebted for the present existence of Freemasonry as a living institution." It was Desaguliers, he considers, " who, by his energy and enthusiasm, infused a spirit of zeal into his contemporaries, which culminated in the Revival of the year 1717." Findel and others express themselves in very similar terms and to the origin of this hallucination of our literati, it will be unnecessary to do more than refer.
The more the testimonies are multiplied, the stronger is always the conviction, though it frequently happens that the original evidence is of a very slender character and that writers have only copied one from another, or, what is worse, have added to the original without any new authority. Thus, Dr. Oliver, in his Revelations of a Square, which in one part of his Eneyelopadia Mackey describes as " a sort of Masonic romance, detailing in a fictitious form many of the usages of the last centuries, with anecdotes of the principal Masons of that period "‑while in another, he diligently transcribes from it, as affording a description of Desaguliers' Masonic and personal character, derived from " tradition." There is no evidence to justify a belief that Desaguliers took any active part in, or was even initiated into Freemasonry, prior to the year 1719, when, as the narrative 62 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o of Dr. Anderson states, he was elected Grand Master, with Anthony Sayer as his Senior Grand Warden.
In 1713, possibly 1722‑for the events which occurred about this period are very unsatisfactorily attested‑he was appointed Deputy Grand Master by the Duke of Wharton and reappointed to the same office six months later by the Earl of Dalkeith ; again by Lord Paisley in 1725.
According to the Register of Grand Lodge, Desaguliers was a member of the Lodge at the Horn, Westminster (Original No. 4), in 1725 ; but his name is not shown as a member of any Lodge in 1723. Still, there can hardly be a doubt that he hailed from the Lodge in question in both of these years. The earliest Minute Book of the Grand Lodge of England commences This Manuscript was begun the 25th November 1723. The R` Hon le Francis, Earl of Dalkeith, Grand Mar; Br John Theophilus Desaguliers, Deputy Grand Mr.
Francis Sorell, Esgr.,lGrand Wardens. Mr John Senexf, Next follows " A List of the Regular Constituted Lodges, together with the names of the Masters, Wardens, and Members of each Lodge." Now, in January 1723, the New Constitutions were ratified by the Masters and Wardens of twenty Lodges. Among the subscribers were the Earl of Dalkeith, Master, No. XI; Francis Sorell, Warden, No. IV; and John Senex, Warden, No. XV. In the list of Lodges given in the Minute Book of Grand Lodge, these numbers, XI, IV, and XV, are represented by the Lodges meeting at the Rummer, Charing Cross ; the Horn, Westminster; and the Greyhound, Fleet Street, respectively. But, though the names of the members appear in all three cases, Lord Dalkeith no longer appears on the roll of No. XI (Rummer) ; and the same remark holds good with regard to the connexion between Sorell and Senex with Nos. IV (Horn) and XV (Greyhound) respectively. Sorell's name, it may be added, as well as that of Desaguliers, appears in the Grand Lodge Register, under the year 1725, as a member of the Horn.
It would seem, therefore, that, in 1723, the names of the four Grand Officers were entered in a separate list of their own, at the head of the roll. Past rank, or membership of and precedence in Grand Lodge, by virtue of having held office therein, it must be recollected, was yet unknown, which will account for the names of Payne and Sayer former Grand Masters‑appearing in the ordinary lists.
Desaguliers, it is certain, must have belonged to some Lodge or other in 1723 ; and there seems no room for doubt that the entry of 1725, which shows him to have then been a member of Original No. 4, merely replaced his name on the roll, from which it was temporarily omitted during his tenure of office as Deputy. Happily the lists of 1725 were enrolled in the Register of Grand Lodge, from returns furnished at a Quarterly Communication, held November 27, 1725 ; otherwise the omission THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 63 might have been repeated,‑as Desaguliers, who vacated the Deputy's chair on St. John's Day (in harvest) 1724, resumed it by appointment of Lord Paisley on St. John's Day (in Christmas) 1725. Subsequently he became a member of other Lodges, whose places of meeting were at Solomon's Temple, Hemming's Row (1725‑3o),‑James Anderson being also a member; The Bear and Harrow, in the Butcher's Row (No. 63, 1732),‑the Earl of Strathmore being the Master, whilst the Grand Master (Lord Montacute), the Deputy; as well as the Grand Wardens of the year, were among the members ; and of the University Lodge, No. 74 (173032). (Grand Lodge Minutes.) The following summary completes the Masonic record of the learned natural philosopher.
In 1719, whilst Grand Master, he " reviv'd the old regular and peculiar Toasts or Healths of the Free Masons." In 1721, at the annual feast, he " made an eloquent Oration about Masons and Masonry " ; and in the same year visited the Lodge of Edinburgh. The preface to the Constitutions of 1723 was from his pen. On November z6,1728, he " proposed that, in order to have the [Great Feast] conducted in the best manner a certain number of Stewards should be chosen, who should have the intire care and direction of the said ffeast, together with the Grand Wardens," which was agreed to. Twelve Brethren at once signed their names as consenting to act as Stewards in the following December; and the same number, with occasional intermissions, were nominated on later occasions until the Union, when it was increased to eighteen. On the same evening, the twelve " propos'd Dr. Desaguliers' Health for reviving the office of Stewards (which appeared to be agreeable to the Lodge in general) ; and the same was drank accordingly." In 1731, at the Hague, he acted as Master of the Lodge in which Francis, Duke of Lorraine‑afterwards Grand Duke of Tuscany‑was " made an Enter'd Prentice and Fellow Craft." (Constitutions, 1738, p. 129.) In 1735 he was present with the Duke of Richmond; the Earl of Waldegrave (British Ambassador) ; President Montesquieu ; Lord Dursley ; and a numerous company, at the opening of a Lodge in the Hotel Bussy, Rue de Bussy, Paris, where the Duke of Kingston; Lord Chewton ; the Count de St. Florentin (Secretary of State) ; and others, were admitted into the Society. (St. James's Evening Post, September 20, 1735.) Two years later‑namely, on November 5, 1737‑he again sat as Master at the initiation of a royal personage; on which occasion, Frederick, Prince of Wales, received the first two Degrees, which, however, were shortly afterwards followed by that of Master Mason, conferred at another Occasional Lodge, composed of the same members as the previous one. (Constitutions, 1738, p. 37.) In the same year‑also in 1738 and later‑he was a frequent visitor at the Lodge then held at the Bear Inn, Bath‑now the Royal Cumberland Lodge, No. 41 ‑‑from the Minutes of which we learn that he frequently sat as Master and dis charged the ceremonial duties incidental to that office. (T. P. Ashley, History of the Koyal Cumberland Lodge, No. 41, 1873, p. 26.) The Constitutions of 1738 were submitted in manuscript to the perusal of Desaguliers and Payne ; and the last 64 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o entry with regard to his active participation in the duties of Masonry records his farewell visit to the Grand Lodge, which took place on February 8, 1742.
It is highly probable that Desaguliers became a member of the Lodge at the Rummer and Grapes in Channel Row, Westminster, because its meetings were held in the vicinity of his dwelling. We first meet with his name in the records of Masonry in 1719 and there is nothing which should lead us to infer that he had then been for any long period a member of the Society. On the contrary, the evidence points in quite the opposite direction. Two meetings only of the Grand Lodge (after its pro tempore constitution in 1716) appear to have been held before the Assembly, on St. John the Baptist's Day, 1719, at which Desaguliers was elected Grand Master, viz. : those in 1717 and 1718, whereat Anthony Sayer and George Payne were severally chosen to fill the same high office. It seems very unlikely that either Payne or Desaguliers was present at the Assembly of 1717. Had such been the case, Anderson would hardly have failed to record the circumstance ; nor does it seem feasible that, if the name of one or the other had been included in the " List of proper Candidates " for the Masonic throne, proposed by the " oldest Master Mason " on the occasion in question‑as must have happened, had either of them been present‑the choice of the Lodges and Brethren would have fallen on Sayer.
It is certain that upon Anderson, rather than either Payne or Desaguliers, devolved the leading role in the consolidation of the Grand Lodge of England. His Boob, of Constitutions has been often referred to, but the General Regulations of 1723 were only designed " for the use of Lodges in and about London and Westminster." The Grand Lodge, however, both in authority and reputation, soon outgrew the modest expectations of its Founders.
It becomes essential to ascertain, as nearly as possible, the character of the Freemasonry existing in England at the date of publication of the first Book of Constitutions. In the same year there appeared the earliest copy, now extant, of the Mason's Examination or Catechism. The Constitutions of 1723, the Catechisms last referred to, the Briscoe MS. and Additional MS. 23,2oz, constitute the stock of evidence, upon which alone conclusions can be formulated.
The intrant, at his admission, became an Apprentice and Brother, then a Fellow Craft in due time and, if properly qualified, might " arrive to the honour of being the Warden, then the Master of the Lodge." " The third Degree," says Lyon, " could hardly have been present to the mind of Dr. Anderson, when, in 1723, he superintended the printing of his Book, of Constitutions, for it is therein stated that the ` Key of a Fellow Craft' is that by which the secrets communicated in the Ancient Lodges could be unravelled." (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 211.) We are also told that " the most expert of the Fellow Craftsmen shall be chosen or appointed the Master, or Overseer of the Lord's Work, who is to be called Master by those that work under him." The references to the status of a Fellow Craft are equally unambiguous in the General Regulations, one of which directs that when private Wardens‑i.e. Wardens of private Lodges‑are required to act as the Grand Wardens, their places " are to THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 65 [not may] be supply'd by two Fellow‑Craft of the same Lodge " (XV). Another (XXXVII), that " the Grand Master shall allow any Brother, Fellow Craft, or Apprentice, to Speak." Also, in " the Manner of Constituting a New Lodge," the expression occurs" The Candidates, or the new Master and Wardens, being yet among the Fellow Craft"; and, a little lower down, we read, " the Candidate," having signified his submission to the charges of a Master, " the Grand Master shall, by certain significant Ceremonies and ancient Usages, install him." It is in the highest degree improbable ‑not to say impossible‑that any secrets were communicated on such an occasion.
Throughout the first half of the eighteenth century, indeed considerably later, it was a common practice in Lodges to elect their officers quarterly ; and, apart from the fact that the Minutes of such Lodges are silent on this point, it is hardly con ceivable that a three months' tenure of office was preceded by a secret reception. But there is stronger evidence still to negative any such conclusion, for it was not until 1811 (Minutes, Lodge of Promulgation, February 4, 1811) that the Masters, even of London Lodges‑under the Grand Lodge, whose procedure we are considering ‑were installed as " Rulers of the Craft " in the manner with which many readers will be familiar.
We find, therefore, that the Freemasons of England, at the period under examination, were classified by the Constitutions of the Society under three titles, though apparently not more than two Degrees were then recognized by the governing body. On this point, however, the language of the General Regulations, in one place (Regulation XIII, is not free from obscurity. Apprentices were only to be made Masters and Fellow Craft in Grand Lodge, which expression has usually been held to point to what is now the third Degree in Masonry, but this interpretation is wholly at variance with the context of the remainder.
How can we reconcile Dr. Anderson's allusion to " the key of a Fellow Craft " with the possibility of there then being a higher or superior Degree ? The " Masters " mentioned in Clause XIII may have been Masters of Lodges, or the term may have crept in through the carelessness of Dr. Anderson. It must be recollected that the General Regulations are of very uncertain date. The proviso in question may have appeared in the code originally drawn up by George Payne in 1720, or it may have formed one of the additions made by Anderson between September 29, 1721 and March zs, 1722. If the earlier date be accepted, by " Masters " we may‑with less improbability‑understand " Masters of Lodges " and the clause or article (XIII) would then be in agreement with its fellows.
" Apprentices," says the Regulation, " must be admitted Masters and Fellow Craft "‑not Fellow Craft and Masters‑" only here." Apprentices, however, were not eligible for the chair; and in every other instance where their preferment is mentioned, they are taken from step to step by regular gradations. But if we get over this objection, another presents itself. Neither an Apprentice nor a Fellow Craft would be admitted, but would be installed, a Master of a Lodge. Next, let us scan the wording of the resolution which repealed the Regulation in question. The officers 66 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o of Lodges are empowered to " make Masters at their discretion." That this licence enabled them to confer the rank of Master of a Lodge ad libitum is an impossibility. Whatever the period may have been when Anderson joined the English Craft, his opportunities of grafting the nomenclature of one Masonic system upon that of another only commenced in the latter part of 1721 and lasted for barely six months, as his manuscript Constitutions were ordered to be printed March 25, 1722. He was, therefore, debarred from borrowing as largely as he must have wished‑judging from his fuller work of 173 8‑from the Operative phraseology of the Northern Kingdom; and it is quite possible that, subject to some trifling alterations, the first edition of the Constitutions was compiled between September 29 and December 27, 1721, as his " manuscript " was ready for examination on the latter of these dates. If, then, any further explanation is sought of the two titles which appear, so to speak, in juxtaposition in Regulation XIII, it would seem most reasonable to look for it in the Masonic records of that country, to which‑so placed‑they were indigenous. At Aberdeen, in 1670, Fellow Craft and Master Mason were used as convertible terms and the same may be said of other Scottish towns in which there were " Mason Lodges." Anderson was certainly a Scotsman and the inference is irresistible that to him was due the introduction of so many Scottish words into the Masonic vocabulary of the south.
It may be taken that a third Degree was not recognized as a part of the Masonic system up to the date of publication of the Boob, of Constitutions in January 1723. l\1ackey says : " The division of the Masonic system into three Degrees must have grown up between 1717 and 173o, but in so gradual and imperceptible a manner, that we are unable to fix the precise date of the introduction of each Degree." (Encyclop&dia, s.v. Degrees.) There is no evidence from which one can arrive at any certainty with regard to the exact dates, either of the commencement or the close of the epoch of transition. It seems certain that the second and third Degrees were not perfected for many years. As a matter of fact, we are only made acquainted with the circumstance that there were Degrees in Masonry, by the 1723 Book of Constitutions, from which, together with the scanty evidence yet brought to light of slightly later date, it can alone be determined with precision that a system of two Degrees was well established in 1723 and that a third ceremony, which eventually developed into a Degree, had come into use in 1724. Modifications continued to be made, however, for some time, while there is no absolute proof that these evolutionary changes were not in operation until about 1728‑29.
That a third, or additional, ceremony was worked in 1724, there is evidence to show, for three persons were " Regularly pass'd Masters " in a London Lodge, before February 18, 1725 (Additional MSS., z3, 2o2) and it is unreasonable to suppose that this was the first example of the kind. Here we meet with the word " pass " and it is curious to learn from the same source of authority that, before the Society was founded (February 18, 1725), the Minutes of which it records " a Lodge was held, consisting of Masters sufficient for that purpose. In order to pass Charles Cotton, Esq., Papitton Ball and Thomas Marshall, Fellow Crafts." (Ibid.) It THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 67 might be argued from these expressions, that Master, even then, was merely another name for Fellow Craft, or why should a Lodge be formed, consisting of Brethren of the higher title, to pass a candidate for the lower ? But some entries in the same records of a few months' later date draw a clearer distinction between the two Degrees. These, indeed, are not quite free from ambiguity, if taken alone, but all doubt as to their meaning is dispelled by collating them with an earlier portion of the same manuscript.
The Minutes of May iz, 1725, inform us, that two persons were " regularly passed Masters,"‑one " passed Fellow Craft and Master " and another " passed Fellow Craft " only. Happily the names are given and, as Charles Cotton and Papitton Ball were the two who were " passed Masters," it is evident that, in the " Master's Part," something further must have been communicated to them than had been already imparted. It is doubtful if the " Part " in question had at that time assumed the form and dimensions of a Degree. In all probability this happened later and, indeed, the way may only have been paved for it at the close of the same year, by the removal of the restriction, which, as 'we have seen, did not altogether prevent private Lodges from infringing upon what ought at least to have been considered the especial province of the Grand Lodge.
It is barely possible that the " Master's Part " was incorporated with those of the Apprentice and Fellow Craft and became, in the parlance of Grand Lodge, a Degree on November 27, 1725. By anew Regulation of that date‑which is given in full under its proper year‑the members of private Lodges were empowered to " make Masters at discretion." This, Dr. Anderson expands into " Masters and Fellows," the terms being apparently regarded by him as possessing the same meaning. But there is too much ambiguity in the order of Grand Lodge, to warrant founding any definite conclusion upon it. The Constitutions of 1738 help very little.
In general terms, it may be said that Master Mason is for the most part substituted for " Fellow Craft " in the second edition of the Constitutions. There is, however, one notable exception. In " The Manner of Constituting a Lodge," as printed in 1738, the " New Master and Wardens " are taken, as before, from the Fellow Crafts, but the Master, " in chusing his Wardens," was to call " forth two Fellow Crafts ('Master Masons).." With this should be contrasted an explanation by Anderson in the body of his work, that the old term " Master Mason " represented in 1738 the Master of a Lodge. (Constitutions, p. 1ocg.) It is probable that Regulation XIII, of the code of 1723, was a survival or an imitation of the old Operative custom, under which the Apprentice, at a certain period, was declared free of the Craft and " admitted or accepted into the fellowship," at a general meeting.
On taking up his freedom, the English Apprentice became a " Fellow " and master in his trade. This usage must have prevailed from very ancient times. Gibbon observes : " The use of academical degrees, as old as the thirteenth century, is visibly borrowed from the mechanic corporations ; in which an apprentice, after 68 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o serving his time, obtains a testimonial of his skill and a licence to practise his trade and mystery." (Miscellaneous Works, edited by Lord Sheffield, vol. i, p. 49.) So long as the governing body refrained from warranting Lodges in the country, there could have been no particular hardship in requiring newly made Brethren to be passed or admitted Fellows in Grand Lodge. In 1724, however, no fewer than nine provincial Lodges were constituted and it must have become necessary, if for no other reason, to modify in part a series of regulations, drafted, in the first instance, to meet the wants of the Masons of the metropolis.
It is unlikely that the number of Fellow Crafts‑as they must be called from 1723‑was very large, that is to say, in November 1725, the date when the law relating to the advancement of Apprentices was repealed. Out of twenty‑seven Lodges in the London district, shown by the Engraved List of 1729 to have been constituted up to the end of 1724, only eleven were in existence in 1723, when the restriction was imposed. Sixteen Lodges, therefore‑doubtless many othersbesides the nine country ones, must have been comparatively unfamiliar with the ceremonial of the second Degree ; and it becomes, indeed, rather a matter of surprise how, in each case, the Master and Wardens could have qualified as Fellow Crafts.
Some confusion must have been engendered at this time by the promiscuous use of the term Master, which was alike employed to describe a Fellow Craft and a Master of a Lodge and gave its name‑Master's Part‑to a ceremony then growing very fashionable. It is probable that about this period the existing Degrees were remodelled and the titles of Fellow Craft and Master disjoined‑the latter becoming the degree of Master Mason, the former virtually denoting a new Degree, though its essentials were merely composed of a severed portion of the ceremonial hitherto observed at the entry of an Apprentice.
These alterations‑if the supposition is correct‑were not effected in a day. Indeed, it is possible that a taste for " meddling with the ritual," having been acquired, lasted longer than has been commonly supposed ; and the " variations made in the established forms," which was one of the articles in the heavy indictment drawn up by the Seceding against the Regular Masons, may have been but a further manifestation of the passion for innovation which was evinced by the Grand Lodge of England during the first decade of its existence.
The Flying Post from April 11 to April 13, 1723 introduces us to a picture of the Freemasonry at that period, which, corroborated from similar sources, as well as by the Book, of Constitutions, amply warrants the belief that at that date and for some time preceding it, Apprentice, Fellow and Master were well‑established titles ‑though whether the two latter were distinct or convertible terms may afford matter for argument‑that there was a Master's Part, also that there were signs, tokens and points of fellowship. The question is, how far can the reading presented by the printed Catechism of 1723 be carried back ? Here the method of textual criticism might yield good results ; but this point, like many others, must be left to the determination of that class of readers fitted by nature and inclination to follow up all such promising lines of inquiry.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 69 It will suffice to assume that the Catechism of 1723 contains a reading which is several years older than the printed copy; or, in other words, that the customs it attests must have reached back to a more remote date. The whole tenor betrays an Operative origin, therefore, if composed or manufactured between 1717 and 1723, its fabricators must not be sought for among the Speculatives of that period; but, on the contrary, it will become essential to believe that this obsolete Catechismincluding the metrical dialogue, which, of itself, is suggestive of antiquity‑was compiled, a few years at most, before its publication in the Flying Post, by one or more Operative Masons ! The circumstances of the case will not admit of such a modern date being assigned to the text of this catechism. Conjointly with the other evidence‑and the undoubted fact of the " examination " in question having been actually printed in 1723 invests Sloane MS. 33z9 with a reflected authority that dissipates many difficulties arising out of the comparative uncertainty of its date‑the extract from the Flying Post settles many important points with regard to which much difference of opinion has hitherto existed. First of all, it lends colour to the statement in the " Praise of Drunkenness," that Masonic Catechisms, available to all readers, had already made their appearance in 1721 or 1722. Next it establishes that there were then two Degrees‑those of Apprentice and Fellow or Master, the latter being only honorary distinctions proper to one and the same Degree. It also suggests that in England, under the purely Operative regime, the Apprentice was not a member of the Lodge and only became so, also a Freemason, on his admission‑after a prescribed period of servitude‑to the degree of Fellow or Master.
It is impossible to define the period of time during which these characteristics of a Masonic system endured. Two obligations, not one only, as in the Sloane MS. and the Old Charges, are plainly to be inferred ; and, as the latter are undoubtedly the most ancient records we possess, to the extent that the Mason's Examination is at variance with these documents, it must be pronounced the evolutionary product of an epoch of transition, beginning at some unknown date and drawing to a close about 1724. Degrees appear to have made their way very slowly into the York Masonic system. Upon the whole, if we pass over the circumstance that there were two forms of reception in vogue about 1723 and, for a period of time before that year, which can only be the subject of conjecture, as there are no solid proofs to rest on, the evidence just passed in review is strikingly in accord with the inferences deducible from Steele's essay in the Tatler, from the wording of Harleian MS. 2054, from Dr. Plot's account of the Society and from the Diary of John Aubrey.
In the first of these references we are told of " Signs and Tokens like Freemasons " ; in the second, of the " Seurall Words & Signes of a Freemason " ; in the third, of " Secret Signes " ; and, in the last, of " Signes and Watch‑words," also that "the manner of Adoption is very formall and with an Oath of Secrecy." There is nothing to induce the supposition that the secrets of Freemasonry, as disclosed to Elias Ashmole in 1646‑in aught but the manner of imparting them 70 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o ‑differed materially, if at all, from those which passed into the guardianship of the Grand Lodge of England in 1717. In all cases, up to about the year 1724 and, possibly later, there was a marked simplicity of ceremonial, as contrasted with the procedure of a subsequent date. Ashmole and Randle Holme, like the Brethren of York, were in all probability " sworn and admitted," whilst the " manner of Adoption "‑to quote the words of John Aubrey‑was doubtless " very formall " in all three cases and quite as elaborate as any ceremony known in Masonry, before the introduction of a third Degree.
There is no proof that more than a single Degree, i.e. a secret form of reception, was known to the Freemasons of the seventeenth century. Ashmole was " made a Freemason," according to his Diary, in 1646 and he speaks of six gentlemen having been " admitted into the Fellowship of Free Masons " in 1682, also of being on that occasion " the Senior Fellow among them," it having been " 3 5 years since he was admitted." Randle Holme's statement is less precise but from the entry, in Harleian MS. 2054, relating to William Wade, it is unlikely that the Chester ceremonial differed from that of Warrington.
It may well have been, however, that the practice in Lodges, consisting exclusively of Operative Masons, was dissimilar, but the solution oú this problem cannot be effected by inference or conjecture. In all probability when the second Degree became the third, the ceremonial was rearranged and the traditionary history enlarged. This view will be borne out by a collation of Dr. Anderson's two editions of the Constitutions. In both, the splendour of the Temple of Solomon is much extolled, but a number of details with regard to the manner of its erection are given in 1738, which are not in the work of 1723. Thus we learn that after " the Cape‑stone was celebrated by the Fraternity .‑. their joy was soon interrupted by the sudden Death of their dear Master, HIRAM ABBIFF, whom they decently interr'd in the Lodge near the Temple, according to antient Usage." (Constitutions, 1738, p. 14‑) As Hiram was certainly alive at the completion of the Temple (z Chron. iv. i i), it has been contended that the above allusion in the Constitutions is not to him, but to Adoniram (or Adoram), a tax receiver under David, Solomon and Rehoboam, who was stoned to death by the people (1 Kings xii: 18). According to J. L. Laurens, the death of Hiram is mentioned in the Talmud (Essais sur la Franche 1Mafonnerie, 2nd edit., 18o6, p. ioz); whilst for an account of the murder of Adoniram, C. C. F. W. von Nettlebladt refers us to what is probably the same source of authority, viz. the Gemara of the Jews, a commentary on the Mischna or Talmud (Geschichte Freimaurerischer Systeme, 1879‑written circa 1826‑p. 746). Both statements can hardly be true.
When the legend of Hiram's death was first incorporated with the older traditions, it is not easy to decide, but it seems to have taken place between 1723 and 1729; 1725 is, perhaps, the most likely year for its introduction to have taken place.
The prominence of Hiram in Masonic traditionary history or legends, in 1723, F. II‑14 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 71 or earlier, is wholly inconsistent with the silence of the Old Charges, the various Catechisms and the first Book of Constitutions, on a point of so much importance. In some of these he is, indeed, mentioned, but always as a subordinate figure, while there is no evidence to justify a belief that the circumstances of his decease, as narrated by Anderson, were in any shape or form a tradition of the Craft, before the year 1723. Had they been, we should not have had occasion to complain that what may be termed the apotheosis of Hiram has not been advanced by a due gradation of preparatory incidents. The legendary characters who live in written and speak through oral traditions are, in a certain sense, companions. We take more kindly to them, if, occasionally looking behind, we are prepared for their approach, or looking onwards espy them on the road before us. As a learned writer has observed, " it is not well for the personages of the historical drama to rise on the stage through the trap‑doors. They should first appear entering in between the side scenes. Their play will be better understood then. We are puzzled when a king, or count, suddenly lands upon our historical ground, like a collier winched up through a shaft." (Palgrave, History of Normandy and of England, vol. i, P‑ 351‑) We are told by Fort, that " the traditions of the Northern Deity, Baldur, seemingly furnished the substantial foundation for the introduction of the legend of Hiram." (Early History and Antiquity of Freemasonry, p. 407.) Baldur, who is the lord of light, is slain by the wintry sun and the incidents of the myth show that it cannot have been developed in the countries of northern Europe. " It may be rash," says Sir George Cox, " to assign them dogmatically to central Asia, but indubitably they sprung up in a country where the winter is of very short duration." (Mythology of the Aryan Nations, 1882, p. 336). Of the Hiramic legend‑which is purely allegorical‑it has been said, that it will bear a two‑fold interpretation, cosmological and astronomical.
The progress of the Degree is to a great extent veiled in obscurity and the By‑laws of a London Lodge of about 1730‑31 can be read, either as indicating that the system of two Degrees had not gone out of date, or that the Apprentice was " entered " in the old way, which made him a Fellow Craft under the new practice and, therefore, eligible for the " Superiour " or third Degree. The 3rd By‑Law of Lodge No. 71, held at the Bricklayers' Arms, in the Barbican reads That no Person shall be Initiated as a Mason in this Lodge, without the Unanimous consent of all then present, & for the better Regulation of this, 'tis Order'd that all Persons proposed be Ballotted for, & if one Negative appear, then the said Person to be Refused, but if all Affirmatives the Person to pay two Pounds seven Shillings at his Making, & receive Double Cloathing, Also when this Lodge shall think Convenient, to confer the Superiour Degree of masonry upon him, he shall pay five Shillings more ; & 'tis further Order'd that if any Regular & worthy Brother desires to be a Member of this Lodge, the same Order shall be observed as to the Ballot & he shall pay half a Guinea at his Entrance & receive single Cloathing." (Kawlinson MSS., C. 126, p. zo5.) 7z THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o But some entries in the Minutes of a country Lodge, on the occasion of its being constituted as a regular Lodge‑May 18, 1733‑are even more difficult to interpret, though the particulars they afford are as diffuse as those in the previous instance are the contrary. The presence is recorded, besides that of the Master and Wardens, of three Fellow Crafts, six Masters and four " Pass'd Masters." (T. P. Ashley, History of the Royal Cumberland Lodge, No. 41, 1873, P. z2.) The distinction here drawn between the two sets of Masters, it is by no means easy to explain, but it appears to point to an epoch of confusion, when the old names had not yet been succeeded by the new, at least in the country Lodges. The first meeting of this Lodge, of which a record is preserved, took place, December 28, 173z. Present, the Master and Wardens and seven members. No other titles are used. Among the members were George Rainsford and Johnson Robinson, the former of whom is described as Master, the latter as Pass'd Master, in the Minutes of May 18, 1733. It is possible, to put it no higher, that these distinctive terms were employed because some of the members had graduated under the Grand Lodge system, whilst others had been admitted or passed to their Degrees according to the more homely usage which preceded it. (Hughan, Origin of the English Rite, p. 25.) The Degree seems, however, to have become fairly well established by 173 8, as the Constitutions of that year inform us that there were then eleven Masters' Lodges in the metropolis. One of these is described by Anderson as, " Black Posts in Maiden Lane, where there is also a Masters' Lodge." This was No. 163 on the General List, constituted Sept. 2i, 1737. Its Minutes, which commence Feb. 9, 17 and, therefore, show the Lodge to have worked by inherent right before accepting a Charter, contain the following entries :‑Dec. 17, 1738.‑"'Twas agreed thatt all Debates and Business shall be between the E.A. and F.C.s Part." Feb. 5, 1740.‑The Petition of a Brother was rejected, " but unanimously agreed to Raise him a Master gratis." Sept. 2, 1742.‑" If a Brother entring is a Fellow Craft, he shall be oblidge to be raised master in 3 Months, or be fin'd Ss." These seem to have been at that time, in London‑although it may have been different in the country‑part and parcel of the Lodges, to which the way they are ordinarily described would have us to believe that they were merely attached. The use of the term " raise " in lieu of " pass " had also then crept into use, as may be seen in the paragraph above, though the latter was not entirely superseded by the former, until much later.
It must freely be conceded that the old manuscript Constitutions show evident traces of a Gallic influence, also that some indications are afforded in the work of a French historian‑whose writings command general respect‑of a ceremony performed at the reception of a French stoneworker, strongly pointing to a ritual not unlike our own. (Monteil, Histoire des Francais des Divers Etats, 1853, vol. i, p. 294.) But the difficulty experienced in recognizing in the legend of Hiram the builder, a common feature of the Companionage and the Freemasonry of more early times, is two‑fold.
In the case of the former, we may go the length of admitting that there is a THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 73 strong presumption in favour of the legend having existed in 1717, but, unfortunately, the most material evidence to be adduced in its support‑that of Perdiguier, showing that there was a Solomonic or Hiramic legend at all‑is more than a century later than the date of the event to which it has been held to refer. In cases of this kind, to adopt the words of Voltaire, the existence of a festival, or of a monument, proves indeed the belief which men entertain, but by no means proves the reality of the occurrence concerning which the belief is held.
Here, indeed, there is not quite so much to rely on, for Perdiguier expressly disclaims his belief in the antiquity of the legend he recounts ; but passing this over and, assuming that in 1841 the Companions, as a body, devoutly cherished it as an article of faith, this will by no means justify us in regarding it as a matter of conviction. As to the Freemasons, the legend made its appearance too late to be at all traceable to the influence of the Companionage though, with regard to the tradition which renders Charles Martel a patron of the Society, it may be otherwise. Charles Martel is said, by many writers, to have sent Stonemasons to England at the request of certain Anglo‑Saxon kings. This he may possibly have done, especially as he lived at a time when the Anglo‑Saxon kingdoms were in a most flourishing condition. But he certainly was not a great church builder, inasmuch as he secularized a large portion of the Church's property to provide for the sustenance of those troops, whom he was forced to raise to defend the Frankish monarchy against the Saracens and others.
With the exception of France, however, there appears no continental source from which it is at all probable that the English Masons borrowed either their customs or their traditions. Had they done so from Germany, the Masonic voca bulary would bear traces of it and German words easily become incorporated with our language. But it is impossible to find in the ritual, or in the names of the emblems of our art, the slightest symptom of Teutonic influence.
By the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes and by the savage persecution which immediately preceded and followed it, France probably lost upwards of a quarter of a million of her most industrious citizens. In consequence, at the early part of the eighteenth century, every considerable town in England, Holland and Protestant Germany, contained a colony of Frenchmen who had been thus driven from their homes. Now, if at the time of this phenomenal incursion of Frenchmen, the English Masonic customs received a Gallic tinge, is it not reasonable to suppose that the same process would have been at work in other Protestant countries, to say nothing of Ireland, where the influx of these refugees was so great that there were no fewer than three French congregations established in Dublin ? On the whole, therefore, it seems not unreasonable to conclude that, if the English borrowed from the French Masons in any other respect than claiming Charles Martel as their patron, the debt was contracted about the same time that the name of the " Hammer‑bearer " first figured in our oral or written traditions.
One of the legendary characters who figures in Masonic history, who may be said to be the most remarkable of them all‑Naymus Grecus‑deserves a few 74 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o parting words. The longevity of this worthy Mason is tame and insignificant when compared with what is preserved in the literature of India. The most remarkable case is that of a personage who was the first king, first anchoret and first saint. This eminent man lived in a pure and virtuous age and his days were indeed long in the land; since, when he was made king, he was two million years old. He then reigned 6,300,000 years, having done which, he resigned his empire, and lingered on for ioo,ooo years more ! (Asiatic Researches, vol. ix, p. 305 ; Buckle, History of Civilization in England, vol. i, p. 136.) Returning to the history of the Grand Lodge of England, the following is an exact transcript of the earliest proceedings which are recorded in its Minutes AT THE GRAND LODGE HELD AT MERCHANT TAYLOR'S HALL, MONDAY, 24TH JUNE 1723 PRESENT His Grace the Duke of Wharton, G. Master.
The Reverend J. T. Desaguliers, LL.D., F.R.S., D.G.M.
Joshua Timson, G. Wardens. The Reverend MI. James Anderson,} ORDERED That William Cowper, Esgr., a Brother of the Horn Lodge at Westminster‑be Secretary to the Grand Lodge.
The order of the 17th Jan : 172', printed at the end of the Constitutions, page 91, for the publishing the said Constitutions was read, purporting, That they had been before Approved in Manuscript by the Grand Lodge, and were then (viz'), 17th January aforesaid, produced in Print and approved by the Society.
THEN The Question was moved, That the said General Regulations be confirmed, so far as they are consistent with the Ancient Rules of MASONRY.
The previous Question was moved and put, Whether the words [so far as they are consistent with the Ancient Rules of MASONRY] be part of the Question.
RESOLVED in the affirmative.
But the main question was not put. And the Question was moved, That it is not in the Power of any person, or Body of men, to make any Alteration, or Innovation in the Body of MASONRY without the Consent first obtained of the Annual Grand Lodge.
And the Question being put accordingly, Resolved in the Affirmative.
The two Grand Wardens were sent out into the Hall to give Notice, That, if any Brother had any Appeal, or any matter to offer, for the good of the Society, he might Come in and offer the same, in this Grand Lodge and two other Brethren were appointed by the Grand Master, to take the Grand Wardens places in the mean while.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 75 The Grand Wardens being returned, reported they had given Notice accordingly.
Then the Grand Master being desired to name his Successor, and declining so to do, but referring the Nomination to the Lodge, The Right Honb'e. The Earl of Dalkeith was proposed to be put in Nomination as GRAND MASTER for the ensuing year.
The Lodge was also acquainted That in case of his Election, he had nominated Dr Desaguliers for his Deputy.
And the 3 S th General Regulation, purporting that the Grand Master being Installed, shall next nominate and appoint his Deputy Grand Master, &c., was read.
Then The Question was proposed and put by the Grand Master, That the Deputy nominated by the Earl of Dalkeith be approved. There was a Division of the Lodge, and two Brethren appointed Tellers.
Ayes, . ň 43 Noes, . . 42 As the tellers reported the Numbers.
Then The Grand Master, in the Name of the new Grand Master, proposed Brother Francis Sorrel and Brother John Senex for Grand Wardens the ensuing year. Agreed, That they should be Balloted for after Dinner.
ADJOURN'D TO DINNER.
After Dinner and some of the regular Healths Drank, the Earl of Dalkeith was declared GRAND‑MASTER according to the above mentioned Resolution of the Grand Lodge.
The late Grand Master, declaring he had some doubt upon the above mentioned Division in the Grand Lodge before Dinner, whether the Majority was for approving Dr Desaguliers, or whether the Tellers had truly reported the Numbers ; proposed the said Question to be now put again in the General Lodge.
And accordingly insisting on the said Question being now put and putting the same, his Worship and several Brethren withdrew out of the Hall as dividing against approving Dr Desaguliers.
And being so withdrawn, Brother Robinson, producing a written Authority from the Earl of Dalkeith for that purpose, did declare in his Name, That his Worship had, agreeably to the Regulation in that behalf, Appointed and did Appoint Dr Desaguliers his Deputy, and Brothers Sorrel and Senex Grand Wardens. And also Brother Robinson did, in his said Worship's Name and behalf of the whole Fraternity, protest against the above proceedings of the late Grand Master in first putting the Question of Approbation, and what followed thereon, as unprecedented, unwarrantable and Irregular, and tending to introduce into the Society a Breach of Harmony, with the utmost disorder and Confusion.
Then the said late Grand Master and those who withdrew with him being 76 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, I7z3‑6o returned into the Hall and acquainted with the foresaid Declaration of Brother Robinson, The late Grand Master went away from the Hall without Ceremony.
After other regular Healths Drank, The Lodge adjourned.
The Minutes of this meeting are signed by " JoHN THEOPHILUs DESAGULIERS, Deputy Grand Master." The Earl of Dalkeith presided at the next Quarterly Communication, held November 25, and the proceedings are thus recorded The following Questions were put I. Whether the Master and Wardens of the several Lodges have not power to regulate all things relating to Masonry at the Quarterly Meetings, one of which must be on St John Baptist's Day ? Agreed, nem. con.
z. Whether the Grand Master has not power to appoint his Deputy ? Agreed, nem. con.
Agreed, That Dr Desaguliers be Deputy Grand Master from the last Annual meeting.
Ordered.; That Brother Huddleston of the King's Head in Ivy Lane be expelled the Lodge for laying several Aspersions against the Deputy Grand Master, which he could not make good and the Grand Master appointed Mr Davis, Senr. Warden, to be Master of the said Lodge in Ivy Lane.
Agreed, That no new Lodge, in or near London, without it be Regularly Constituted, be countenanced by the Grand Lodge, nor the Master or Wardens be admitted at the Grand Lodge.
3. Whether the two Grand Wardens, Brother Sorrell and Brother Senex, are confirmed in their offices ? Agreed, nem. con.
The above is a literal extract from the actual Minutes of Grand Lodge ; but among the " alterations, improvements and explications " of the " Old Regulations " of the Society, or, in other words, the " New Regulations " enacted between the dates of publication of the first and second editions of the Book, of Constitutions, Anderson gives the following as having been agreed to on November z5, I7z3 That in the Master's absence, the Senior Warden of a lodge shall fill the chair, even tho' a former Master,be present.
No new Lodge to be owned unless it be regularly Constituted and registered. That no Petitions and Appeals shall be heard on the Feast Day or Annual Grand Lodge.
That any G. Lodge duly met has a Power to amend or explain any of the printed Regulations in the Book of Constitutions, while they break not in upon the antient Rules of the Fraternity. But that no Alteration shall be made in this printed Book of Constitutions without Leave of the G. Lodge.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 77 Of the foregoing resolutions, the first and third‑so Anderson informs uswere not recorded in the Grand Lodge Book. But, with the exception of the latter, which must have been necessitated at an early date, in order to preserve the requisite harmony on the Assembly or Head‑meeting Day, all of them seem to be merely amplifications of what really was enacted by the Grand Lodge. Anderson, moreover, it should be recollected, was not present (or at least his attendance is not recorded) at the Communication in question.
Grand Lodge met in ample form on February 19, 1724, when the following Questions were put and agreed to i. That no Brother belong to more than one Lodge at one time, within the Bills of Mortality.
2. That no Brother belonging to any Lodge within the Bills of Mortality be admitted to any Lodge as a visitor, unless personally known to some Brother of that Lodge where he visits and that no Strange Brother, however skilled in Masonry, be admitted without taking the obligacon over again, unless he be introduced or vouched for by some Brother known to, and approved by, the Majority of the Lodge. And whereas some Masons have mett and formed a Lodge without the Grand Master's Leave. ' AGREED ; That no such persons be admitted into Regular Lodges.
At this meeting, every Master or Warden was enjoined to bring with him a list of the members belonging to his Lodge at the next Quarterly Communication. Two further " Questions " were submitted to the Grand Lodge on April 28 and, in each case, it was resolved by a unanimous vote,‑firstly, that the Grand Master had the power of appointing the two Grand Wardens and, in the second place, that Charles, Duke of Richmond, should " be declared Grand Master at the next Annual meeting." According to Anderson (Constitutions, 173 8,p. I 18), the Duke was duly " install'd in Solomon's Chair," on June 24 and appointed Martin Folkes his Deputy, who was " invested and install'd by the last Deputy in the Chair of Hiram Abbiú" No such phrases occur in the official records and the only circumstance of a noteworthy character, associated with the Assembly of 1724, is, that the Stewards were ordered " to prepare a list for the Grand Master's perusal of twelve fit persons to serve as stewards at the next Grand Feast." During the Grand Mastership of the Duke of Richmond, the Committee of Charity‑at the present day termed the Board of Benevolence‑was instituted. The scheme of raising a fund of General Charity for Distressed Masons was proposed, November 21, by the Earl of Dalkeith and, under the same date, there is a significant entry in the Grand Lodge Minutes‑" Brother Anthony Sayer's petition was read and recommended by the Grand Master." It does not appear, however, that the premier Grand Master received any pecuniary assistance on the occasion of his first application for relief, though sums oú money were voted to him in 1730 and 1741 respectively as seen already.
78 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o Lord Dalkeith's proposal met with general support and, among those whose names are honourably associated with the movement in its earlier stages, may be mentioned Dr. Desaguliers, George Payne and Martin Folkes.
At the same meeting it was resolved, that all Past Grand Masters should have the right of attending and voting in Grand Lodge and it was AGREED, nem. con.‑That if any Brethren shall meet Irregularly and make Masons at any place within ten miles of London, the persons present at the making (the New Brethren Excepted) shall not be admitted, even as visitors, into any Regular Lodge whatsoever, unless they come and make such submission to the Grand Mast. and Grand Lodge as they shall think fit to impose upon them.
A few words must now be devoted to the proceedings of the Gormogons, an Order which first came under public notice in this year, though its origin is said to have been of earlier date. The following notification appeared in the Daily Post of September 3, 1724 : Whereas the truly ANTIENT NOBLE ORDER of the Gormogons, instituted by Chin‑Quaw Ky‑Po, the first Emperor of China (according to their account), many thousand years before Adam and of which the great philosopher Confucius was ecumenical Volgee, has lately been brought into England by a Mandarin and he, having admitted several Gentlemen of Honour into the Mystery of that most illustrious order, they have determined to hold a Chapter at the Castle Tavern in Fleet Street, at the particular Request of several persons of Quality. This is to inform the public, that there will be no drawn Sword at the Door, nor Ladder in a dark Room, nor will any Mason be receiv'd as a Member till he has renounced his Novel Order and been properly degraded. N.B.‑The Grand Mogul, the Czar of Muscovy and Prince Tochmas are enter'd into this Hon. Society ; but it has been refused to the Rebel Meriweys, to his great Mortification. The Mandarin will shortly set out for Rome, having a particular Commission to make a Present of this Antient Order to his Holiness and it is believ'd the whole Sacred College of Cardinals will commence Gormogons. Notice will be given in the Gazette the Day the Chapter will be held.
If we may believe the Meekly journal or Saturday Post, of the 17th of October following, " many eminent Freemasons " had by that time " degraded themselves " and gone over to the Gormogons, whilst several others were rejected " for want of qualification." But the fullest account of the Order is given in the second edition of the Grand Mystery of the Freemasons Discovered, published October z8, 1724. This has been closely dissected by Kloss, who advances three distinct theories with regard to the appearance of the Gormogons :‑I. That the (Ecumenical Volgi was no less than the Chevalier Ramsay, then at Rome in attendance upon the Young Pretender; II. That the movement was a deeply laid scheme on the part of the Jesuits to attain certain ends, by masquerading after the fashion of the Freemasons ; and III. That in the Gormogons we meet with the precursors of the Seceding Masons, or Antients. The first and last of these suppositions may be passed over, but the THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 79 second is more plausible, especially if its application is widened and for " Jesuits " read " Roman Catholics," since, curiously enough, the Order is said to have become I extinct in 1738, the year in which Clement XII published his Bull against the Freemasons.
The Plain Dealer of September 14, 1724, contains a letter from a Mandarin at Rome to another in London. The former congratulates the latter on the speedy progress he has made " from the Court of the Young SOPHY " and adds Your Presence is earnestly expected at ROME. The Father of High Priests is fond of our Order and the CARDINALS have an Emulation to be distinguish'd. Our Excellent Brother GORMOGON, Mandarin, CHAN FuE, is well and salutes you.
There are also several allusions to the Freemasons, which point to the prevalence of irregularities, such as we are already justified in believing must have existed at the time.
The following notice appeared in the Daily Journal of October z6, 1730 By command of the VOL‑GI.
A General Chapter of the most August and Ancient order GOR‑MO‑GON, will be held at the Castle Tavern in Fleet Street, on Saturday the 31st Inst., to commence at i z o'clock ; of which the several Graduates and Licentiates are to take Notice, and give their Attendance.
P. W. T.
An identical summons, signed F. N. T., will be found in the same journal for October 28, 1731, but that earlier chapters were held at the same place may be inferred from a paragraph in the British Journal of December 12,1724, which reads We hear that a Peer of the first Rank, a noted Member of the Society of FreeMasons, hath suffered himself to be degraded as a member of that Society and his Leather Apron and Gloves to be burnt and thereupon enter'd himself as a Member of the Society of Gormogons, at the Castle‑Tavern in Fleet Street.
This can only refer to the Duke of Wharton, whose well‑known eccentricity of character, combined with the rebuff he experienced when last present in Grand Lodge, may have led him to take this step. It is true, that in 1728 he constituted a Lodge at Madrid, but this would be in complete harmony with the disposition of a man who, in politics and everything else, was always turning moral somersaults; and the subsequent application of the Lodge to be " constituted properly " tends to show that, however defective his own memory may have been, his apostasy was neither forgotten nor forgiven by the Craft.
The number of renegade Gormogons was, probably, large, but the only secession from the Order published occurs in the Tleekly journal or British Ga.Zetteer of April i8, 1730, which has On Saturday last, at the Prince William Tavern, at Charing +, Mr Dennis, the famous poet and critick, was admitted a Free and Accepted Mason, at a lodge 80 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o then held there, having renounced the Society of the Gormogons, of which he had been a member for many years.
This John Dennis, poet, political writer and critic, was born in 1657 and died on January 6, 1734. He was, therefore, in his seventy‑third year when initiated into Freemasonry.
The Grand Lodge on May 2o, 1725, ordered that the Minutes of the last meeting should be read‑a formality noticed for the first time ; it was also " ordered, that his Grace the Duke of Richmond be continued Grand Mast. for the next half year ending at Christmas " and there occurs a singular entry, with regard to which we should remain entirely in the dark, were it not for the discovery of a manuscript in the library of the British Museum, by the late Matthew Cooke (Additional MS., 23,202 ; see Freemasons' Magazine, July to December, 1861, pp. 67, 85, 132, 304, 326, 387) that clears up the whole matter. The Minute runs Ordered, that there be a letter wrote to the following Brethren, to desire them to attend the Grand Lodge at the next Quarterly Communication (vizt.) William Gulston, Coort Knevitt, William Jones, Charles Cotton, Thomas ffisher, Thomas Harbin and ffrancis Xavier Germiniani.
All these Brethren, except ffisher and Harbin, were " made Masons " in the Lodge at the Queen's Head in Hollis Street and three of them‑Knevitt, Jones and Cotton‑by the Duke of Richmond, Grand Master. Harbin was a member of the same Lodge in 1725. Thomas ffisher was junior Warden of the Lodge at Ben's Coffee House, New Bond Street, in 1723.
The manuscript referred to informs us that these persons were membersand, with three exceptions, founders‑of an association, entitled the Philo Musicx et Architecturx Societas, Apolloni, established February 18, 1725, by seven Brethren from the Lodge at the Queen's Head in Holles Street and one other.
The Minutes of the Society extend to 296 pages and the last entry is dated March 23, 1727. Rule xviii ordains‑" that no Person be admitted as a Visitor, unless he be a Free Mason " and the ranks of the Society were recruited solely from the Craft. But if the applicant for membership was not a Mason, the Society proceeded to make him one and sometimes went further, for we find that on May i z, 1725, two brothers " were regularly passed Masters," one " was regularly passed fellow Craft & Master," another " was regularly passed Fellow Craft "‑the ordinance (XIII) of Grand Lodge, enjoining that such ceremonies should only be performed in the presence of that body, being in full force at the time.
The ordinary practice in cases where the candidates were devoid of the Masonic qualification was to make them Masons in the first instance, after which they were ordered to attend " to be admitted and properly inducted members." This, however, they frequently failed to do and, on March 17, 1726, two persons were ignominiously expelled for not taking up their membership‑for which they had been duly qualified‑though thrice summoned to do so.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 81 Geo. Payne, J. G. Warden, was present as a visitor on September 2, 1725 and the following entry occurs in the Minutes under December 16 of the same year A letter Dat. the 8th Instant from Brother Geo. Payne, Junt Grand Warden, directed in form to this Society, inclosing a Letter from the Duke of Richmond, Grand Master, dat. likewise the 8 Instant, directed to the Presid`. and the rest of the Brethren at the Apollo, in which he Erroneously insists on and Assumes to himself a Pretended Authority to call Our Rt. Worpfull and Highly Esteem'd Society to an account for making Masons irregularly, for which reasons as well as for want of a Due Regard, Just Esteem and Omitting to Address himself in proper form to the Rt. Worpfull and Highly Esteemed Society, Ordered That the Said Letters do lye on the Table.
The subject is not again referred to in the Minutes of the Society, or in those of Grand Lodge, but a week later‑December 23,1725‑three members of the Lodge at the Horn were present as visitors, including Alexander Hardine, the Master; and Francis Sorrell, Senior Grand Warden.
The preceding extracts throw a light upon a very dark portion of Masonic history. It is highly probable that Payne's visit to the Musical Society took place at the instance of the Duke of Richmond, by whom, as seen, three of the members were " made Masons." But the attendance of Sorrell and Hardine, after the Grand Master's letter had been so contemptuously disregarded, is not a little remarkable. Still more curious is the circumstance, that, at the very time their visit occurred, Coort Knevitt was also a member of the Lodge at the Horn. It may be taken, therefore, that the denunciations of the Grand Master were a mere brutum fulmen and led to no practical result. The Musical Society died out in the early part of 1727, but the Minutes show that the members persisted in making Masons until June 23, 1726 and, possibly, would have continued the practice much later had the supply of candidates lasted longer than it apparently did.
William Gulston, the prises, or president, of the Society during the greater part of its existence, whose name, it may be supposed, would have been particularly obnoxious to the rulers of the Craft, was a member of Lodge No. 40, at the St. Paul's Head, in 1730 and his name appears first on the list. There were 107 members in all and, among them, were Dr. Richard Rawlinson, Grand Steward 1734; John Jesse, Grand Treasurer 1738‑52; and Fotherley Baker, Deputy Grand Master 1747‑51. These were not the kind of men to join in fellowship with any person whose Masonic record would not bear investigation. It is reasonably clear that, down at least to 1725, perhaps later, the bonds of discipline so recently forged were unequal to the strain which was imposed upon them. Confidence is a plant of slow growth and, even were evidence wanting to confirm the belief that the beneficent despotism which arose out of the unconditional surrender of their inherent privileges by four private Lodges, was not submitted to without resistance 82. THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o by the Craft at large‑from the nature of things, no other conclusion could be adopted.
It may, therefore, be supposed that Gulston and the others gradually ceased to commit the irregularities for which they were censured and that they did so before the time had arrived when the Grand Lodge felt itself established on a sufficiently firm basis to be able to maintain in their integrity the General Regulations agreed to by the Masons of London and Westminster in 1723.
The evidence Additional MS. 23,zoz affords of the Fellow Craft's and Master's parts having been.actually wrought other than in Grand Lodge, before February 18, 1725, is of great value, both as marking the earliest date at which such ceremonies are known to have been worked and, from the inference we are justified in drawing, that at the period in question there was nothing unusual in the action of the Brethren concerned in these proceedings.
The Quarterly Communication, held November 27, 1725, was attended by the officers of forty‑nine Lodges, a number vastly in excess of any previous record of a similar character, which does not again reach the same figures until the November meeting of 173z. Two reasons may be assigned for so full an attendance‑one, the general interest experienced by the Fraternity at large in the success of the Committee of Charity, the report of which body, drawn up by William Cowper, the chairman, was to be presented to Grand Lodge ; the other, that an extension of the authority of private Lodges was to be considered and, as the following extract shows, conceded A Motion being made that such part of the 13th Article of the Gen". Regulations relating to the making of Masts only at a Quarterly Court may be repealed and that the Mast. of Each Lodge, with the consent of his Wardens and the Majority of the Brethren, being Masts., may make Masts at their discretion. Agreed, Nem. Con.
It is singular, that whilst forty‑nine Lodges are stated to have been represented in Grand Lodge on this occasion, the Engraved List of 17zg has only fifty‑four Lodges in all, forty‑four of which, no more, were constituted up to and inclusive of the year 1725. This is at first sight somewhat confusing, but the Engraved List of 1725 shows that sixty‑four Lodges existed in that year and there were many influences at work between the years 1725 and 1729, tending to keep down and still further reduce the number of Lodges.
The Duke of Richmond was succeeded by Lord Paisley, afterwards Earl of Abercorn, who appointed Dr. Desaguliers his Deputy and, during this Grand Mastership, the only event worth recording is the resolution passed February z8, 1726, giving past rank to Deputy Grand Masters, a privilege, it may be observed, also extended to Grand Wardens on May io, 1727.
The next to ascend the Masonic throne was the Earl of Inchiquin, during whose term of office, Provincial Grand Masters were first appointed and, on June 24, 1727, the Masters and Wardens of Private Lodges were ordered to wear at all THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 83 Masonic meetings, " the Jewells of Masonry hanging to a White Ribbon (vizt.) That the Mast. wear the Square, the Sen% Warden the Levell and the Junr. Warden the Plumb Rule " (Constitutions, 1738, N. R. XII).
About this period the question of Masonic precedency began to agitate the Lodges and the following. extract from the Minutes of Grand Lodge will afford the best picture of the manner in which their relative positions at the Quarterly Communications were determined, before any strict rule on the subject was laid down.
December icg, 1727.‑The Masters and Wardens of the Several Lodges following, attended and answered to their Names, vizt i. Goose and Gridiron, St. Pauls. 1o. Globe, Strand.
2. Rose and Rummer, Castle Yard. ii. Tom's Coffee House, Clare Market.
3. Queen's Head, Knave's Acre. 12. Crown and Scepter, St. Martin's.
4. Horn, Westr. 13. Swan, Greenwich.
5. Green Dragon, Newgate St. 14. Cross Keys, Henrieta St., Co: Garden.
6. St. Paul's Head, Ludgate St. 15. Swan, Tottenham High Cross.
7. Three Tuns, Swithin's Alley. 16. Swan and Rummer, Finch Lane.
8. Queen's Head, Great Queen St. 17. Mag: Pye, against Bishopsgate Church.
9. Ship, Fish St. Hill. 18. Mount Coffee House, Grosvenor St.
Here we find the Four Old Lodges at the head of the roll, arranged, moreover, in due order of seniority, reckoned from their age, or respective dates of establishment or constitution. This position they doubtless owed to the sense entertained of their services as founders of the Grand Lodge. But the places of the remaining Lodges appear to have been regulated by no principle whatever. No. 5 above becomes No. icg on the first list (I 7z9), in which the positions of Lodges were determined by the dates of their warrants of constitution. Similarly, No. 6 drops down to the number 18, 7 to 12, 8 to 14, 9 to 22, 13 to 25, whilst the No. 11 Of 1727 goes up to the sixth place on the Engraved List of 1729.
In the same year, at the Assembly on St. John's Day (in Christmas), the following resolution was adopted That it shall be referred to the succeeding Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master and Grand Wardens, to enquire into the Precedency of the Several Lodges and to make report thereof at the next Quarterly Communication, in order that the same may be finally settled and entre'd accordingly.
In conformity with this regulation, " most of the Lodges present delivered the dates of their being Constituted into Lodges, in order to have precedency in the Printed Book " ; others did so on June 25, 1728 ; and, at the ensuing Grand Lodge held in November, the Master and Wardens of the several Lodges were for the first time " called according to their seniority." The Grand Officers, under whose superintendence the Engraved List of 1729 was brought out‑Lord Coleraine, Grand Master; Alexander Choke, the Deputy; 84 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o Nathaniel Blakerby and Joseph Highmore, Grand Wardens‑were invested with their badges of office on the aforesaid St. John's Day, 1727, at which Assembly, an application by the members of the Lodge at the King's Head in Salford, that their names might be entered in the Grand Lodge Books and themselves taken under the care and patronage of the Grand Lodge‑which was acceded todeserves to be recorded, both as showing the existence at that time of Lodges other than those forming part of the regular establishment, as well as the tendency of all such bodies gradually to become absorbed within the central organization. These accessions strengthened the authority of Grand Lodge, whose officers wisely forebore from interposing any obstacles that might hinder or retard a surrender of their independence by those Lodges which had not yet given in their adhesion to the new regime. Thus on November 26, 1728, a petition was presented from the Master and Wardens of a Lodge held for some time past at Bishopsgate Coffee House, declaring their intention and earnest desire to be Constituted as soon as it will suit the conveniency of the Deputy Grand Master to confer the honour upon them and humbly praying to be admitted among the regular Lodges at this Quarterly Communication.
The Deputy Grand Master‑Alexander Choke‑we are informed, " did dispense with their being at present irregular and admitted them into the Grand Lodge." At the same meeting, which was the last under the administration of Lord Colerane, it was settled, on the motion of Dr. Desaguliers, that there should be twelve Stewards for the future, who should have the entire care and direction of the Annual Feast. Also, it was ordered that, in the absence of any Officer of a Lodge‑Master or Warden‑one of the members, " but not a mere Enter'd Prentice," might attend the Grand Lodge, " to supply his Room and support the Honour of his Lodge" (Constitutions, 1738, N. R. XII).
Viscount Kingston‑who was afterwards at the head of the Craft in Ireland ‑was the next Grand Master and the proceedings of Grand Lodge were agreeably diversified on the occasion of his installation‑December 27, 1728‑by a petition being presented from several Masons residing at Fort William in Bengal, wherein they acknowledged the authority of the Grand Master in England and humbly prayed to be constituted into a Regular Lodge. The prayer was acceded to and the duty entrusted to George Pomfret, brother to one of the petitioners, then on the eve of proceeding to the East Indies, to whom was granted a Deputation for the purpose. Similar Deputations were granted to some Brethren at Gibraltar and to Charles Labelle (or Labelye), Master of the Lodge at Madrid‑originally constituted by the Duke of Wharton in 1728 (Grand Lodge Minutes, April 17, 1728) ‑but which the members subsequently prayed might be constituted properly under the direct sanction of Grand Lodge (ibid., March 27, 1729).
The deputation to the Gibraltar Masons was granted to them " for and on behalf of several other Brethren, commissioned and non‑commissioned officers and others, to be constituted a regular Lodge in due form " and the body thus legitimated, in a subsequent letter wherein they style themselves " The Lodge oú THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, '1723‑6o 85 St. John of Jerusalem lately constituted at Gibraltar," express their thanks to Grand Lodge for empowering them "to hold a Lodge in as due and ample manner as hath been hitherto practised by our Brethren " (Grand Lodge Minutes, December z7, '1729).
Lord Kingston made very handsome presents to the Grand Lodge and, so great was his sense of the responsibilities of his office that, on a message reaching him in Ireland from the Deputy Grand Master, stating his presence was desirable at the Quarterly Communication of November zs, '17zg, he forthwith embarked for England and " rode Post from Holyhead in two days and a half," in order to preside over the meeting,‑at the proceedings of which harmony appears to have prevailed, certainly did towards the end, for the records inform us, " that the Deputy Grand Master, having gone through all business, clos'd the Lodge with the Mason's Song." During the term of office of this nobleman, the Grand Lodge " ordain'd " that every new Lodge that should be constituted by the Grand Master, or by his authority, should pay the sum of two guineas towards the General Charity (Grand Lodge Minutes, December z7, '1729). We also first hear of those grave irregularities, which, under the title of " making Masons for small and unworthy considerations," are afterwards alluded to so frequently in the official records. According to the Minutes of March 27,'1729, Complaint being made that at the Lodge at the One Tun in Noble Street, a person who was not a Mason was present at a Making and that they made Masons upon a trifling expense only for the sake of a small reckoning ; that one Huddlestone of that Lodge brought one Templeman of the South Sea House with him, who was not a Mason and the obligation was not required." The Master and Wardens of the Lodge were ordered to attend at the next Quarterly Communication and, " in the mean time," to " endeavour to make the said Templeman a regular Mason." At the ensuing meeting the Master attended and his explanation was deemed satisfactory; but whether, with the assistance of his Wardens, he ultimately succeeded in bringing Templeman within the fold, the records leave undecided.
The Duke of Norfolk, who succeeded Lord Kingston, was invested and installed at an Assembly and Feast held at Merchant Taylors Hall, on January 2g, '1730, in the presence of a brilliant company. No fewer than nine former Grand Masters attended on the occasion and walked in the procession in order of juniority‑viz. Lords Colerane, Inchiquin and Paisley, the Duke of Richmond, Lord Dalkeith, the Duke of Montagu, Dr. Desaguliers, George Payne and Anthony Sayer.
Although this was the only time the Duke of Norfolk was present at Grand Lodge during his tenure of office, as he shortly afterwards went to Italy, his interest in the prosperity of the Institution is evinced both by his having personally con stituted several Lodges prior to his departure and having sent home many valuable presents from abroad, consisting of ('1) twenty pounds to the Charity fund; (2) a 86 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o large folio book for the records of Grand Lodge ; and (3) a sword of state (still in use), to be borne before the Grand Master, being the old trusty sword of Gustavus Adolphus, King of Sweden, which was next worn by his brave successor in war, Bernard, Duke of Saxe‑Weimar, with both their names on the blade.
In this year the pamphlet already referred to, entitled Masonry Dissected, was published by Samuel Prichard. " This work contained a great deal of plausible matter, mingled with some truth as well as falsehood ; passed through a great many editions ; was translated into the French, German and Dutch languages ; and became the basis or model on which all the subsequent so‑called expositions were framed " (Mackey, Encyclopedia, p. 6oi). It elicited a noble reply from an unknown writer, styled A Defence of Masonry, which has been commonly, though erroneously, ascribed to Dr. Anderson and produced one other good result by inducing stricter caution on the admission of visitors into Lodges. Thus we learn from the Minutes of Grand Lodge that, on August 28, 1730‑ Dr. Desaguliers stood up and (taking notice of a printed Paper lately published and dispersed about the Town and since inserted in the News Papers, pretending to discover and reveal the Misteries of the Craft of Masonry) recommended several things to the consideration of the Grand Lodge, particularly the Resolution of the last Quarterly Communication, for preventing any false Brethren being admitted into regular Lodges and such as call themselves Honorary Masons. The Deputy Grand Master seconded the Doctor and proposed several rules to the Grand Lodge, to be observed in their respective Lodges, for their security against all open and Secret Enemies to the Craft." The same records inform us that in the following December D.G.M. Blackerby took notice of a Pamphlet lately published by one Prichard, who pretends to have been made a regular Mason: In violation of the Obligation of a Mason wc'' he swears he has broke in order to do hurt to Masonry and expressing himself with the utmost indignation against both him (Stiling him an Impostor) and of his Book as a foolish thing not to be regarded. But in order to prevent the Lodges being imposed upon by false Brethren or Impostors: Proposed till otherwise Ordered by the Grand Lodge, that no Person whatsoever shall be admitted into Lodges unless some Member of the Lodge there present would vouch for such visiting Brother being a regular Mason and the Member's Name to be entered against the visitor's Name in the Lodge Book, which Proposal was unanimously agreed to.
It is a curious coincidence that the names of two of the earliest Grand Masters should be associated prominently with the proceedings of this meeting‑Desaguliers, as the champion of order and regularity ; and Sayer, alas, as an offender against the laws of that body over which he was called, in the first instance, to preside. The records state A paper, signed by the Master and Wardens of the Lodge at the Queen's Head in Knave's Acre, was presented and read, complaining of great irregularities having F. 11‑15 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 87 been committed by Bro. Anthony Sayer, notwithstanding the great ffavours he hath lately received by order of the Grand Lodge.
December 15, 173o.‑Br░. Sayer attended to answer the complaint made against him and, after hearing both parties and some of the Brethren being of opinion that what he had done was clandestine, others that it was irregular‑the Question was put whether what was done was clandestine, or irregular only and the Lodge was of opinion that it was irregular only‑whereupon the Deputy Grand Master told B'░. Sayer that he was acquitted of the charge against him and recommended it to him to do nothing so irregular for the future At this meeting the powers of the Committee of Charity were much extended. All business referring to Charity was delegated to it for the future, the Committee were empowered to hear complaints and ordered to report their opinion to Grand Lodge.
The Earl of Sunderland and Lord Portmore declining to be put in nomination for the Grand Mastership, Lord Lovell was elected to that office on March 17, 1731, on which occasion the following important regulations were enacted That no Lodge should order a dinner on the Grand Feast Day.
That none but the Grand Master, his Deputy and the Grand Wardens, should wear the jewels in gold or gilt pendant to blue ribbons about their necks and white leather aprons lined with blue silk.
That all who had served any of the three grand offices (i.e. Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master and Wardens) should wear the like apron lined with blue silk in all Lodges and Assemblies of Masons.
That Stewards should wear aprons lined with red silk and have their proper jewels pendant to red ribbons.
That all who had served the office of Steward should be at liberty to wear aprons lined with red silk " and not otherwise." That Masters and Wardens of Lodges might wear their aprons lined with white silk, and their respective jewels with plain white ribbons, " but of no other colour whatsoever." At the Quarterly Communication in June, a petition was presented, signed by several Brethren, praying that they might be admitted into the Grand Lodge and constituted into a Regular Lodge at the Three Kings in Crispin Street, Spittle fields. " After some debate, several Brethren present vouching that they were Regular Masons, they were admitted and the Grand Master declared, that he or his Deputy would constitute them accordingly and signed their petition for that purpose." Of the distinction then drawn between the Regular Masons and those hailing from Lodges still working by inherent right, independently of the central authority, the official records afford a good illustration.
These inform us that the petition for relief of Brother William Kemble was dismissed, " satisfaction not being given to the Grand Lodge, how long he had been made a Regular Mason " (Grand Lodge Minutes, June 24, 1731), whilst a similar 88 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o application from Brother Edward Hall, a member of the Lodge at the Swan in Chichester, resulted in a vote of Six Guineas, the latter alleging that he had been made a Mason in the said Lodge " by the late Duke of Richmond, six‑and‑thirty years ago " and, being recommended by the then holder of that title, the Grand Master of 1724, who was present during the consideration of the petition. (Grand Lodge Minutes, March z, 173 2.) The Duke of Lorraine, who had received the two first Degrees of Masonry at the Hague, by virtue of a Deputation granted to Dr. Desaguliers and others in 1731, visited England the same year and was made a Master Mason, together with the Duke of Newcastle, at an Occasional Lodge formed by the Grand Master, at Houghton Hall, the seat of Sir Robert Walpole, for that purpose. (Constitutions, 1738, p. 12g.) According to the Minutes of No. 3o,‑‑constituted at Norwich 1724, erased February 10, 18og, the Warrant assigned to the Lodge of Rectitude, Corsham, No. 632 (now No. 335)‑published in The Freemason, December 17, 1870 Ye Rt. Hon. ye Lord Lovell, when he was G.M. summoned ye M. and Bn. to hold a Lodge at Houghton Hall‑there were present the G.M., His Royal Highness the Duke oÇ Lorrain and many other noble Bn. and, when all was put into due form, ye G.M. presented the Duke of Newcastle, the Earl of Essex, Major‑General Churchill and his own Chaplin, who were unanimously accepted of and made Masons by Rt. W'pful Thos. Johnston, the then M. of this Lodge.
Among the distinguished members of the Lodge were Martin Folkes and Dr. Samuel Parr.
Lord Lovell was succeeded by Viscount Montagu and the latter by the Earl of Strathmore, at the time of his election Master of No. go, the University Lodge, at the Bear and Harrow in the Butcher's Row. He was installed by proxy, but presided over Grand Lodge on December 13, 173 3, when the following resolutions were unanimously agreed to That all such business which cannot conveniently be despatched by the Quarterly Communication, shall be referred to the Committee of Charity.
That all Masters of Regular Lodges (contributors within twelve months to the General Charity), together with all present, former and future Grand Officers, shall be members of that Committee.
That all questions shall be carried by a majority of those present.
It has been necessary to give the preceding resolutions somewhat at length, because they have been singularly misunderstood by Findel and other commentators. Thus the German historian assures us This innovation, viz., the extension of the Committee for the administration of the Charity Fund into a meeting of Master Masons, on whom power was conferred to make arrangements of the greatest importance, and to prepare new THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, ‑1723‑6o Sg resolutions, not only virtually annulled the authority vested in the Grand Lodge, but likewise greatly endangered the equality of the Brethren in the different Lodges. (Findel, History of Freemasonry, p. ‑1 5 4.) The criticism is misplaced. No such evils resulted, as, indeed, would have been simply impossible, upon the state of facts which the records disclose. Indeed, the Grand Lodge of ‑1753‑which sometimes has been supposed to have owed its existence to the series of innovations begun December ‑13, ‑1733 ‑delegated, in like manner, the management of its routine business to a very similar committee, styled the Steward's Lodge, the record of whose proceedings happily survives, whilst of that of its prototype, alas, only a fragment has been preserved.
Whilst, however, many important details must remain hidden, which might explain much that is obscure in this portion of our annals, it is satisfactory to know that all matters deemed to be of consequence‑and many that were not‑were brought up by the Committee of Charity at the next Quarterly Communication for final determination. It is when the Communications were held with irregularity that the loss is the greatest ; of this there is an early example, for during the administration of the Earl of Crawford, who succeeded Lord Strathmore, an interval of eleven months occurred between the meetings of Grand Lodge.
The former of these noblemen was initiated in the Lodge of Edinburgh under somewhat singular circumstances, as the following minute of that body attests Att Maries Chapell, the 7th day of August ‑1733. Present: the Right Honourable James Earle of Strathmore, present Grand Master of all the Lodges in England, and also chosen Grand Master for this present meetting. The which day the Right Honourable John Earle of Crawford, John Earle of Kintore and Alexander, Lord Garlies, upon application to the Societie, were admitted entered apprentices, and also receaved fellow crafts as honorary members. (Lyon, op. cit., p. ‑16‑1:) The Earl of Crawford was installed in office March 30, ‑1734 and the next meeting of Grand Lodge took place on February 24, ‑173 5, when Dr. Anderson, formerly Grand Warden, presented a Memorial, setting forth, that, whereas the first edition of the General' Constitutions of Masonry, compiled by himself, was all sold off and a Second edition very much wanted and that he had spent some thoughts upon some alterations and additions that might fittly be made to them, which he was now ready to lay before the Grand Lodge for their approbation‑Resolved‑that a Committee be appointed consisting of the present and former Grand Officers and such other Master Masons as they should think proper to call on, to revise and compare the same and, when finished, to lay the same before the Grand Lodge ensuing for their approbation.
Dr. Anderson " further represented that one William Smith, said to be a Mason, had, without his privity or consent, pyrated a considerable part of the go THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o Constitutions of Masonry aforesaid, to the prejudice of the said Dr Anderson, it being his sole property." It was therefore Resolved and Ordered‑That every Master and Warden present should do all in their power to discountenance so unfair a practice and prevent the said Smith's Books being bought by any member of their respective Lodges.
At this meeting the Minutes of the two last Committees of Charity were read and approved of. The cost of serving the Grand‑Mastership was restricted in future to the sum of thirty guineas and the following resolution was adopted That if any Lodge for the future within the Bills of Mortality shall not regularly meet for the space of one year, such Lodge shall be erased out of the Book of Lodges and, in case they shall afterwards be desirous of meeting again as a Lodge, they shall loose their former Rank and submitt themselves to a New Constitution.
In the following month‑March 31‑the Grand Master Took notice (in a very handsome speech) of the Grievance of making extraneous Masons, in a private and clandestine manner, upon small and unworthy considerations and proposed, that in order to prevent the Practice for the future No person thus admitted into the Craft, nor any that can be proved to have assisted at such Meetings, shall be capable either of acting as a Grand Officer on occasions, or even as an officer in a private Lodge, nor ought they to have any part in the General Charity, which is much impaired by this clandestine Practice.
His Worship, secondly, proposed, that since the General Charity may possibly be an inducement to certain persons to become Masons merely to be admitted to the Benefit thereof : That it be a Resolution of the Grand Lodge that the Brethren subscribing any Petitions of Charity should be able to certify that they have known the Petitioner in reputable or at least in tollerable circumstances.
These proposals of the Grand Master, together with some others referring to the fund of Charity, " were received with great unanimity and agreed to." Then a Motion was made that Dr. James Anderson should be desired to print the Names (in his New Book of Constitutions) of all the Grand Masters that could be collected from the beginning of time, also of the Deputy Grand Masters, Grand Wardens and of the Brethren who have served the Craft in the Quality cf Stewards, which was thought necessary‑Because it is Resolved, that for the future, all Grand Officers (except the Grand Master) shall be selected out of that Body.
The business of this important meeting having been brought to a satisfactory close, " his Lordship was pleased to order "‑so the Minutes inform us‑" a large quantity of Rack, that was made a present of, from Bengall, to be made into Punch and to be distributed among the Brethren." Lord Weymouth, who became the next head of the Society, was installed THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 91 April 17, 1735, but left all business to be transacted by his Deputy John (afterwards Lord) Ward, in which capacity the latter presided at a Quarterly Communication, held June 24 and, as the Minutes inform us very justly took notice of the great want of order that had sometimes happened in the debates of these Assemblies and earnestly recommended to those present, the preserving proper Decency and Temper in the management of the Debates; and advised that only one person should speak at a time, desiring only that the Practice of the Grand Lodge in this case might be a fitt Pattern to be followed by every Private Lodge.
On the same occasion, a memorial was read from the Stewards, praying i. That they might meet monthly or otherwise, as a Lodge of Master Masons (under the Denomination of the Stewards' Lodge) and be enrolled among the number of the Lodges as usual, with the times of their meeting.
z. That they might be so far distinguished (since all the Grand Officers are for the future appointed to be chosen out of their number) as to send a deputation of 12 from the whole body of Stewards to each Quarterly Communication. All the 12 to have voices and to pay half a crown apiece towards the expense of that occasion.
3. That no one who had not served the Society as a Steward might be permitted to wear the Coloured Ribbonds or Aprons. But that such as had been Stewards might wear a particular jewel suspended in the proper Ribbond wherein they appear as Masons.
On a division being taken, the privileges sought to be obtained were granted, " 45 of the Assembly being in the Affirmative, and 4z in the negative." It was also declared‑That the i z Stewards for any coming year might attend in their proper colours and on paying as usual for 4 Lodges, but are not to be allowed to vote, nor to be heard in any debate, unless relating to the ensuing Feast.
The twelve Stewards appeared for the first time in their new badges at a Grand Lodge, held December 11, 1735‑ Sir Robert Lawley, Master of the newly constituted Stewards' Lodge, " reported that Br. Clare, the Junior Grand Warden, had been pleased to entertain it on the first visiting Night with an excellent Discourse containing some Maxims and Advice that concerned the Society in General, which at the time seemed to their own Lodge and an hundred visiting Brethren," worthy of being read before the Grand Lodge itself‑which was accordingly done, it being " received with great attention and applause " and the lecturer " desired to print the same." After these amenities, the proceedings were diversified by the presentation of a petition and appeal, signed by several Masters of Lodges against the privileges granted to the Stewards' Lodge at the last Quarterly Communication. The Appellants were heard at large and, the question being put, whether the determina‑ 92 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o tion of the last Quarterly Communication, relating to that matter, should be confirmed or not. In the course of the collecting the votes on this occasion, there appeared so much confusion, that it was not possible for the Grand Officers to determine with any certainty what the numbers on either side of the question were. They were therefore obliged to dismiss the Debate and close the Lodge.
Martin Clare, the Junior Grand Warden, acted on this occasion as Deputy Grand Master and George Payne (by desire) as Grand Master, with Jacob Lamball and Dr. Anderson as his Wardens pro tempore.
To the presence, perhaps, in the official chairs, of the three veterans, whose services as Grand Officers began before those of the Grand Stewards had any existence, may be due the fact, that, for once at least, the pretensions of the latter met with a signal check. At the next meeting of the Grand Lodge, however, held April 6, 1736, Ward was present and in the chair, with Desaguliers sitting as his Deputy and against the influence of these two supporters of the Stewards' Lodge, combined with that of several noblemen who also attended on the occasion, Payne, Lamball and Anderson, though reinforced by the presence of a fourth veteran ‑Josiah Villeneau, Grand Warden in 1721‑must have felt that it would be useless to struggle.
The appeal does not seem to have been proceeded with, though the principle it involved was virtually decided (without debate) by the members of Grand Lodge being declared to be‑i. The four present and all former Grand Officers ; z. The Master and Wardens of all constituted (i.e. regular) Lodges; and 3. The Master and Wardens and nine representatives of the Stewards' Lodge.
It was not until June 24, 1741, that " the Treasurer, Secretary and Swordbearer of the Society were declared members of every Quarterly Communication or Grand Lodge " ; and it was only decided, after a long debate, on June 14, 175 3, that " the Treasurer was a ` Grand Officer,' by virtue of his office and as such, to be elected from amongst the Brethren who had served the Stewardship." As the right of the members of the Stewards' Lodge in general to attend the Committee of Charity appeared doubtful, the Grand Lodge wag of opinion they had not a general right to attend. But in order to make a proper distinction between that and the other Lodges, a motion was made [and adopted], that as the Master alone of each private Lodge had a right to attend, so that Master and three other members should attend on behalf of the Stewards' Lodge, at every succeeding Committee. (Grand Lodge Minutes, February 7, 1770.) Frederick, Prince of Wales, became a member of the Society in 1737 and the New Book of Constitutions was published in 1738, the same year in which the first Papal Bull was issued against the Freemasons. With the exception of these events and the issue of Deputations for the purpose of founding Lodges in foreign parts, there is nothing of moment to chronicle from April 15, 1736, when the sequence of Grand Masters was continued by the installation of the Earl of Loudoun, down THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 93 to May 3, 1739, when Henry, Marquess of Carnarvon, who followed the Earl of Darnley in the chair, in turn gave place to Lord Raymond.
On June 12, 1739, the members of Grand Lodge were " moved to take into their future consn. the complaint concerning the irregular making of Masons," brought before them in the previous June.
Whereupon the Grand Master [Lord Raymond] took notice, that although some Brothers might have been guilty of an offence tending so much to destroy the Cement of the Lodge and so utterly inconsistent with the Rules of the Society, yet he could not bring himself to believe that it had been done otherwise than through Inadvertency and, therefore, proposed that if any such Brothers there were, they might be forgiven for this time, which was Ordered accordingly; also that the Laws be strictly put in Execution against all such Brothers as shall for the future countenance, connive, or assist at any such irregular makings.
A summary of these proceedings is given in the Constitutions of 1756, 1767 and 1784; but in the edition last named, we meet with a note of fifty lines, extending over three pages, which, from its appearance in a work sanctioned and recommended by the Masonic authorities, has led to a wide diffusion of error with regard to the historical points it was placed there to elucidate. It does not even possess the merit of originality, for the compiler or editor, John Noorthouck, took it without acknowledgment from Preston, by whom the statements it contains were first given to the world in a manner peculiarly his own, from which those familiar with the general proportion borne by the latter's assertions to the actual truth will believe that the note in question rests on a very insecure foundation of authority. Besides the affairs of the Society in 1739, it also professes to explain the causes which led to the great Schism.
Lord Raymond was succeeded in April 174o by the Earl of Kintore, who had only retired from the presidency of the Grand Lodge of Scotland in the previous November. He was Master of the Lodge of _Aberdeen from 1735 to 1738 inclusive; also that as Grand Master of the Scottish, as well as of the English Craft, he was succeeded by the Earl of Morton.
On July 23, 1740 Br░. Berrington informed the [Grand] Lodge that several Irregularities in the making of Masons having been lately committed and other Indecencies offered in the Craft by several Brethren, he cautioned the Masters and Wardens against admitting such persons into their Lodges. And thereupon, several Brethren insisting that such Persons should be named, the same was, after a long Debate and several Questions put‑Ordered accordingly. When Br░ Berrington informed the Lodge that Br░ George Monkman has a list of several such persons, he, on being required to do so, named Esquire Cary, Mansell Bransby and James Bernard, late Stewards, who assisted in an irregular Making.
The Minutes of this meeting terminated somewhat abruptly with the words When it being very late, the Lodge was closed.
94 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑60 No further proceedings in the matter are recorded, nor, indeed, are any irregularities of the kind again mentioned in the official records until 1749, when Lord Byron had entered upon the third year of his grand mastership. This, con jointly with the circumstance that Berrington and Monkman, as well as the others, were former Grand Stewards, whose position in those days corresponded very closely with that of Grand Officers in our own, demands very careful attention.
It is evident that the authority of Grand Lodge was in no wise seriously menaced between 174o and 1749, as the stream of historians would have us believe ; indeed, on the contrary, the absolute silence oú the records, with regard to infractions of Old and New Regulation VIII during the period in question, sufficiently proves that, for a time, at least, in the regular Lodges, they had entirely ceased. This supposition is strengthened, however, by the evidence last presented, from which it would appear that irregularities were committed by the thoughtless, as well as by those %A ho were wilfully disobedient to the laws ; and that, in both cases, the governing body was quite able to vindicate its authority.
On June 24, 1741, it was ordered by Grand Lodge that the proceedings of Lodges and the names of Brethren present at meetings should not, in future, be printed without the permission of the Grand Master or his Deputy. Also " that no new Lodge should for the future be constituted within the Bills of Mortality, without the consent of the Brethren assembled in Quarterly Communication first obtained for that purpose." The latter regulation, being found detrimental to the Craft, was repealed March z3, 1742 and, in lieu thereof, it was resolved " that every Brother do conform to the law made February i g, 172J, `that no Brother belong to more than one Lodge within the Bills of Mortality.' " Lord Ward, who succeeded the Earl of Morton in April 1742, was well acquainted with the nature and government of the Society, having served every office from the Secretary in a private Lodge to that of Grand Master. The adminis tration of the Earl of Strathmore, who next presided over the Society, is associated with no event of importance ; and of that of his successor, Lord Cranstoun, it is only necessary to record that on April 3, 1747, a resolution was passed, discontinuing for the future the usual procession on the feast day.
The occasion of this prudent regulation was, that some unfaithful Brethren, disappointed in their expectations of the high offices and honours of the Society, had joined a number of the buffoons of the day, in a scheme to exhibit a mockery of the public procession to the grand feast. (Constitutions, 1784, p. 253‑) Lord Byron was elected Grand Master on April 3o, 1747 and presided over the Fraternity until March zo, 175z, but was only present in Grand Lodge on those dates and, on March 16, 1752, when he proposed Lord Carysfort as his successor. During the presidency of this nobleman, which lasted for five years, the affairs of the Society were much neglected and to this period of misrule‑aggravated by the summary erasure of Lodges‑we must look for the cause of that organized rebellion THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 95 against authority. Only one Grand Lodge (besides the Grand Feast of April 30) was held in 1747 ; in 1748 there were two ; in 1749 and 1750, one each ; in 1751, two. Between, moreover, these several Communications, there were, in two instances, great intervals of time‑that of June 175o being held thirteen and that of September 17 fifteen, months after its immediate predecessor.
The same Grand Officers and Grand Stewards continued in office from 1747 until 1752, which is the more remarkable because the honours of the Craft were much coveted. The Stewards were an influential body and, from 1728 to 1747, with but two exceptions‑1742‑43 and 1745‑46, when Lords Ward and Cranstoun respectively had second terms‑twelve Stewards were annually appointed.
In Multa Paucis a statement occurs, which though the work is not one of much authority, must have had some foundation in fact, the more especially as the event it professes to record is only said to have happened about eleven or twelve years previously and, therefore, stands on quite another footing, historically speaking, from the earlier part of the same publication.
The following is the passage referred to Grand Master Byron was very inactive. Several years passed by without his coming to a Grand Assembly, nay, even neglected to nominate his successor. The Fraternity, finding themselves intirely neglected, it was the Opinion of many old Masons to have a consultation about electing a new and more active Grand Master and assembled for that Purpose, according to an Advertisement, which accidentally was perceived by our worthy Brother, Thomas Manningham, M.D., who, for the Good of Masonry, took the trouble upon him to attend at this Assembly and gave the Fraternity the most prudent Advice for their future Observance and lasting Advantage. They all submitted to our worthy Brother's superior judgement, the Breach was healed.
The Minutes of the Grand Lodge are provokingly silent throughout the period under examination and the only entry which needs allusion occurs under May z6, 1749, when a Bro. Mercado having acknowledged his fault and explained that a person made a Mason irregularly, had agreed to be regularly made the next Lodge night at the George in Ironmonger Lane, was, at the intercession of the Master and Wardens of the said Lodge, forgiven.
Lord Byron, who, we learn, " had been abroad for several years," proposed Lord Carysfort as his successor on March 16 and the latter was duly placed in the chair on March zo, 1752, when " all expressed the greatest joy at the happy Occasion of their Meeting, after a longer recess than had been usual." Dr. Manningham, who had been one of the Grand Stewards under Lord Byron, was appointed Deputy Grand Master, although, unlike all his predecessors in that office from .1735, he had not previously served as a Grand Warden, a qualification deemed so indispensable in later years, as to be affirmed by a resolution of the Committee of Charity.
96 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o This points to his having rendered signal services to the Society, which would so far harmonize with the passage in Multa Pauris and be altogether in keeping with the character of the man. (Constitutions, 1756, p. .258.) On June 18, 1752, complaint was made in Grand Lodge, " of the frequency of irregular makings‑when the Deputy Grand Master recommended the Brethren to send to him or the Grand Secretary the names of such as shall be so irregularly made and of those who make them." At this date, however, the secession had assumed form and cohesion and although the recusant Masons had not yet formed a Grand Lodge, they were governed by a Grand Committee, which was the same thing except in name.
On November 23, 175 3, it was enacted, That no Lodge shall ever make a Mason without due inquiry into his character, neither shall any Lodge be permitted to make and raise the same Brother at one and the same Meeting, without a dispensation from the Grand Master, which on very particular occasions may be requested.
Also, That no Lodge shall ever make a Mason for a less sum than one Guinea and that Guinea to be appropriated either to the private Fund of the Lodge, or to the Publick Charity, without deducting from such Deposit any Money towards the Defraying the Expense of the Tyler, etc.
The latter resolution was not to extend, however, to waiters or other menial servants.
Lord Carysfort was succeeded by James, Marquess of Carnarvon‑son of the Duke of Chandos, a former Grand Master‑who, on investment‑March 25, 1754‑continued Dr. Manningham as his Deputy. In this year a committee was appointed to revise the Book of Constitutions; twenty‑one country Lodges were erased for nonconformity with the laws; and some irregularities were committed by a Lodge meeting at the Ben Jonson's Head in Pelham Street, Spitalfields, through which we first learn, in the records under examination, of the existence of so‑called Antient Masons, who claimed to be independentňof the Grand Lodge of 1717 and, as such, neither subject to its laws nor to the authority of its Grand Master.
According to Laurence Dermott, the members of this Lodge, No. 94, " were censured, not for assembling under the denomination of ` Antient Masons,' but for practising Antient Masonry " (Ahiman Kep,,on, 1778) ; which is incorrect, as they were guilty of both these offences. The former they admitted and the latter was substantiated by the evidence of " Bro‑ Jackson and Pollard, who had been refused admittance at those Meetings until they submitted to be made in their novel and particular Manner." (Grand Lodge Minutes, March 8, 1754; March 2o and July 24, 175 5.) For these practices the Lodge was very properly erased and it is curious that the only hands held up in its favour were those of the representatives of the Lodge then meeting at the Fish and Bell‑Original No. 3.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 97 The Marquess of Carnarvon was succeeded by Lord Aberdour, afterwards 16th Earl of Morton, a former Grand Master of Scotland (1755), May 18, 1757, of whose administration it will be sufficient to record that, on January 24, 176o, a resolution was passed to the effect that the sum of fifty pounds be sent to Germany, to be distributed among the soldiers who were Masons in Prince Ferdinand's army, whether English, Hanoverians, or Hessians.
In the Freemasons' Calendar of 1776, however, the disturbances, which we are told had their origin in 1739, are traced back to the time of Lord Loudoun, whose appointment of Grand Officers in 1736, Preston informs us, gave offence to a few individuals, who withdrew from the Society during the presidency of the Earl of Darnley, but in that of Lord Raymond " assembled in the character of Masons and without any power or authority from the Grand Master, initiated several persons into the Order for small and unworthy considerations." (Illustrations of Masonry, pp. 19, 2o.) Ultimately the story assumed the stereotyped form in which we now possess it. Successive editions of the Illustrations of Masonry, published in 1781, 1788, 1792 and later, inform us that in the time of Lord Carnarvon (1738) some discontented Brethren, taking advantage of the breach between the Grand Lodges of London and York, assumed, without authority, the character of York Masons ; that the measures adopted to check them seemed to authorize an omission of and a variation in, the ancient ceremonies; that the seceders immediately announced independency and assumed the appellation of Antient Masons, also they propagated an opinion that the ancient tenets and practices of Masonry were preserved by them ; and that the Regular Lodges, being composed of Modern Masons, had adopted new plans and were not to be considered as acting under the old establishment. (Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, pp. 285, et seq.) Here we meet with an‑anachronism, for the proceedings of the Grand Lodge of 1738 are certainly confused with those of a much later date. But the chief interest of the story lies in the statement that changes were made in the established forms, " which even the urgency of the case could not warrant." Although, indeed, the passages last quoted were continued in the editions of his work published after 1789, they were written (1781) by Preston‑a very doubtful authority at any timeduring the suspension of his Masonic privileges, when he must have been quite unable to criticise dispassionately the proceedings of the Grand Lodge, against whose'authority he had been so lately in rebellion.
It is possible that the summary erasure of Lodges for non‑attendance at the Quarterly Communications and for not " paying in their charity," may have been one of the causes of the Secession, which must have taken place during the presidency of Lord Byron (1747‑5 2). In the ten years, speaking roundly, commencing June 24, 1742, ending November 30, 1752, no fewer than forty‑five Lodges, or about a third of the total of those meeting in the metropolis, were struck out of the list. Three, indeed, were restored to their former places, but only after intervals of two, four and six years respectively. The case of the Horn Lodge has been already 98 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o referred to ; but with regard to those of its fellow‑sufferers, No. 9 was restored, " it appearing that their Non‑Attendance was occasioned by Mistake " ; also No. 54, " it appearing that their not meeting regularly had been occasioned by unavoidable Accidents." On the principle that history repeats itself, the Minutes of Sarum Lodge, later in the century, may hold up a mirror, in which is reflected the course of action adopted by the erased Lodges of 1742‑52. This Lodge, which became No. 37 at the change of numbers in 178o, was erased February 6, 1777, for non‑compliance with the order of Grand Lodge, requiring an account of registering fees and subscriptions since October 1768.
" Our refusal," says their letter in reply, dated March 19, 1777, has arisen from a strict obedience to the laws, principles and constitutions, which expressly say, " that though the Grand Lodge have an inherent power and authority to make new regulations, the real benefit of the ancient Fraternity shall in all cases be consulted and the old landmarks carefully preserved." By the late attempt of the Grand Lodge to impose a tax on the Brethren at large, under penalty of erasing them from that list wherein they have a right to stand enrolled, as long as they shall preserve the principles of that Constitution, the bounds prescribed by these landmarks seem to have been exceeded; the Grand Lodge has taken upon itself the exercise of a power hitherto unknown; the ancient rules of the Fraternity (which gave freedom to every Mason) have been broke in upon ; and that decency of submission, which is produced by an equitable government, has been changed to an extensive and, we apprehend, a justifiable resistance to the endeavours of the Grand Lodge.
The Lodge was restored May 1, 1777, but on a further requisition from the Grand Lodge of two shillings per annum from each Brother towards the Liquidation Fund, the members met, November I9, 18oo and unanimously agreed not to contribute to this requisition. After which, a proposal for forming a Grand Lodge in Salisbury, independent of the Grand Lodge of England, was moved and carried. (F. H. Goldney, History of Freemasonry in Ililtshire, 188o, pp. i o9‑i 9.) The arbitrary proceedings of 174z‑5z were doubtless as much resented in London, as those of 1777‑99 were in the country. Though the last Lodge warranted in 175 5 bore the number 271, only zoo Lodges were carried forward at the closingup and alteration of numbers in 1756.
According to the Engraved Lists, Lodges were constituted by the Grand Lodge of England at Madrid in 1728 ; in Bengal, 1730; at Paris, 1,732 ; Hamburgh and Boston (U.S.A.), 1733 ; the Hague, Lisbon and in Georgia, 1735 ; in the West Indies, 1738 ; Switzerland, 1739 ; Denmark, 1745 ; Minorca, 1750 ; Madras, 175z; Virginia, 1753 ; and in Bombay, 1758. Deputations were also granted to a number of persons in foreign countries, but of these no exact record has been preserved.
Among the early Grand Masters who were Fellows of the Royal Society, may be named Dr. Desaguliers, the Duke of Montagu, the Earls of Dalkeith, Strathmore, Crawford and Morton, Lords Paisley and Colerane‑and Francis Drake, who
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1723‑6o 99 presided over the Grand Lodge at York. The Duke of Lorraine and the Chevalier Ramsay were likewise both Brethren and Fellows.
The following Deputies were also F.R.S. ; Martin Folkes, 1724; W. Grxme, 1739; Martin Clare, 1741 ; E. Hody, 1745‑46; so were Sir J. Thornhill, S.G.W., 1728 ; Richard Rawlinson, Grand Steward, 1734; whilst it may interest some readers to learn that William Hogarth, son‑in‑law of the former, served the Stewardship in 173 5. Of the other Grand Stewards down to the year 176o it will be sufficient to name John Faber, 1740; Mark Adston, 1753 ; Samuel Spencer, 1754; the Rev. J. Entick, 1755 ; Jonathan Scott, 1758‑59.
Editions of the Book of Constitutions appeared in 1723, 1738, 1746 and 1756. The last named was compiled by the Rev. John Entick and published by Jonathan, Scott; in it some alterations in and additions to the Ancient Charges, which had disfigured the second edition, were omitted. The spirit of toleration which breathes in the Masons' creed has been attributed by Findel and others to the influence of certain infidel writers. But of these, Woolston was probably mad and, as remarked by a contemporary, " the devil lent him a good deal of his wickedness and none of his wit." Chubb was almost wholly uneducated; and, although Collins, Tindal and Toland discussed grave questions with grave arguments, they were much inferior in learning and ability to several of their opponents and they struggled against the pressure of general obloquy. The deist was liable to great social contempt and, in the writings of Addison, Steele, Pope and Swift he was habitually treated as external to all the courtesies of life. A simpler reason for the language of the Charge, " Concerning God and Religon," will be found in the fact that Anderson was a Presbyterian and Desaguliers an Episcopalian; whilst others, no doubt, of the Grand Officers of that year were members of the older faith. It is therefore reasonable to suppose that they united on a platform which would divide them the least; and, in so doing, the churchmen among them may have consoled themselves with the reflection, that Cumberland, Bishop of Peterborough, had, many years before (1672), endeavoured to construct a system of morals without the aid of theology. At the same time it must freely be conceded, that the principles of inductive philosophy which Bacon taught, which the Royal Society had strengthened, had acquired a complete ascendancy over the ablest minds. Perhaps therefore the object of these prescient Brethren, to whom is due the absence of sectarianism in our Charges, may be summed up in the words of Bishop Spratt (1667), the first and best historian of the Royal Society, who thus describes the purposes of its founders As for what belongs to the members themselves, that are to constitute the Society, it is to be noted that they have freely admitted men of different religions, countries and professions of life. This they were obliged to do, or else they would come far short of the largeness of their own declarations. For they openly profess not to lay the foundation of an English, Scottish, Irish, Popish, or Protestant philosophy‑but a philosophy of mankind.
CHAPTER III FREEMASONRY IN YORK HERE has been cited the " Parchment Roll " as evidence of the character of the old Lodge at York from March 19, 171z, down to December 27, 1725, during which period the records testify that the meetings were simply entitled those of a Lodge, Society, Fraternity, or Company of " Antient and Honourable Assemblies of Free and Accepted Masons." Other evidences of the existence of the Lodge at York have also been given, dating back to the seventeenth century, notably the York MS. of A.D. 1693, facsimile of which has been given in Hughan's Old Charges, which contains " the names of the Lodg "; six in all, including the Warden. A still earlier relic is a mahogany flat rule or gauge, with the following names and year incised William X;X Baron 1663 of Yorke 3 Iohn Drake Iohn 0 Baron.
Todd, in The Freemason for November 15, 1884, is inclined to think that the John Drake mentioned was collated to the Prebendal Stall of Donnington in the cathedral church of York in October 1663 and, if so, Francis Drake, the historian, was a descendant, which, to say the least, is very probable.
Considerable activity was manifested by the York Brotherhood from 1723 ‑the year when the premier Grand Lodge of England published its first Book of Constitutions‑and particularly during 1725.
The following will complete the roll of meetings (1712‑30), of which the first portion has been already furnished.
This day Dec. 27, 1725, Being the Festival of St. John the Evangelist, the Society went in Procession to Merchant's Hall, where, after the Grand Feast was over, they unanimously chose the Worsp'. Charles Bathurst, Esqre., their Grand Master, Mr. Johnson his Deputy, Mr. Pawson and Mr. Drake, Wardens, Mr. Scourfield, Treasurer, and Inigo Russell, Clerk for the ensuing year.
Dec. 31, 1725.‑At a private Lodge held at Mr. Luke Lowther's, at the Starr in Stonegate, the underwritten Gentleman was sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons. [Name omitted.] Jan. 5, 1725‑6.‑At a private Lodge held at Mr. John Colling's at ye White Swan in Petergate, the underwritten persons were sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons. Thomas Preston. Martin Crofts.
FREEMASONRY IN YORK Feb. 4, 1725‑6.‑At a private Lodge at the Star, in Stonegate, Sr William Milner, Bart., was sworn and admitted into the Society of Free Masons.
Wm. Milner.
Mar. 2, 1725‑6.‑At a private Lodge at the White Swan in Petergate, the undernamed Gentleman was sworn and admitted into the Society of Free Masons. John Lewis.
Apr. 2, 1726.‑At a private Lodge at ye Starr in Stonegate, the following Gentlemen were sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons. Robert Kaye.
W. Wombell. Wm. Kitchinman. Cyril Arthington.
Apr. 4, 1726.‑At a private Lodge at the Star in Stonegate, the following Gentleman was sworn and admitted into ye Antient Society of Free Masons.
J. Kaye.
May 4, 1726.‑At a private Lodge at Mr. James Boreham's, the underwritten Persons were sworn and admitted into the Society of Free and Accepted Masons. Charles Guarles. Rich'. Atkinson. Sam'. Ascough. May 16, 1726.‑At a private Lodge at Mr. Lowther's at ye Star in Stonegate, the undermentioned Gentleman was sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons. Gregory Rhodes. June 24, 1726.‑At a General Lodge held at Mr. Boreham's in Stonegate, the undermentioned Gentlemen were sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons. Jon. Cossley. Wm. Johnstone. At the same time the following persons were sworn and admitted into the Honb'e. Society, vizt., William Marshall.
Matt V% Cellar.
His mark. Benjamin Campsall. William Muschamp.
Wm. Robinson. Matthew Groul. John Bradley. John Hawman.
Hughan, it may be stated, is of opinion that the records of the regular monthly meetings were kept in a separate book.
July 6, 1726.‑Whereas it has been certify'd to me that Mr. William Scourfield has presumed to call a Lodge and make Masons without the consent of the Grand Master or Deputy, and the approbation of the whole Lodge, and in opposition to the 8th article of the Constitutions, I do, with the consent of the Grand Master and the approbation of the whole Lodge, declare him to be disqualify'd from being a member of this Society, and he is for ever banished from the same.
Such members as were assisting in constituting and forming Mr. Scourfield's 101 102 FREEMASONRY IN YORK Schismatical Lodge on the 24th of the last month, whose names are John Carpenter, William Musgreve, Th. Albanson, and Th. Preston, are by the same authority liable to the same sentence, yet upon their acknowledging their Error, in being deluded and making such submission as shall be judg'd Requisite by the Grand Master and Lodge at the next monthly Meeting, shall be receiv'd into the favour of the Brotherhood, otherwise to be banish'd, as Mr. Scourfield and their names to be eras'd out of the Roll and Articles.
If any other Brother or Brothers shall hereafter separate from us, or be aiding and assisting in forming any Lodge under the said Mr. Scourfield or any other Person without due Licence for the same, He or they so offending shall be disown'd as members of this Lodge and for ever Excluded from the same.
If the reference in the first paragraph is to Regulation VIII laid down by the Grand Lodge in London (as undoubtedly it is), then this must have been a more than ordinary breach, since expulsion was the penalty here inflicted and not the fine of five pounds ordained in the Regulation cited. The York authorities were evidently determined to put down with a strong hand all irregularities on the part of the Schismatics. The William Scourfield referred to was undoubtedly identical with the Grand Treasurer elected on December 27, 172‑5. There is no record as to who was the presiding officer on July 6, 172‑6.
July 6, '7z6.‑At a private Lodge held at Mr. Geo. Gibson's, the underwritten Persons were sworn and admitted into the Antient and Honourable Society of Free Masons, vizt., Henry Tireman.
Will. Thompson.
Augt. 13, 1726.‑At a private Lodge at Mr. Lowther's at the Star in Stonegate, the underwritten Gentlemen were sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons, vizt., Bellingham Graham.
Nic░. Roberts.
Dec. 13, 1726.‑At a private Lodge at the Star in Stonegate, the Right Honb'e. Arthur Ld. Viscount Irvin was sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons. A. Irwin.
This was Arthur Ingram, sixth Viscount Irwin, brotber of the fourth, fifth, seventh, and eighth Viscounts. He was born at Temple Newsam, Yorks, in 1689, matriculated at Oriel College, Oxford, on June 2‑5, 17o6, entered as a Student at Lincoln's Inn on June 13, 17o6. He was M.P. for Horsham from June 1715 to April 1721, when he succeeded to the peerage. He was Lord‑Lieutenant of the East Riding in 172‑8. He died on May 30, 1736. These and other biographical details, which will be given, may be regarded as rebutting a statement sometimes made that the personnel of York Freemasonry was, on the whole, plebeian.
Dec. 15, 172‑6.‑At a private Lodge at the Star in Stonegate, the undernamed Persons were sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons.
Jno. Motley. Wm. Davile. Thos. Snowsell.
FREEMASONRY IN YORK 103 Dec. 22, 1726.‑At a private Lodge at the Star in Stonegate, the undernamed Persons were sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Free Masons. Richard Woodhouse. Robart Tilburn.
June 24, 1729.‑At St. John's Lodge held at ye Starr in Stonegate, the following Gentlemen were sworn and admitted into the Antient Society of Freemasons, vizt., Basil Forcer.
John Lamb.
The same day Edward Thompson, Junior of Marston, Esqr., was chosen Grand Master. Mr. John Wilmer, Deputy Grand Master, Mr. Geo. Rhodes and Mr. Geo. Reynoldson, Grand Wardens, for ye year ensuing and afterwards the Grand Master was pleased to order the following appointment, viz., I do appoint Dr. Johnson, Mr. Drake, Mr. Marsden, Mr. Denton, Mr. Brigham, Mr. R. Marsh, and Mr. Etty to assist in regulating the state of the Lodge and redressing from time to time any inconveniences that may arise. Edwd. Thompson, Gr. Mr.
May 4, 17zo.‑At a private Lodge at Mr. Colling's, being the Sign of ye White Swan in Petergate, York, it was order'd by the Dep. Mastr. then present‑That if from thenceforth any of the officers of y Lodge should be absent from ye Company at ye Monthly Lodges, they shall forfeit the sum of one shilling for each omission. John Wilmer, Dep. G.M.
With regard to the last four entries, Findel, in his History of Freemasonry, writes After the Minutes of December 22, 1726, a considerable space is left in the page and then follow the Minutes of June 21, 1729, wherein it is said that two Gentlemen were received into the St. John's Lodge and their election confirmed by vote Edw. Thompson, Esq., Grand Master; John Willmers, Deputy Grand Master; G. Rhodes and Reynoldson, Grand Wardens. The Grand Master on his part appointed a Committee of seven Brothers, amongst whom was Drake, to assist him in the management of the Lodge and every now and then support his authority in removing any abuses which might have crept in.
The Lodge was, however, at its last gasp and, therefore, the Committee seem to have effected but little, for, on May 4, 1730, it was found necessary to exact the payment of a shilling from all officers of the Lodge who did not make their appearance; and with this announcement the Minutes close.
This, however, is not a fair inference. It is the custom at the present day to inflict a fine upon any officers of a Provincial Grand Lodge who may be absent without valid excuse from a meeting of the Provincial Grand Lodge and it was at one time, the rule to inflict a fine, not only upon officers, but also upon ordinary members who might be absent, without just cause, from a Lodge meeting.
It will be at once noticed that the Festival of St. John the Evangelist, 1725, was celebrated under somewhat different circumstances from any of those held previously, inasmuch as it was termed the " Grand Feast," the " President " of former years being now the " Grand Master " and a Deputy Grand Master and Grand Wardens, Treasurer and Clerk were also elected. It is impossible to arrive at any other conclusion than that this expansion of the Northern organization was 104 FREEMASONRY IN YORK due to the formation of the premier Grand Lodge in 1717, of which doubtless the York Fraternity had been informed and who, therefore, desired to follow the example of the Lodges in London, by having a Grand Master to rule over them.
A point much discussed of late years is the number of Lodges which are essential to the legal constitution of a Grand Lodge, for even if the minimum were fixed at three or five, as some advocate, the York organization would be condemned as illegal. Laurence Dermott pronounced the Grand Lodge of England, constituted in London in 1717, to be defective in numbers, because he said, " in order to form a Grand Lodge, there should have been the Masters and Wardens of five regular Lodges" (see Ahiman Re.Zon, 3rd ed., 1778, p. 14). It must, however, be borne in mind, that in 1725, as in 1717, there were no laws to govern the Craft as to the constitution of Grand Lodges, the first of its kind being only some eight years old when the second Grand Lodge was inaugurated; and though the Northern Authority was not the result, so far as is known, of a combination of Lodges, as in London, clearly there was as much right to form such an organization in the one case as in the other.
It is to be regretted that the records of the " Four Old Lodges " do not antedate those of the " Grand Lodge " they brought into existence, as fortunately happens in the case of the single Lodge which blossomed into the " Grand Lodge of All England, held at York " and assuredly the priority of a few years cannot be urged as a reason for styling the one body legal and denying such a position to the other. Apparently for some years the York Grand Lodge was without any chartered subordinates, but that of itself does not invalidate its claim to be the chief authority, at least for Yorkshire and the neighbouring counties. That it emanated from an old Lodge at work for years prior to the creation of the London Grand Lodge, there cannot be a doubt ; the records preserved going back to 1712, whilst others ranging from 1705 were extant in the last century. These extend throughout and indeed overlap, that obscure portion of our annals, viz. the epoch of transition. It has long been assumed that this Lodge of 1705‑I z and later, is the same as the one alluded to in the Minster Archives of the fourteenth century. It may be so and the popular belief is perhaps the true one, but until it is supported by at least a modicum of evidence, it would be a waste of time to proceed with its examination. There is, however, absolutely nothing now to connect the York Lodge of the eighteenth and, very probably, of the seventeenth century, with any Lodges of earlier date, although, of course, the possibility and even the probability, of the former being a lineal descendent of the latter must be conceded.
In the brief registers of the meetings from 1725 to 1730, it will be seen that after the year 1725, even when Festivals were held, they are not described as Grand Lodge assemblies ; but that some of them were so regarded is evident from the speech delivered by Francis Drake, F.R.S., " Junior Grand Warden," at the celebration of the Festival of St. John the Evangelist in 1726. This well‑known antiquary was familiar with the Constitutions of 1723, for he styles Dr. Anderson " The Learned Author of the Antiquity of Masonry, annexed to which are our Constitu‑ FREEMASONRY IN YORK 105 tions " and adds, " that diligent Antiquary has traced out to us those many stupendous works of the Antients, which were certainly and without doubt, infinitely superior to the Moderns." Dr. Bell, in his Stream of English Freemasonry, says A noted Procession at York and a Charge delivered by Brother Francis Drake, Senior Grand Warden, which was so favoured by the Grand Lodge in London that it was printed by their printer and inserted amongst others published by their order.
Francis Drake was junior and not Senior Grand Warden, as may be verified by the title of the pamphlet, which was as follows A Speech delivered to the Worshipful and Ancient Society of Free and Accepted Masons, at a Grand Lodge held at Merchants' Hall, in the city of York, on St. John's Day, December the 27th, 1726. The Right Worshipful Charles Bathurst, Esq., Grand Master. By the Junior Grand Warden. Olim meminisse Juvabit. York Printed by Thomas Gent, for the benefit of the Lodge.
There is no date to the pamphlet, which was dedicated to Daniel Draper, Esq. Findel says that another edition was published in London in 1727 or 17zc9 and a further edition by Creake and Cole in 1734. Cole also reprinted the speech in his Constitutions of the Freemasons, for the edition of 1728 and it was reproduced in the Freemasons' Magazine for 1794, p. 3 z9, again in 18 5 8, p. 726. Hughan has also reproduced it in his Masonic Sketches.
There is a lengthy biography of Francis Drake in the Dictionary of National Biography, so that it is necessary here only to say that he was a Yorkshireman by birth, the son of the Rev. Francis Drake, Vicar of Pontefract, a living held by the family for three generations and Prebendary of York. He was born in 1695 and in early life established himself at York as a surgeon and practised with considerable reputation, but antiquarian researches became his favourite occupation, in which he was free to indulge, as he was possessed of sufficient means. He was elected F.S.A. on February 27, 1735‑6 and F.R.S. on June io, 1736. His principal work was Eboracum, or the History and Antiquities of the City of York from its Original to the Present Time, which was published in 1836. He also published a Parliamentary History of England to the Restoration and wrote many essays in the Archceologia and contributed many articles to the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. He died in 177o and a memorial to his memory stands in St. Mary's Church, Beverley. In his oration Drake referred to the three classes of members of which the Lodge at York was composed, viz. " Working Masons; persons of other Trades and Occupations; and Gentlemen." He recommended the first carefully to read the Constitutions ; the second to obey the moral precepts of the Society and to attend to their own business‑" Let not Masonry so far get the Ascendant as to make you neglect the support of yourselves and Families "‑and the third, to acquire io6 FREEMASONRY IN YORK a knowledge of the Arts and Sciences and particularly Geometry and Architecture. Addressing the last class, he said 'Tis true by Signs, Words and Tokens, you are put upon a level with the meanest Brother; but then you are at liberty to exceed them as far as a superior Genius and Education will conduct you. I am creditably informed that in most Lodges in London and several other parts of this Kingdom, a Lecture on some point of Geometry or Architecture is given at every meeting. And why the Mother Lodge of them all should so far forget her own Institutions, cannot be accounted for, but from her extreme old Age. However, being now sufficiently awaken'd and reviv'd by the comfortable Appearance of so many worthy Sons, I must tell you that she expects that every Gentleman who is called a Free Mason should not be startled at a Problem in Geometry, a Proposition in Euclid, or, at least, be wanting on the History and just Distinction of the Five Orders of Architecture.
Drake's statement that " the first Grand Lodge ever held in England was held at York," we need not pause to examine, its absurdity having been fully demonstrated in earlier chapters. If, indeed, for " Grand Lodge," we substitute "Assembly," the contention may perhaps be brought within the region of possibility and the ingenious speculation that the meeting in question was held under the auspices of " Edwin, the first Christian King of the Northumbers, about the Six Hundredth year after Christ, who laid the Foundation of our Cathedral," is at least entitled to consideration, notwithstanding the weakness of its attestation. Not so, however, the assertions, that " King Edwin " presided as " Grand Master " and that the York Lodge is " the Mother Lodge of them all," which will serve rather to amuse, than to convince the readers of this history. The explanation offered by Drake with regard to " Edwin of the Northumbers " does not seem to have been popular at any time, either with the York Masons, or with the Craft at large, for the date ascribed to the apocryphal Constitutions of 9z6 has been almost invariably preferred by 'the Brethren in the north and Laurence Dermott was not slow to follow their example, as will be seen further on. The Old Charges explicitly refer to Prince Edwin temp. Athelstan and to no one else, as being the medium of procuring for the Masons the privilege of holding their Assemblies once a year, Where they would, one of which was held at York; and, therefore, it requires something more than the colourable solution of Drake, to set aside the uniform testimony of our timehonoured Operative Constitutions. Hargrove states that In searching the Archives of Masonry, we find the first Lodge was instituted in this city (York) at a very early period ; indeed, even prior to any other recorded in England. It was termed " The Most Ancient Grand Lodge of All England " and was instituted at York by King Edwin in 9z6, as appears by the following curious extract from the ancient records of the Fraternity.
Hughan says that the extract sent him, which he inserted in his Old Charges in reference to York, from Hargrove's History, 1818, p. 476, is deficient in the FREEMASONRY IN YORK 107 following line: " and gave them the charter and commission to meet annually in communicaytion." This clause is peculiar to the MS. noted by Hargrove, which so far has escaped detection.
The first writer who treated the subject of Masonry in York at any length was Findel (see his History of Freemasonry, pp. 83, 158‑70), but the observations of this.able historian have been to a great extent superseded by a monograph from the pen of Hughan, published in 1871 (History of Freemasonry at York, forming the first essay in Masonic Sketches and Reprints). The labours, indeed, of subsidiary writers must not be ignored. Many of the articles dealing with York and its unrivalled (English) Archives, in the late Freemasons' Magazine, represent work, which in other hands would have assumed the proportion of volumes. It is now difficult, if not altogether impossible, to trace how far each historian of the Craft is indebted to those that have preceded him. Especially is this the case with regard to subjects largely discussed in publications of an ephemeral character, such as the journals of the Fraternity. There quickly arises a great mass of what is considered common property, unless, as too often happens, it is put down to the account of the last reader who quotes it. It is true that he who shortens the road to knowledge lengthens life, but we are all of us more indebted than we believe we are to that class of writers whom Johnson termed " the pioneers of literature, doomed to clear away the dirt and the rubbish, for those heroes who pass on to honour and to victory, without deigning to bestow a single smile on the humble drudge that facilitates their progress." Among those members of the Craft to whose researches we are chiefly indebted for the notices of York and its Freemasons, which lie scattered throughout the more ephemeral literature of the Craft, are some to whom we may be allowed to allude. The name of the late E. W. Shaw (see particularly Freemasons' Magazine, January to June ‑1864, p.163) was familiar to a past generation of Masonic readers, not less so than that of the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford (see his " Archives of the York Union Lodge " in the Freemasons' Magazine for April 16, 1864), whose former labours, indeed, have been eclipsed by later ones. T. B. Whytehead and Joseph Todd may be next referred to, both diligent explorers of Masonic antiquities and to whose local knowledge visitors at the old shrine of Yorkshire Masonry are so much indebted.
Evidently it was the custom to style the ordinary meetings of the York Brethren " Private Lodges," those held on Festival Days in June and December being entitled " General " or " St. John's " Lodges. It appears that Brethren who temporarily presided, in the absence of the Presidents and (subsequently) Grand Masters, were described as Masters, but they could not have been the actual Masters of the Lodge, not only because there were three Brethren so entitled, who occupied the chair at the meetings held on July zi, August io and iz, September 6 and December i, 1725, but because the Rulers at that period were named Presidents. The regular monthly meetings were apparently distinct from the " Private Lodges," the latter being additional to the ordinary assemblies and, it may well be, were convened io8 FREEMASONRY IN YORK exclusively for "makings." The numerous gatherings of the Lodge indicate that the interest of the members was well sustained, at least for a time.
The Old Rules of the Grand Lodge at York are given by Hughan in his Masonic Sketches and Reprints as transcribed from the original, written on parchment, and now in the custody of the York Lodge, No. z36, which meets at the Masonic Hall, York. They are as follows Articles agreed to be kept and observed by the Antient Society of Freemasons in the City of York and to be subscribed by every Member thereof at their Admittance into the said Society.
Imprimis.‑That every first Wednesday in the month a Lodge shall be held at the house of a Brother according as their turn shall fall out.
z.‑All Subscribers to these Articles not appearing at the monthly Lodge shall forfeit Sixpence each time.
3.‑If any Brother appear at a Lodge that is not a Subscriber to these Articles, he shall pay over and above his club [i.e. subscription] the sum of one Shilling. 4.‑The Bowl shall be filled at the monthly Lodges with Punch once, Ale, Bread, Cheese and Tobacco in common, but if any more shall be called for by any Brother, either for eating or drinking, that Brother so calling shall pay for it himself besides his club.
5.‑The Master or Deputy shall be obliged to call for a Bill exactly at ten o'clock, if they meet in the evening and discharge it.
6.‑None to be admitted to the making of a Brother but such as have subscribed to these Articles.
7.‑Timely notice shall be given to all the Subscribers when a Brother or Brothers are to be made.
8.‑Any Brother or Brothers presuming to call a Lodge with a design to make a Mason or Masons, without the Master or Deputy, or one of them deputed, for every such offence shall forfeit the sum of Five Pounds.
q.‑Any Brother that shall interrupt the Examination of a Brother shall forfeit one Shilling.
io. Clerk's Salary for keeping the Books and Accounts shall be one Shilling, to be paid him by each Brother at his admittance and at each of the two Grand days he shall receive such gratuity as the Company [i.e. those present] shall think proper.
ii.‑A Steward to be chose for keeping the Stock at the Grand Lodge, at Christmas and the Accounts to be passed three days after each Lodge.
i2.‑If any disputes arise, the Master shall silence them by a knock of the Mallet, any Brother that shall presume to disobey shall immediately be obliged to leave the Company, or forfeit five Shillings.
13.‑An Hour shall be set apart to talk Masonry.
i4.‑No person shall be admitted into the Lodge but after having been strictly examined.
15.‑No more persons shall be admitted as Brothers of this Society that shall keep a Public House.
O.‑That these Articles shall at Lodges be laid upon the Table, to be perused by the Members and also when any new Brothers are made, the Clerk shall publicly read them.
FREEMASONRY IN YORK 109 17.‑Every new Brother at his admittance shall pay to the Wait[er]s as their Salary, the sum of two shillings, the money to be lodged in the Steward's hands and paid to them at each of the Grand days.
18.‑The Bidder of the Society shall receive of each new Brother at his admittance the sum of one Shilling as his Salary [see Rule 7].
icy.‑No Money shall be expended out of the Stock after the hour of ten, as in the fifth Article.
These Laws were signed by " Ed. Bell, Master" and 87 Members ; and, though not unusual in character for the period, they are not unworthy of reproduction as the earliest regulations known of the old Lodge at York.
In the opinion of Hughan, although these Rules " offer a strange contrast to the Constitutions of the Grand Lodge of England, published two years before, we can discover sufficient of the style of their meetings to see that the Freemasons of York, at that early date, had begun to bestir themselves and assume the prerogatives of a Grand Lodge; doubtless in consequence of the London Constitutions being published, a little rivalry being engendered between the two bodies and because public attention was being directed to the Fraternity." With regard to Rule 17, it has been assumed that this is a contraction for " waiters," but it is not improbable that it really means what it says. Raine, in his Glossary of the Fabric Rolls, published in 1859, says that " Waits are musicians who still parade the towns in the north of England at Christmas time. At Durham they had a regular livery and wore a silver badge. Their musical abilities at the present time are not of the most striking character, but formerly they were deemed worthy enough to assist the choristers of the Minster." Hughan, in Masonic Sketches, gives a " Schedule of the Regalia, Records, etc.," dated September 15, 1779, but it is much to be regretted that the " narrow folio manuscript Book, beginning 7th March 1705‑6, containing sundry Accounts and Minutes relative to the Grand Lodge," is missing, all the efforts of those most interested in the discovery having so far proved abortive. With that valuable document before us, it would doubtless be easy to obtain clues to several puzzles which at present confront us. Its contents were well known in 1778, as the following letter proves, which was sent by the then Grand Secretary (York) to B. Bradley, of London (J. W. of the Lodge of Antiquity), in order to satisfy him and William Preston (P.M. of the same old Lodge and author of the famous Illustrations of Masonry) of the existence of the ancient Grand Lodge at York before the year 1717 Sir,‑In compliance with your request to be satisfied of the existence of a Grand Lodge at York previous to the establishment of that at London in 1717 I have inspected an Original Minute Book of this Grand Lodge beginning at 1705 and ending in 1734 from which I have extracted the names of the Grand Masters during that period as follows 1705 Sir George Tempest Barronet.
1707 The Right Honourable Robert Benson Lord Mayor [of York].
FREEMASONRY IN YORK 17o8 Sir William Robinson Bart. 1711 Sir Walter Hawksworth Bart. 1713 Sir George Tempest Bart. 1714 Charles Fairfax Esgr.
1720 Sir Walter Hawkesworth Bart. 1725 Edward Bell Esgr.
1726 Charles Bathurst Esgr.
1729 Edward Thompson Esqr. M.P. 1733 John Johnson Esgr. M.D. 1734 John Marsden Esqr.
It is observable that during the above period the Grand Lodge was not holden twice together at the same house and there is an Instance of its being holden once (in 1713) out of York, viz. at Bradford in Yorkshire when 18 Gentlemen of the first families in that Neighbourhood were made Masons.
In short the superior antiquity of the Grand Lodge of York to all other Lodges in the Kingdom will not admit a Doubt all the Books which treat on the subject agree that it was founded so early as the year 926 and that in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth it was so numerous that mistaking the purport of their Meeting she was at the trouble of sending an armed Force to dislodge the Brethren, it appears by the Lodge Books since that Time that this Lodge has been regularly continued and particularly by the Book above extracted that it was in being early in the present Century previous to the Era of the Aggrandised Lodge of London‑and that it now exists even the Compilers of the Masons Almanack published under the sanction of that Lodge cannot but acknowledge tho they accompany such their acknowledgement with an invidious and unmasonic Prophecy that it will be soon totally annihilated‑an event which we trust that no man nor sett of men who are mean enough to wish, shall ever live to see.
I have intimated to this Lodge what passed between us of your Intention to apply for a Constitution under it and have the satisfaction to inform you that it met with universal Aprobation‑You will therefore be pleased to furnish me with a petition to be presented for the purpose specifying the Names of the Brethren to be appointed to the several Offices and I make no Doubt that the Matter will be speedily accomplished.
My best Respects attends Brother Preston whom I expect you will make acquainted with the purport of this and hope it will be agreeable to him‑I am with true Regard Your most faithful Brother and Obedient Servant JACOB BUSSEY, G.S.
To Mr. Benjam. Bradley, N░. 3 Clements Lane Lombard Street London.
York, 29th Aug't 1778.
It is necessary here merely to observe that Grand Secretary Bussey terms the chief officers prior to December 1725, " Grand Masters " instead of " Presidents," although the title of " Grand Master " was not adopted until 1725, when the Lodge assumed the rank of a Grand Lodge.
FREEMASONRY IN YORK Presuming that the year in each case means the period of service and that the election or installation took place on the celebration of the (immediately) preceding Festival of St. John the Evangelist, that would really take the Register back to December 1704 ; when Sir George Tempest, Bart., was chosen to be the President; succeeded in 1707 by the Right Hon. Robert Benson, Lord Mayor of York (afterwards Baron Bingley) ; after whom came Sir William Robinson, Bart., for 1708 (M.P. for York, 1713) ; followed by other local celebrities, down to the year 1734. T. B. Whytehead observes most truly, that " a large proportion of the Masons at York were Lord Mayors, Aldermen and Sheriffs ; and even down to our own day it has been the same." Admiral Robert Fairfax, the " Deputy President " at Christmas 1721, was Lord Mayor in 1715 and M.P. 1n 1713 ; he was the grandson of Sir William Fairfax of Streeton and other instances might be cited of the distinguished social position of these early rulers of the Yorkshire Fraternity, most of whom were members of prominent County families. One is not, indeed, much impressed with the accuracy or critical value of the list of " Grand Masters " supplied by Jacob Bussey and for more reasons than one. Take, for instance, the names of some of the Presidents. Sir Walter Hawkesworth is recorded as the President, June 24, 1713, though not mentioned by Bussey after 1711 until 172o. Then, again, Charles Fairfax is not recognized as the chief Ruler in the minutes of Christmas 1716 and 1721, but is distinctly described as the Deputy President (" D.P.") ; neither is he anywhere termed the President in the existing Roll of 1712‑3o. His name certainly occurs as " The Worshipful Charles Fairfax, Esgre.," on June 24, 1714 ; but the same prefix was accorded to other temporary occupants of the chair, who were not Presidents at the time. The so‑called President of 1725 is simply entitled " Master " on July 2I in that year, as Scourfield and Huddy are in 1725. It is impossible, therefore, to arrive at any definite conclusion with regard to these officers as respects the list in question, nor can their status in the Lodge be even approximately determined upon the evidence before us.
Dr. J. Pearson Bell, of Hull, in his Stream of English Freemasonry, rather too confidently assumes that the tenure of office of the successive Presidents lasted from the years opposite their own names, until the dates placed by the same authority against those of their successors. This, of course, may have been sometimes the case; but we know for a certainty that it was not always so. For 1713 the same writer gives Sir Walter Hawkesworth instead of Sir George Tempest as the President, and one is inclined to agree with him in so doing, notwithstanding it is opposed to Bussey's statement. Dr. Bell bestows the title of " President " on Charles Bathurst for the year 1724 and " Edmund Bell or William Scourfield " Esquires for 1725. Charles Bathurst was not initiated until July 2i, 1725, unless, indeed, the office was held by his father, as T. B. Whytehead suggests (see The Freemason, November 8, 1884) was possible ; if so, the elder Bathurst died during his year of office and was succeeded by his son on December 27, 1725. It is possible that the year stated by the Grand Secretary was not the right one, for there are other discrepancies which have yet to be considered. So far as can now be conjectured, " George 112 FREEMASONRY IN YORK Bowes, Esq.," who was Deputy President on March 19, 1712 and August 7, 1713, was as much entitled to be described as President as either of the three gentlemen already mentioned. The Bowes were well‑known people and this George Bowes married a daughter of Sir John Legard, Bart., of Ganton. T. B. Whytehead has succeeded in tracing another Grand Master " of the Grand Lodge of All England at York," thus proving the incomplete character of the list of Masonic dignitaries supplied by the Grand Secretary of 1778. The discovery made by this excellent authority he thus relates in The Freemason of December zo, 1884 A short time ago I noticed in an old copy of Debrett a statement that the first Baronet of the Milner family was Grand Master of Freemasons in England. I knew that he had been " made " at York, as also that he had not been Grand Master of either of the Southern Bodies ; and after some inquiry and the kind assistance of Clements Markham and of Sir F. G. Milner, I have ascertained that the first Baronet was Grand Master at York in 1718‑9. In a MS. work in four volumes in the Leeds Library, entitled, A Collection of Coats of Arms and Descents of the Several Families of the Test Riding, from MSS. of John Hopkinson ; corrected by T. Wilson, of Leeds, is the following entry, under the name of Sir W. Milner " On St. John Baptist Day, 1718, at York, he was elected Grand Master of the Freemasons in England, being the 798 successor from Edwin the Great." This is an interesting addition to the list of the York Grand Masters.
The entry in the latest edition of Debrett runs: " Sir William Milner, 1st Bart., of Nun Appleton Hall, Yorks, M.P. for York 1722‑23 ; Grand Master of the Freemasons in England, was created a Baronet, 26 February, 1716‑17." In Foster's Yorkshire Pedigrees the entry is: " Sir William Milner, of Nunappleton, was educated at Eton and Cambridge, created a Baronet 26 February, 1717 ; elected M.P. for York in 17zz and 1727 ; elected Grand Master of the Freemasons in England in 1728, being the 798th successor of Edwin the Great. He died 23 November, 1745." William Milner, the father of the first Baronet, was a cloth merchant in Leeds, of which city he was mayor in 1697. He amassed a fortune, partly by his investments in the Aire and Calder navigation project. He erected a white marble statue to Queen Anne in the niche outside the Leeds Town Hall. He was granted a coat‑of‑arms in 1710 and, in 1711, he bought Nun Appleton and the manor of Bolton Percy.
The present Baronet, the seventh, the Right Hon. Sir Frederick G. Milner, who was appointed Past Grand Warden of England 111 1goi, on the occasion of the installation of the Duke of Connaught as Grand Master, is the great great‑great‑grandson of the first Baronet. He was initiated in the Churchill Lodge, No. 478, Oxford and afterwards joined the Eboracum Lodge, No. 1611, York, of which he was installed Master on November 1o, 1884. Strange to say, the discovery of the relationships was only made by the authorities of that Lodge just in time to furnish the materials for one of the most attractive FREEMASONRY IN YORK 113 features in the toast list at the subsequent banquet designed by the successful investigator.
It will be remembered that the next Grand Master, "Edward Thompson, Junior, of Marston, Esq.," was elected and installed at a " St. John's Lodge," held on June 24, 1729.
This is, perhaps, a fitting opportunity to notice some of the other personalities prominent in the York Freemasonry of the period.
Sir George Tempest, of Tonge, was the second baronet. He was born in 1672 and matriculated at University College, Oxford, at the age of sixteen years. He succeeded to the Baronetcy on June 23, 1693 and rebuilt Tonge Hall in 1702. He died in October 1745, at the age of seventy‑three years.
Robert Benson is an interesting character. He was the son and heir of Robert Benson, of Wrenthorpe, co. York (described as " an attorney of mean extraction ") by Bertha, daughter of Tobias Jenkins, of Grimston, in that county. He inherited an estate of ú1,500 a year from his father, which he largely augmented in later years. He was M.P. (sitting first as a Tory, but afterwards joining the Whigs) for Thetford, 1702‑5 and for the city of York from 1705‑13, of which city he was Lord Mayor in 1707, the year of his " Grand" Mastership. He was a Commissioner of the Treasury 111 1710‑11, under Harley's administration and Chancellor of the Exchequer from 1711‑13. On July 21, 1713, he was elevated to the peerage, under the style and title of Baron Bingley of Bingley, co. York. His elevation led to some antagonism among the more rigid members of that aristocratic body and provoked some pleasantries because of his lack of a coat‑of‑arms. He was a Director of the South Sea Company, 1711‑15 ; Privy Councillor from June 14, 1711, until September 17 14 and restored to the list on June 11, 1730, on taking office under Walpole. He was Ambassador at Madrid for Queen Anne, 1713‑14; and Treasurer to the Household of George II, 1730‑31. He obtained from the Crown the grant of an extensive tract called Bramham Manor, co. York, whereon he erected a stately mansion. He married, December 21, 1703, at St. Giles's in the Fields, Lady Elizabeth, daughter of Heneage Finch, first Earl of Aylesford (to whom he was introduced by the Earl of Portsmouth) by Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Banks, Bart. He died at the age of fifty‑five years on April 9, 173 1 and was buried on April 14 in St. Paul's Chapel, Westminster Abbey. His widow died on February 26, 1757, at the age of seventy‑eight and was buried on March ii, also in Westminster Abbey. At his death his Barony became extinct, but was revived in favour of his son‑in‑law, George Lane Fox, M.P., but he also died without male issue, when the Barony again became extinct.
Sir William Robinson, of Newby, co. York, Knight and first Baronet, was the son of Thomas Robinson, a Turkey merchant. He succeeded to the estate of Newby on the death of his uncle, Sir Metcalfe Robinson, Bart. and was himself created a Baronet on February 13, 1689‑coo, having, apparently, been knighted a short time before. He was Sheriff for co. York, 1689‑go; M.P. for Northallerton, 1689‑go and from 16go‑5 ; and for York in nine Parliaments from 1698‑1722, FREEMASONRY IN YORK of which city he was Lord Mayor in 1700. He was great‑great‑gr,, Marquess of Ripon, who was Grand Master of England from 187( _.. .~,~. lie married on September 8, 1699, at Wheldrake, Mary, daughter of George Aislabie, of Studley Royal, co. York. He died on December 22, 1736, at the age of eighty. Sir Walter Hawkesworth of Hawkesworth, second Baronet, succeeded to the Baronetcy in February 1683 and married circa 1697, Judith, daughter of John Ayscough of Osgodby, co. Lincoln. He died at York on March 17, 1735, when the Baronetcy became extinct.
Charles Fairfax was a Jacobite and, in 1715, was fined for recusancy ; his house at York was searched and his gun confiscated. The same year he was brought before his brother Robert, Lord Mayor; Sir Henry Goodricke ; Sir Walter Hawkesworth ; and Sir William Robinson and sent to gaol.
Sir Thomas Gascoigne, of Porlington, co. York, was the eighth Baronet. He was born in February 1743 and succeeded his brother on January io, 1762. He renounced the Roman Catholic faith and read the recantation of its tenets before the Archbishop of Canterbury. He was M.P. for Thirsk, 1780‑4; for Malton from April to August 1784; and for Arundel, 1795‑6. He died on February ii, 181o, when the Baronetcy became extinct.
What Jacob Bussey, G.S., intended to convey by the words, " It is observable that, during the above period, the Grand Lodge was not holden twice together at the same place," is not altogether clear, as several consecutive meetings took place at James Boreham's, 1712‑z6 and at the " Starr in Stongate," 1725‑9. Moreover, there were Lodges held in other houses more than once in the year‑e.g. at John Colling's, in Petergate, 1724‑5. Evidently, as stated by Lucy Toulmin Smith in the Introduction to English Gilds, the feast was held occasionally (or regularly) at the houses of the Brethren by turns.
It is from this letter we learn that the Lodge was held at Bradford by the York Brethren, when some eighteen gentlemen were made Masons. No mention is made of the Lodge held at Scarborough in 1705, under the presidency of William Thomp son, Esq., though there is probability that it assembled under the banner of the old Lodge at York. Hughan states, on the authority of Samuel Middleton, of Scarborough, that William Thompson was M.P. for that town in 1705 and was appointed Warden of the Mint in 1715. He died in 1744.
Preston bases his account of the York Grand Lodge on the letter of its Grand Secretary (probably with subsequent additions from the same source).
From this account [says Preston] which is authenticated by the Books of the Grand Lodge at York, it appears that the Revival of Masonry in the South of England did not interfere with the proceedings of the fraternity in the North ; nor did that event taking place alienate any allegiance that might be due to the General Assembly or Grand Lodge there, which seems to have been considered at that time and long after, as the Mother Lodge of the whole Kingdom. For a series of years the most perfect harmony subsisted between the two Grand Lodges and private Lodges flourished in both parts of the Kingdom under their separate jurisdiction. The FREEMASONRY IN YORK only mark of superiority which the Grand Lodge in the North appears to ha retained after the revival of Masonry in the South, is in the title which they claim viz. The Grand Lodge of All England, TOTIUS ANGLIIE ; while the Grand Loc in the South passed only under the denomination of " The Grand Lodge of En glan, The distinction claimed by the York Masons appears to have originated w the Junior Grand Warden on December 27, 1726 ; at least, there is no earlier reference to it that can be traced. Hughan suggests (see Illustrations of Masonry, 1788 ed., pp. 245‑6) that the title may have been a retort upon the Pope, by whom Canterbury was given a precedence over York, the Archbishop of the former city being styled " Primate of All England " and the latter " of England " only.
Preston was a warm adherent of the Northern Grand Lodge during the period of his separation from the Grand Lodge of England and, assuredly, if all he states about its antiquity and character could be substantiated, no one need wonder at his partiality being so marked. He declares that " To be ranked as descendants of the original York Masons was the glory and boast of the Brethren in almost every country where Masonry was established; and from the prevalence and universality of the idea that York was the place where Masonry was first established by Charter, the Masons of England have received tribute from the first States in Europe " (Illustrations of Masonry, p. 246). What can be said of such a statement, when, as a simple matter of fact, not a Lodge abroad was ever constituted by the York Grand Lodge and as to the tribute mentioned, there is not the slightest confirmatory evidence respecting it to be found anywhere.
The fact is, Preston doubtless wrote what he thought ought to be the case, if it were not really so, or shall we say, what he considered might be true, if the means for a full investigation were granted him.
Preston's version of the breach which occurred between the two Grand Lodges ‑London and York‑is in the form of two distinct statements, one of which must be inaccurate, as both cannot be true. According to him, it arose out " of a few Brethren at York having, on some trivial occasion, seceded from their ancient Lodge, [and] applied to London for a Warrant of Constitution. Without any inquiry into the merits of the case, their application was honoured. Instead of being recommended to the Mother Lodge, to be restored to favour, these Brethren were encouraged to revolt ; and in open defiance of an established authority, permitted under the banner of the Grand Lodge at London, to open a new Lodge in the city of York itself. This illegal extension of power and violent encroachment on the privileges of antient Masonry, gave the highest offence to the Grand Lodge at York and occasioned a breach, which time and a proper attention to the Rules of the Order, only can repair 2) (Illustrations of Masonry, 1788 ed., p. 247). His second version of the " breach " is said to be due to the encroachment of the Earl of Crawford on the " Jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Masons in the City of York, by constituting two Lodges within their district and by granting without their consent, 116 FREEMASONRY IN YORK three Deputations, one for Lancashire,/ umberland. This circumstance tl,resented and ever after seem to h, jealous eye. All friendly inte, supposed cause of unpleasar Provincial Grand Master f which it seems so trouble stance, all correspond P. 274) Those who ha view of the subject may have been led astray, for there is no ~' stantiate the allegation that at any time there was animosity side or the other; and, as Hughan, in Masonic Sketches and R, y shows, if Preston's explanations are accepted, the granting of the ~Jo. 59, Scarborough, on August 27, 1729, is quite ignored, besides wi._ shall find farther on, that a friendly correspondence on the part of the Yon_ Brand Lodge was offered the Grand Lodge of England, after the breach between them is said to have occurred, though the offer was not accepted.
It is singular also to note the error of Findel (who says in History of Freemasonry, p.165, that " Many Brethren at their own request received in London a Charter for the institution of a Lodge at York ") and other historians with respect to the invasion of the York Territory, A.D. 1734, for, as Hughan conclusively points out, there is no register of any Lodge being warranted or constituted in Yorkshire or its neighbourhood in that year. The fact is, the second Yorkshire Lodge was No. 176, Halifax, July 12, 1738 (now Probity No. 61), the first, as already stated, being the one at Scarborough of 1729 (see Four Old Lodges, pp. 51‑2).
It is not possible now to decide when the " Grand Lodge of All England " ceased to work‑that is to say, spasmodically, at least. Findel states (History of Freemasonry, p. 164) that " the York Lodge was inactive from 1730 to 1760 " and " at its last gasp " on May 30, 1730, when fines were levied for non‑attendance. The same able writer observes : " The isolated or Mother Lodge, which dates from a very early period, had, until the year 1730, neither made nor constituted any other Lodge " (Ibid., p. 166). If by the latter declaration, it is meant that a Lodge or Lodges were formed by the "Grand Lodge of All England," in 1730, there seems to be no evidence to justify the statement, but apparently collateral proof is not wanting to suggest the constitution, or at least the holding of Lodges in other parts of the country, besides York, under the authority of the Old Lodge in question, prior to 1730 ; the Assemblies at Scarborough and Bradford in 1705 and 1713 respectively being alone sufficient to support this contention.
That the Grand Lodge at York was not extinct even in 1734 is also susceptible of proof, for the Roll of Parchment, No. 9, still preserved by the present York Lodge, No. 236, which is a List of Master Masons, thirty‑five in all, indicates that meetings had been held so late as that year and probably later‑July 7, 1734, being nd for Durham and a third for Northodge at York at that time highly Grand Lodge at London with a (Ibid., p. 268). Yet another the granting of a Patent to the .; Marquess of Carnarvon, in 1738, . ork Brothers " that since that circumao Grand Lodges has ceased " (Ibid., FREEMASONRY IN YORK 117 attached to the 27th name on the Register. There are then eight more names to be accounted for, which may fairly be appr imately dated a few months farther on, if not into the year i~ 1735.
The following is the list to wb~ of parchment, z ft. 6 in. long and r is made. It is written on a slip eaded ASONS ,odge at ZORK.
`arm. Miln' gym. Wright Robt. Bainbridge Edwd. Tho. Lewis Wood Henry Tireman (illegible) John Rogers Frac Cordukes (illegible) Ric Denton July 1st 1734 John Johnson William Stephenson Steph Bulkley Henry Pearson Malby Beckwith Francis Benton Francis Drake Elbing Cressy James Hamilton Geo. Reynoldson Richard Thompson John Mellin Geo. Rhodes George Marsh George Coates Philemon Marsh Thos. Mason Christer Coulton Jno. Marsden Saml. Ascough James Carpenter Luke Lowther John Smith James Lupton John Wilmer James Boreham This list is not dated except between the names of Cordukes and Bulkley, but T. B. Whytehead says (Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, vol. xiii, p. 96) that it seems to him to point to the fact that it was begun when Edwd. Thompson was Master in 1729 and was signed subsequently by members in no particular order, but as they happened to have the opportunity of so doing.
There is no occasion to depend entirely upon the testimony of this Roll, for the Book of Constitutions, 1738, p. 196, contains the following reference to the York Lodge, which is not one likely to have been inserted, unless it was known that, about the time or year mentioned, the Lodge was still in existence.
All these foreign Lodges [i.e. those to which Deputations had been granted by the Grand Lodge of 1717] are under the Patronage of our Grant) Master of England.
But the old Lodge at YORK CITY and the Lodges Of SCOTLAND, IRELAND, FRANCE and ITALY, affecting Independency, are under their own Grand Masters, tho' they have the same Constitutions, Charges, Regulations, &c., for Substance, with their Brethren of England.
Then there are the several allusions to Freemasonry at York by Dr. Fifield Dassigny in 1774‑A Serious and Impartial Enquiry into the Cause of the Present FREEMASONRY IN YORK 119 was duly addressed by the retiring Master, Frodsham and, by request of the members, the charge was printed and published, going through more than one edition. It was entitled A Charge Delivered to the most Antient and Honourable Society of Free and Accepted Masons, in a Lodge held at the Punch Bowl, in Stonegate, York, upon Friday, January 18, 1762, by Bro. Frodsham, at his dismission of the chair. T. B. Whytehead tells us (The Freemason, January io, i88o) that " as Bro. Seth Agar, the W.M. (from Jan. 3, 1763), soon afterwards became Grand Master of All England, it seems probable that the superior assumption of Grand Lodge had eclipsed the humble Punch Bowl Lodge and that the latter was deserted by its members." That the constitution of the Lodge of 1761 was actually the cause of the revival of the slumbering Grand Lodge cannot positively be asserted, but it appears to be most probable that the formation of the one led to the restoration of the other and yet, singular to state, the latter organization, though apparently owing a new lease of life to the existence of the former, was only able to shake off the lethargy of long years by absorbing the very body which stimulated its own reconstitution.
We will now cite the full account of the revival, which is given by Hughan (Masonic Sketches, p. s 1) from the actual records.
The Antient and Independent Constitution of Free and Accepted Masons Belonging to the City of York, was this Seventeenth day of March, in the year of our Lord 1761, Revived by six of the surviving members of the Fraternity by the Grand Lodge being opened and held at the House of Mr. Henry Howard, in Lendall, in the said City, by them and others hereinafter named. When and where it was further agreed on, that it should be continued and held there only the Second and Last Monday in every month.
Present Grand Master, . Brother Francis Drake, Esq., F.R.S.
Deputy G.M., . Brother George Reynoldson.
Grand Wardens, . Brothers George Coates and Thomas Mason. Together with Brothers Christopher Coulton and Martin Crofts.
Visiting Brethren.
Tasker, Leng, Swetnam, Malby Beckwith, Frodsham, Fitzmaurice, Granger, Crisp, Oram, Burton and Howard.
Minutes of the Transactions at the Rivival and Opening of the said Grand Lodge Brother John Tasker was by the Grand Master and the rest of the Brethren, unanimously appointed Grand Secretary and Treasurer, he having first petitioned to become a Member and being approved and accepted nem. con.
Brother Henry Howard also petitioned to be admitted a Member, who was accordingly balloted for and approved nem. con.
Mr. Charles Chaloner, Mr. Seth Agar, George Palmes, Esq., Mr. Ambrose 110 FREEMASONRY IN YORK Beckwith and Mr. William Siddall, petitioned to be made Brethren the first opportunity, who, being severally balloted for, were all approved nem. con.
This Lodge was closed till Monday, the 23rd day of this instant month, unless in case of Emergency.
The V.S.L. which, it is believed, was used at the meetings, is in the safe keeping of the Eboracum Lodge, No. 1611, and is inscribed, " This Bible belongs to the Free Mason's Lodge at Mr. Howard's at York, 1761." The names of George Reynoldson and Martin Crofts do not appear in the " List of Master Masons in the Lodge at York " already given, unless, which is improbable, they happen to be identical with the two illegible names. A fair assumption is that they were initiates between 1734 and 1761 and that the term " Revival " is an accurate designation.
Several of the visitors mentioned were members of the Lodge assembling at the Punch Bowl and the fact of their being present in such a capacity has been assumed as proof that the two Grand Lodges were on terms of amity, especially emphasized by the friendly action of the York organization later on, about which a few words have presently to be said.
A noticeable feature of this record is that the Grand Master, Deputy, and Wardens occupied their positions as if holding them of inherent right, the only Brother elected to office being the Grand Secretary, who was also the Grand Treasurer. It seems probable that Francis Drake and his principal officers must have acted in their several capacities prior to the dormancy of 1740‑50. If this was the case‑and there are no facts which maitate against such an hypothesisthen the Grand Master and his coadjutors were nominated and elected at assemblies of the Grand Lodge of which no record has come down to us.
The five candidates proposed on March 17 were initiated on May i 1, 176 1 ; mention is also made of a Brother being raised to the degree of a Master Mason on May 23 and Apprentices were duly passed as Fellow Crafts. Minutes of this kind, however, need not be reproduced in these pages, neither is there much in the rules agreed to in 1761 and later, which requires particularization.
The fees for the three Degrees and membership amounted to ú2 16s., which sum " excused the Brother from any further expence during Lodge hours for that Quarter, supper and drink out of and Glasses broke in the Lodge only excepted." The quarterage was fixed at six shillings and sixpence, " except as above." Candidates were only eligible for initiation on a unanimous ballot, but joining members, " regularly made masons in another Lodge," were elected if there were not more than two adverse votes ; the fee for the latter election being half a guinea. Careful provisions were laid down for the guidance of the officers in the event of Brethren seeking admission who were unable to prove their regularity. It was ordered on July 15, 1777, " that when a Constitution is granted to any place, the Brother who petitioned for such shall pay the fees charged thereon upon delivery ". ; and on November zo, 1778, the members resolved " that the Grand Master of All England FREEMASONRY IN YORK 12.1 be on all occasions as such stiled and addressed by the Title of Most Worshipful, and the Masters of all Lodges under the Constitution of this Grand Lodge by the Title of Right Worshipful." The secretary's salary was fixed at ten guineas per annum from December 27, 1779 and the Treasurer was required " to execute his Bond in the Penal sum of one hundred pounds." The fee for certificates was fixed at six shillings each, "always paid on delivery." Unless in cases of emergency two Degrees were not allowed to‑be conferred in one evening and " separate Ballot shall be made to each Degree distinct," as is still the custom under many Grand Lodges, but not in England, one ballot covering all three Degrees, also membership. There is no proof that the " Grand Lodge of All England " sided actively with either the Grand Lodge (Moderns) founded in 1717 or that of the "Andents " founded in 175 3. Passively, indeed, its sympathies would appear to have been with the older organization and, though it ultimately struck up an alliance with the Lodge of Antiquity, No. z, as will be noted later, in so doing a blow was aimed at the pretensions of both the Grand bodies claiming jurisdiction in the south.
We now approach an important innovation on the part of the York Grand Lodge, no less than the granting of Warrants for subordinate Lodges, in accordance with the custom so long followed by its London prototype. As previously intimated, the meetings of the old Lodge at York, held out of that city, do not appear to have led to the creation of separate Lodges, such as Bradford in 1713 and elsewhere. On this point it is impossible to speak with precision ; it cannot be affirmed positively they did not, but, on the other hand, there is no evidence to warrant even a random conjecture that they did.
So far as evidence is concerned, there is nothing to warrant the belief, so frequently advanced, that Charters were granted for subordinate Lodges by the Grand Lodge of All England, until after the" Revival" Of 1761. Prior to that date, indeed, it is quite possible that frequent meetings were held by the old York Lodge in neighbouring towns, but never (it would appear) were any other Lodges constituted by that body, as we know there were in 1762 and later.
No little trouble has been taken in an attempt to compile for the first time a list of the several Lodges warranted by the York authorities, but unfortunately there is not sufficient data to make the roll as complete as could be desired. The only one of the series that bears an official number is the first Lodge that was warranted, for it was not customary in this Lodge to assign numbers, which makes the task of tracing the York Lodges and of fixing their precedence a very difficult one.
" YORK " LODGES FROM 1762.
1. French Lodge, " Punch Bowl," York, June io, 1762.
2. Scarborough, Aug. 1cg, 1762.
3. " Royal Oak," Ripbn, July 31, 1769.
4. " Crown," Knaresborough, Oct. 30, 1769.
5 . " Duke of Devonshire," Macclesfield, Sept. 24, 1770 6. Hovingham, May 29, 1773 FREEMASONRY IN YORK 7. Snainton, near Malton, Dec. 14, 1778.
9. " Druidical Lodge," Rotherham Dec. zz, 1778.
io. " Fortitude," at the " Sun," Hollingwood, Lanc., Nov. z7, 1790Deputation for a " Grand Lodge." 8. " Grand Lodge of England, South of the River Trent," March 29, 1779. ] No. I, " Lodge of Perfect Observance," London, Aug. 9, I779.~ tNo. z, " Lodge of Perseverance and Triumph," London, Nov. 15, 1779‑f There was much correspondence about certain Masonic jewels between the Grand Secretary at York and a Bro. W. Hutton Steel, of Scarborough and others, extending from I 77z to 178 1. The jewels were said to have been used by a Lodge whose " Constitution was obtained from York," probably No. z as above. Bro. Steel presented them on December z6, 1779 and declared that " No meeting of a Lodge since 173 5 " had been held and that he was the " Last Survivor of four score Brethren." The impression is that this aged Brother referred to the Lodge No. 59, warranted by the Grand Lodge of England‑not All England‑in 17z9 and this opinion is strengthened by the fact that 1729 is engraved on these jewels, which are carefully treasured at York. Doubtless they were used by both the Lodges named prior to their becoming extinct.
In addition to these, one must add that in the Records and elsewhere, mention is made of petitions being presented to the Grand Lodge for the holding of Lodges, some of which were doubtless granted; but there is no register existing from which we can ascertain what charters were actually issued.
I. Petition addressed to the " G.M. of All England at York " and signed by Abraham Sampson, about the year 1771. He declared that he had been taken to task by the " Grand Lodge in London " for getting a Warrant for Macclesfield. The new Lodge was to be held at the " Black Bull, otherwise the Rising Sun, Pettycoat Lane, White Chappel," the first Master and Wardens being nominated.
II. A letter was read at the Grand Lodge held September 27, 1779, "Requiring the mode of applying for a Constitution," the petitioner being " Bro. William Powell," of Hull. J. Coultman Smith [History of the Warrant of the Humber Lodge, 18 5 5 ] declared that the Charter of the present " Humber Lodge," No. 5 7, of that town, was derived from the York Grand Lodge; but he is in error, that Lodge having been constituted by the "Atholl " Grand Lodge, London (see Gould's Atholl Lodges, pp. I3‑I4).
III. A letter was received from Doncaster, dated July II, I78o, to the effect that a Warrant had been applied for and granted. Probably there had been an application sent to the York Grand Lodge ; but a Charter had been obtained ad interim from London,‑the present St. George's Lodge, No. 242, of Doncaster, being the one referred to (see W. Delanoy's History of St. George's Lodge, I88I). IV. A petition was received for a Lodge to be held at the " Brush Makers' Arms, Smithy Door," at the house of John Woodmans, Manchester, dated December 23, 1787 ; but as the records of that period are missing, one cannot say what answer was given to the petitioners, but it is very likely that a Charter was granted.
FREEMASONRY IN YORK 123 T. B. Whytehead has supplied the following interesting extract from the records, which establishes the fact that the year 1762 witnessed the first Lodge being placed on the Roll of the revived Grand Lodge at York. It would have simplified matters very considerably if this list, which was begun " in order," had been continued in like manner by the York officials.
Constitutions or Warrants granted by this Right Worshipful Grand Lodge to Brethren enabling them to hold Lodges at the places and in the houses particularly mentioned in such constitutions or warrants.
No. i. Anno Secundo Brother Drake G.M. On the io' day of June 1762 a constitution or warrant was granted unto the following Brethren, French Prisoners of War on their Parol (viz.) Du Fresne, Le Pettier, Julian Vilfort, Pierre Le Villaine, Louis Brusle, and Francis Le Grand, Thereby enabling them and others to open and continue to hold a Lodge at the sign of the Punch Bowl in Stonegate in the City of York and to make New Brethren as from time to time occasion might require, Prohibiting nevertheless them and their successors from making anyone a Brother who shall be a subject of Great Britain or Ireland, which said Lodge was accordingly opened and held on the said io' day of June and to be continued regularly on the second Thursday in every month or oftener if occasion shall require.
Of the second Lodge but little account has been preserved in the archives of the York Lodge, though, undoubtedly, a Minute‑book was sent to the Grand Lodge for safe custody, which contained the records either of this Lodge or of the one formed in 1729 by the Grand Lodge in London. Hughan declares he saw a Minute‑book, or extracts therefrom, in the York archives, being records of a Lodge opened at Scarborough " on Thursday the 19th August 1762 by virtue of a Warrant from the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons at York, Bro. Thos. Balderston, Rt. Worp'. M. ; Thos. Hart, S.W. ; John Walsham, J.W. ; Matt‑. Fowler, S." ; hence one is inclined to believe that the second on the roll is the Lodge referred to. Joseph Todd has kindly transcribed the few Minutes thus preserved, which begin March 25, 1762 (before the Warrant was received) and end August 30, 1768.
Of the third on the list there is no doubt, it having been duly " seal'd and signed " ; neither is there any as to the fourth, the Minute of October 30, 1769, reading as follows : " The three last‑mentioned Brethren petitioned for a Constitu tion to open and hold a Lodge at the sign of the Crown in Knaresborough, which was unanimously agreed to and the following were appointed officers for the opening of the same." It would seem that the belief in a Lodge having been warranted in the Inniskilling Dragoons by the York authorities‑which is held by Hughan‑on the same day as No. 4, must be given up, since Whytehead and Todd positively affirm that there is no reference whatever in the Minutes to such a Charter having been granted (see Atholl Lodges, p. z5). It is but fair, however, to state that the text of the Minutes of the procession suggest that a Lodge was formed, either in Inniskilling or in connexion with the regiment mentioned, as the record reads : " Many Brethren from York, as well as from the daughter Lodges of 124 FREEMASONRY IN YORK the Grand Lodge, established at Ripon, Knaresborough and Inniskilling, were present at this Festival." The earliest allusion to the Inniskilling Dragoons is in 1770, when the Brethren of the Lodge held in that regiment (doubtless No. 123 on the roll of " Atholl " Lodges) took part, with other visitors, in the Great Procession on the celebration of the Festival of St. John the Evangelist. It was arranged on December 17, Whytehead maintains that " the Brethren of the Inniskilling Regiment who carry the Colours and act as Tylers, as also all the Brethren in the said Regiment who are private soldiers to have tickets gratis." The hospitality thus exhibited to the members of a regimental Lodge by the Brethren at York, has been again and again exercised of late years by the " York " and " Eboracum " Lodges, no warmer reception being ever given to military Lodges than in the city of York. The Lodge at Macclesfield does not seem to have been successfully launched, as no fees were ever paid to the authorities at York ; and probably the existence of an " Atholl " Lodge in the same town from 1764 may have had something to do with the members of No. 5 transferring their allegiance.
There is nothing to add as to Nos. 6 and 7, but the ninth of the series, according to Hughan, was called " No. iocg " at Rotherham, the members evidently considering that the addition of one hundred to its number would increase its import ance. Some of its records found their way to York, ranging from December zz, 1778, tp March 26, 1779. There is no account of the Lodge at Hollingwood among the York documents, the only notice of its origin being the original Charter in the archives of the " United Grand Lodge of England," which has been transcribed and published by Hughan in Masonic Sketches, Part II, Appendix C. The Warrant was signed by Kilby and Blanchard, Grand Master and Grand Secretary respectively. It is to be regretted that this Charter is not included among the Masonic documents guarded in so zealous a manner at York. A volume of Minutes of the York Grand Lodge, 178o‑9z, is evidently still missing, though Hargrove saw it in Blanchard's hands so late as 18 i cg.
Hughan, in his History of Freemasonry at York and Whytehead, ably continuing the same subject, As Told by an Old Newspaper File (The Freemason, September 1884), have furnished the most interesting sketches of the proceedings of the York Grand Lodge from the " Revival " of 1761, as well as of those assembling under other Constitutions. It is not the intention, however, to do more than pass in review a few of their leading references. In the York Courant for December zo, 1763, is an advertisement by authority of J. S. Morritt, the Grand Master, the two Grand Wardens being Brooks and Atkinson, the latter Brother having been the builder of the Bridge over the Foss at York. He and his brother were initiated in 1761, " without paying the usual fees of the Lodge as being working masons," indicating (Whytehead suggests) the fact that the old Lodge at York recognized its operative origin. Several of the festivals were held at the Punch Bowl, an inn being much frequented by the York Masons. The Lodges favoured processions to church prior to the celebration of the festivals, many of the advertisements for which have been carefully reproduced by Whytehead. The J. S. Morritt referred to in the FREEMASONRY IN YORK 125 advertisement was John Sawrey Morritt, of Rokeby Park, co. York, who married Anne, daughter of Henry Peirse, of Bedale, M.P. for Northallerton. He was the father of J. B. S. Morritt, M.A. Cantab., one of the earliest travellers in Greece and Asia Minor, who published a description of the plains of Troy and several translations from the Greek poets and was himself M.P. in turn for Beverley, Northallerton and Shaftesbury. The son was also an intimate friend of Sir Walter Scott, who described Rokeby as one of the most enviable places he had ever seen and it was the subject of his poem Rokeby, which was lauded for the " admirable, perhaps unique, fidelity to local descriptions." It was the son who was entrusted with the secret of the authorship of Waverley. Both parents were buried in a vault in Rokeby Church, where their son erected to their memory a monument with a poetic inscription.
In the Courant for June io, 1770, is an announcement on behalf of the Lodge at the Crown, Knaresborough, for June z6,‑" A regular Procession to Church to hear Divine Service and a Sermon to be preached by a Brother suitable to the occasion," being the chief attractions offered by the Rev. Charles Kedar, the Master and Bateson and Clark, Wardens. In similar terms, another procession was advertised for December 27, 1770, to St. John's Church, Micklegate, York, the notice being issued by order of Grand Master Palmes. The sermon was preached by the Rev. W. Dade, Rector of Barmston, in the East Riding, author of A History of Holderness, the congregation including more than a hundred Brethren. It was usual to have both a summer and winter festival in York; so the zeal of the Fraternity was kept alive, so far as processions and festive gatherings could promote the interests of the Society.
The brief existence of the Lodge at the Punch Bowl, No. 259, constituted by the Grand Lodge of England (London) on January i z, 1761, did not deter the Brethren of the Grand Lodge of England from constituting another Lodge in York ‑the Apollo being warranted there as No. 450 on July 31, 1773. Whytehead (The Freemason, August 30, 1884) states that many distinguished Brethren were connected with this Lodge; and several of the members of the old Lodge, who should have stood by their mother, went over to the more fashionable body which met at the George Hotel, in Coney Street. The Apollo was evidently regarded as an intruder by the York Grand Lodge, as the Brethren of the latter convened their meetings on the same day and hour as those of the rival Society. In 1767 the Grand Lodge of England (London) was courteously informed by David Lambert, Grand Secretary of the York organization, that the Lodge formerly held at the Punch Bowl " had been for some years discontinued and that the most Antient Grand Lodge of All England, held from time immemorial in this city, is the only Lodge held therein." The Grand Secretary also added This Lodge acknowledges no Superior; it exists in its own Right; it grants Constitutions and Certificates in the same manner as is done by the Grand Lodge i26 FREEMASONRY IN YORK in London and as it has from Time immemorial had a Right and used to do and it distributes its own Charity according to the true principles of Masons. Hence he does not doubt that the Grand Lodge in London will pay due respect to it and to the Brethren made by it, professing that it ever had a great esteem for that body, and the Brethren claiming privileges under its authority.
The reason for this intimation was the sending of an official document, evidently inadvertently, from the Grand Lodge in London to the defunct Lodge, No. 259, which apparently fell into the hands of the Grand Master of the York Grand Lodge. It was laid before that body at its meeting held on December 14, 1767, when the Grand Secretary was instructed to write in the foregoing manner.
There is no evidence that the letter was honoured with a reply from the Grand Lodge of England, nor does there seem to be any evidence for the contention of Findel that the " correspondence proves that the York Lodge was then on the best of terms " with the Grand Lodge at London, although he is confirmed in that opinion by Hughari. There was no " correspondence," only a letter written from York to London, which was unacknowledged.
The York Grand Secretary had not the satisfaction of transmitting the intelligence of the decease of rival No. 2, for the latter outlived the York Grand Lodge by many years. The Lodge did not become extinct " about the year 1813," as Todd supposes (History of the York Lodge, No. 236, p. 16), but was transferred to Hull in 1817 ; the furniture, jewels and various Warrants being sold for some c6o. It was subsequently known as the " Phcrnix," until its final collapse about twenty years afterwards.
Another Lodge came on the scene and announced that its festival was to be held at " the house of Mr. William Blanchard, the Star and Garter, in Nessgate. York," on December 27, 1775. This was the Moriah Lodge, originally chartered by the Atholl Grand Lodge, London, in the 1st Regiment of Yorkshire Militia, as No. 176, Sheffield, October 14, 1772. Its stay in the city was probably of very short duration, being a military Lodge.
On January 29, 1776, the Grand Lodge of All England instituted the office of Chaplain and, on February 12, 1776, the Rev. John Parker, Vicar of St. Helen's, was initiated and passed and, on February z6, raised to the third Degree. No fees were charged, because of the services he was to render as Chaplain, in which office he was duly invested on March i 1 and it is said that he was a regular attendant at the meetings from that time, his place being " the seat next to the Master's right hand." On December 27, 1776, a service was held at St. Helen's Church, to which the Brethren marched in procession, wearing their Masonic clothing. New ribbons were voted to be obtained by the Grand Secretary " for the jewels of the Brethren, to appear in clean aprons and gloves." St. John's Day, 1777, witnessed the Grand Lodge being held at York Tavern and the Provincial Grand Lodge under the Grand Lodge of England (London) at Nicholson's Coffee House. Both bodies attended divine service, the former at St. Helen's and the latter at St. Martin's, suitable discourses being FREEMASONRY IN YORK 1i7 delivered by the Revs. John Parker and James Lawson respectively. Meetings by both bodies‑Grand and Provincial‑were frequently thus held on the same day. Still another Lodge was constituted by the " Mother of Grand Lodges," and this time on such a sure foundation that it has outlived all its early contem poraries. This was the Union Lodge, No. 504, which was first held by dispensation dated June 20, 1777, Joseph Jones being the first W.M. The subsequent and eventful career of this justly celebrated Lodge, we cannot now pause to consider and will simply remark that its name was appropriately changed to that of the York in 1870, when No. 236, time having but served to enhance its reputation. The last meeting advertised in the Courant by the York Grand Lodge was dated June 18, 17 ; but undoubtedly there were many assemblies of the Brethren held after that year, even so late as the next decade. Hargrove in History and Description of the Ancient City of York, 1818, vol. ii, pt. ii, PP. 478‑9, states As a further proof of the importance of this Lodge, we find it recorded that " On the z4th June 1783, the Grand Master, with all the officers, attended in the great room of the Mansion House, where a lodge in the third degree was opened, and brother Wm. Siddall, esquire, at that time the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor and Grand Master elect, was installed, according to an ancient usage and custom, The Most Worshipful Grand Master Mason of All England and was thus saluted, homaged and acknowledged." About the year 1787 the meetings of this lodge were discontinued and the last surviving member was Blanchard, proprietor of the York Chronicle, to whom the writer is indebted for information on the subject. He was a member many years and being " Grand Secretary," all the books and papers which belonged to the lodge are still in his possession.
Either Hargrove misunderstood Blanchard, or the latter possessed a very treacherous memory, since there is abundant evidence to prove that the Grand Lodge was in existence even so late as August 23, 1792, which is the date " of a rough Minute recording the election of Bro. Wolley as Grand Master, Bro. Geo. Kitson, Grand Treasurer, Bro. Thomas Richardson, S.G.W. and Bro. Williams, J.G.W." The York Lodge has an engraved portrait of Grand Master Wolley and T. B. Whytehead presented one to the Grand Lodge of England. Wolley afterwards changed his name to Copley.
There is also a list still extant, in Blanchard's handwriting, containing an entry of October 1, 1790, when a Brother was raised to the Third Degree; and as already mentioned the grant of a Warrant in that year by the same body, which does not savour of extinction. One need not add other evidences of the activity of the Grand Lodge, as the foregoing are amply sufficient. Even the Constitutions of 1784, published by the authority of the Grand Lodge of England, thus refers to the Northern Grand Lodge: " Some Brethren at York continued to act under their original constitution, notwithstanding the revival of the Grand Lodge of England; but the irregular Masons in London never received any patronage from them. The ancient York Masons were confined to one Lodge, 128 FREEMASONRY IN YORK which is still extant, but consists of very few members and will probably be soon altogether annihilated " (see Constitutions, 1784, p. zoo and Freemasons' Calendar, 11783, p. 23).
Here, doubtless, the wish was father to the thought, but the prediction of John Noorthouck was soon fulfilled, though it must not be overlooked that he acknowledges the antiquity and, so to speak, the regularity of the York Grand Lodge, at a period, moreover, when the secession of the Lodge of Antiquity from the Grand Lodge of England‑in which movement, though a member of No. 1, Noorthouck was not a participant‑had greatly embittered (for reasons about to be mentioned) the relations between the two earliest of the English Grand Lodges. John Noorthouck, stationer, is entered in the Grand Lodge register as having become a member of the Lodge of Antiquity in 1771, three years before Preston joined it. Both men were largely employed by the celebrated printer, William Strahan. That a Warrant or Deputation for the constitution of a " Grand Lodge of England South of the River Trent," under the wing of the Lodge of Antiquity, was issued by the York authorities, has been already stated. The story of the two parties in the Lodge of Antiquity‑1779‑89‑each striving to extinguish or coerce the other; the apparent triumph of the minority, who had the support of their Grand Lodge; the secession of the majority; the expulsion of the leaders, including the famous author of the Illustrations of Masonry ; and the setting up of a rival Grand Lodge, is not only a long one, but is also far from being a pleasant study, even at the present time. It will, however, be brought within the smallest compass that is consistent with perspicuity and, as the whole story is so thoroughly interwoven with the history of the Lodge of Antiquity, and the claims‑real or imaginary‑‑advanced on its behalf by William Preston, it may be convenient to give in this place a short but comprehensive memoir of that well‑known writer, which will come in here, perhaps, more appropriately than at any other stage, since, in addition to the leading part played by him in the temporary alliance of the Lodge of Antiquity with the " Grand Lodge of All England," there are other reasons for the introduction of his Masonic record as a whole‑in the chapter devoted to Freemasonry in York. In those which respectively precede and follow, a great deal of the history which has been generally‑not to say, universally‑accepted, as fact, rests upon his sole authority. Whilst, therefore, the narrative which has been brought up to the beginning of the second half of the eighteenth century, is fresh in the recollection and, before proceeding with a description of the Great Schism, which becomes the next subject for our consideration, let us take a closer view of the writer, whose bare statement, unsupported by evidence, has been held sufficient‑by the majority of later historians ‑to establish any point in eighteenth‑century Masonry, that it might be called in aid of. In the ensuing pages, besides the official records of the four Grand Lodges, in existence during the period over which this sketch extends and other documents and authorities specially referred to, use has been made of the following works : Illustrations of Masonry, editions 1781, 1788, 1792 ; Freemasons' Magazine, vol. iv, 1795, P_‑3, et seq. ; European Magazine, vol. 1, 1811, p. 323 ; A State of FREEMASONRY IN YORK 129 Facts: Being a narrative of some late Proceedings in the Society of Free Masons, respecting William Preston, Past Master of the Lodge of Antiquity, No. 1. London, Printed in the year MDCCLxxv111.
William Preston, whose father was a Writer to the Signet, was born at Edinburgh, July z8, 1742, O. S. and came to London in 176o, where he entered the service of William Strahan, His Majesty's Printer.
Soon after his arrival in London, a number of Brethren from Edinburgh attempted to establish a Lodge (in London) under sanction of a Constitution from Scotland. Findel, in History of Freemasonry, p. 178, cites the application of some London Brethren to the Grand Lodge of Scotland and observes, " It was determined to refuse this request, lest by complying they might interfere with the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge. The so‑called Ancient or York Masons received, then, at that time no support from Scotland. But the Grand Lodge of Scotland offered to recommend them to the [Antient] Grand Lodge of England," who granted them a dispensation to form a Lodge and to make Masons, bearing, curiously enough (175 6‑70) the same number (1I I) as that of Preston's Mother Lodge. Lawrie, in his History of Freemasonry, with an Account of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, 1804, p. 192, quotes the following Minute of the Grand Lodge of England, " According to the Old Institutions, i.e. of the Schismatics or ` Antients ' " March z, 1763.‑Bror. Robt. Lochhead petitioned for Dispensation to make Masons at the sign of the White Hart, in the Strand‑And a Dispensation was granted to him to continue in force for the space of 3o days.
Preston was the second person initiated under this Dispensation and the associated Brethren were afterwards duly constituted into a Lodge (No. III) by the officers of the " Antient " Grand Lodge in person, on or about April zo, 1763. After meeting successively at Horn Tavern, Fleet Street ; The Scots Hall, Blackfriars; and the Half Moon, Cheapside ; the members of No. 111‑at the instance of William Preston‑petitioned for a Charter from the " Regular " Grand Lodge, and the Lodge was soon after constituted a second time in Ample Form, by the name of the Caledonian Lodge (under which name it still exists, No. 134) on May 2i, 1 772. He instituted a Grand Gala at the Crown and Anchor Tavern in the Strand and delivered an oration, afterwards printed in the first edition of the Illustrations of Masonry, published in the same year.
A regular course of lectures was publicly delivered by him at the Mitre Tavern in Fleet Street in 1774.
At last he was invited by his friends to visit the Lodge of Antiquity, No. 1, then held at the Mitre. This he did, June 15, 1774, when the Brethren of that Lodge were pleased to admit him a member, and‑what was very unusual‑elected him Master at the same meeting.
He had been Master of the Philanthropic Lodge, at the Queen's Head, Gray's Inn Gate, Holborn, above six years and of several other Lodges before that time.
130 FREEMASONRY IN YORK But he was now taught to consider the importance of the office of the first Master under the English Constitution.
To the Lodge of Antiquity he now began chiefly to confine his attention and, during his Mastership, which continued for some years, the Lodge increased in numbers and improved in its finances.
During the Grand Mastership of the Duke of Beaufort and the Secretaryship of Thomas French, he had become a useful assistant in arranging the General Regulations of the Society and reviving the foreign and country correspondence.
Having been appointed to the office of Deputy Grand Secretary, under James Heseltine, he compiled for the benefit of the Charity, the History of Remarkable Occurrences, inserted in the first two publications of the Freemasons' Calendar and also prepared for the press an appendix to the Book of Constitutions, from 1767, published in 1776.
From the various memoranda he had made, he was enabled to form the History of Masonry, afterwards printed in his Illustrations. The office of Deputy Grand Secretary he soon after voluntarily resigned.
The Schismatic body, under whose banner he had been initiated, was regarded by him with very scant affection, a feeling heartily reciprocated by the Atholl (or Ancient) Grand Lodge, as the Minutes of that Society attest.
Thus, in November 1775, a long correspondence between William Preston, styled " a Lecturer on Masonry in London " and William Masson, Grand Secretary of Scotland, was read‑the former having endeavoured to establish an under standing between the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the " Modern " Grand Lodge ‑but being referred by the latter to William Dickey, Grand Secretary, " Antients," for information, in a reply dated October 9, states : " It is with regret I understand by your letter, that the Grand Lodge of Scotland has been so grossly imposed upon as to have established a correspondence with an irregular body of men, who falsely assume the appellation of Antient Masons." The " Modern " Grand Lodge was, of course, the Regular or Constitutional Grand Lodge, established A.D. 1717, the so‑called " Antients " being a Schismatic body, dating‑as a Grand Lodge‑from 175 2‑3. The epithets " Antient " and " Modern," as applied to the rival Grand Lodges, will be dealt with in the next chapter‑meanwhile, it may be said that, whilst preferring the use of more suitable expressions, to distinguish between the two bodies, the terms actually employed will be given as far as possible when quoting from official records.
From the resolutions passed on this occasion, we find that the " Antient " Grand Lodge stigmatized, in terms of great severity, certain passages in Preston's writings, for example, where describing the " Antients," he mentions their rise into notice, " under the fictitious sanction of the Ancient York Constitution, which was entirely dropt at the revival in 1717 "‑and they placed on record an expression of surprise at " an Ancient Grand Lodge, being said to be revived by entirely dropping the old Constitutions." " Of equal sense and veracity," did they deem a further statement of Preston, " that the regular Masons were obliged to adopt FREEMASONRY IN YORK fresh measures and some variations were made in and additions to the established forms," remarking " that an adoption of fresh measures and variations was openly confessed, nor could human wisdom conceive how such a change could be constitutional or even useful in detecting impostors, though it was plain that such new change might be sufficient to distinguish the members of the new Masonical Heresy from those who adhered to the good old system." They also " thought it remarkable (if such alterations were absolutely necessary) that no account of them had been transmitted to Scotland or Ireland, as such alterations obliterated the ancient landmarks in such manner as to render the ancient system scarcely distinguishable by either of those nations, tho' ever famous for Masonry." The reference given in the Minutes is‑" p. 4, line 35, etc."‑and the publication quoted from must have been a pamphlet printed after the second edition of the Illustrations of Masonry. The passages referred to, slightly amplified, will be found (under the year 1739) in all the later editions ; also in the Freemasons' Calendar, 1776 ; and the Constitutions, 1784.
The dispute in which Preston's Lodge, at his instigation became embroiled with the " regular or Constitutional " Grand Lodge of England, originated in this way The Rev. M. H. Eccles, Rector of Bow, having been re‑elected Chaplain to the Lodge of Antiquity, engaged to preach an anniversary sermon on December 27, 1777, particulars of which were advertised in the Gazetteer for December 24. The Brethren proceeded to church informally, clothing as Masons in the vestry. On returning they walked to the Lodge room without having divested themselves of their Masonic clothing. John Noorthouck, a member, took exception to the latter action of the Lodge, but Preston claimed that " the proceedings of the Brethren on St. John's Day were perfectly conformable to the principles of the Institution and the laws of the Society." Preston cited the law respecting processions, but contended that it was not " calculated to debar the members of any private Lodge from offering up their adoration to the Deity in a public place of worship, in the character of Masons, under the direction of their Master." Noorthouck and Bottomley failed to obtain the consent of the members to a resolution terming the procession an " unguarded transaction," but, on Preston moving " that the Lodge of Antiquity disapproves of any general processions of a Masonic nature contrary to the authority of the Grand Lodge," it was passed unanimously. A memorial was presented to the Grand Lodge by, the minority, signed by the two mentioned and two others, four in all. A reply to this protest was also signed in open Lodge on January 27, 1778, by all but six (including Preston) and by six others subsequently who were not at the meeting, making a total of seventeen. The R.W.M., John Wilson and Preston waited on the Grand Secretary in the interim, imploring him to do his utmost to obtain an amicable settlement.
Hitherto, the quotations are mainly from Preston's Statement of Facts, but the subsequent proceedings, at the Committee of Charity, are given from the actual Minutes of that body.
132 FREEMASONRY IN YORK The Committee of Charity, on January 30, 1778, sided with the minority and, as Preston justified the proceedings of the Lodge, on the ground of its possessing certain " inherent privileges by virtue of its original constitution, that other Lodges of a more modern date were not possessed of," resolved that the Lodge of Antiquity possessed no other privilege than its rank according to seniority and " Mr. Preston was desired publicly to retract that doctrine, as it might tend to create a schism." This he refused to do, or to sign a declaration to the same purport and was forthwith expelled from the Society. At the Quarterly Communication ensuing, however, he presented the following memorial : " I am sorry I have uttered a doctrine contrary to the general opinion of the Grand Lodge and declare I will never in future promulgate or propagate a doctrine of any inherent right, privilege, or pre‑eminence in Lodge No. I more than any other Lodge, except its priority as the senior Lodge." The motion for his expulsion was then rescinded.
There, it might have been expected, matters would have been allowed to rest, but the lamentable course pursued by the majority in the Lodge, in expelling Noorthouck, Bottomley and Brearly, led to fresh disturbances. At the Quarterly Communication held April 8, 1778, the Master of No. i was directed to produce the Minute Book on the Z9th of the month and Preston's name was ordered to be struck off the list of members of the Hall Committee, " by reason of his having been chiefly instrumental in fomenting discord in the Lodge No. 1 ; and his being otherwise obnoxious to the greatest part of the Society." The outcome was a petition to the Grand Lodge of All England, signed by sixteen Brethren, amongst whom was William Preston. Hughan, in his History of Freemasonry at York, reproduces a copy of the letter sent on September 16, 1778, to the " Grand Lodge at York " from the Lodge of Antiquity, which reads as follows MOST WORSHIPFUL GRAND MASTER AND BRETHREN The contents of Bro. Bussey's letter to Mr. Benjamin Bradley dated ye 29th ult. has been communicated to us and we are much obliged to that Gentleman for the information it contains, but humbly conceive that our meeting has not been clearly explained to him.
Though we should be happy to promote Masonry under the banner of the Grand Lodge at York, an application by petition for a Warrant for a Constitution to act as a Private Lodge here was never our intention, as we consider ourselves sufficiently empowered by the Immemorial Constitution of our Lodge to execute every duty we can wish as a Private Lodge of Masons.
What we meant to propose to Bro. Bussey, when we had the pleasure of seeing him in London, was that in order to the confirming of social intercourse between the York Masons and the Brethren in the South of England and thereby strengthen by Connexion, we were ready, if the Grand Lodge at York furnished us with sufficient and satisfactory proofs of their existence before 1717‑and provided the same met with their approbation, to accept from them a constitutional authority to act as a Grand Lodge in London, for that part of England South of the Trent and would willingly and faithfully acquit ourselves of any Trust which might be reposed FREEMASONRY IN YORK 133 in us by that respectable Assembly, of whose antiquity and the legality of whose proceedings we have the highest opinion.
This proposal of Ours we now ratify‑and in expectation of being favoured with the answer whether it has the happiness of meeting with your approbation or not, etc. etc.
Then, on September zz, ‑1778, Benjamin Bradley wrote over his own name to the Grand Secretary at York, a letter in which he said Your obliging favour of the z9th ult. came safely to hand. The information it gives is very satisfactory to me and to other friends here of the York Grand Lodge. I can have no longer a doubt of the authenticity of that Assembly and, as I shall have frequent occasion to quote the original Book from which you have extracted the names of the Grand Masters from 1705 to 1734 exclusive, hope it will be carefully preserved and all the other books preceding the date thereof, but this caution I have no occasion to give to Bro. Bussey, a gentleman ever strenuous in support of so antient and noble an establishment.
A Warrant or Deputation from York to a few members of R.W. Lodge of Antiquity to act as a Grand Lodge for that part of England South of the Trent with the power of Constituting Lodges in that Division, when properly applied for, a regular correspondence to be kept up and some token of allegiance to be given annually on the part of the Brethren thus authorized to act, in my humble opinion might tend to revive the Splendor of that Assembly, whose prerogatives appear to have been so grossly invaded.
Should such a plan succeed, I shall be happy to spread the Art of Free Masonry once more under the banner of York and endeavour to convince the Grand Lodge of London that the prophecy of their Calendar compilers is not likely to be fulfilled.
The following are the names of the Brethren I could wish to have specified in the Warrant or Deputation, should the Grand Lodge be prepared to grant one. John Wilson, Esq. (present Right Worshipful Master of the Lodge of Antiquity) as R.W. Grand Master.
William Preston (Right Worshipful Past Master of the Lodge of Antiquity) as Worshipful Deputy Grand Master.
Benjamin Bradley (present Worshipful Junior Warden of the Lodge of Antiquity) as Worshipful Senior Grand Warden.
Gilbert Buchanan (present Secretary to the Lodge of Antiquity) as Worshipful Junior Grand Warden.
John Seaby (present Senior Steward of the Lodge of Antiquity) as Grand Secretary.
And two other Brethren whom we may appoint hereafter out of said Lodge.
On January z9, 1779, the Master of No. 1 being called upon by the Committee of Charity to state whether their order (made October 30, 1778, at which meeting " a Pamphlet lately published by Bro. Wm. Preston under the title of ` a State of Facts,' was cited as containing `many severe, inflammatory and false Reflections upon the Proceedings of the Grand Lodge in general and upon the Conduct of Brother 134 FREEMASONRY IN YORK Heseltine, the Grand Secretary, in particular"'), respecting the restoration of Bottomley, Noorthouck and Brearly, had been complied with. " Bro. Wm. Rigge, the Master, stated that on the evening of the last Quarterly Communication, viz. November 4, last, it was resolved not to comply with the order of the Grand Lodge ; that the Lodge should withdraw itself from the authority of the Grand Lodge in London and immediately join what they called the York Grand Lodge, after which the health of James Siddell was drank as Grand Master of Masons, the said Bro. Wm. Rigge and Brother Le Caan only dissenting. And that it was further resolved to notify such proceedings to the Grand Secretary and that a manifesto should be published to the world." This manifesto has been reproduced in Hughan's Masonic Sketches and Reprints, and in Four Old Lodges.
It was further stated that a minority‑who were desirous of continuing their allegiance to the Grand Lodge‑opposed the violent proceedings of the majority and informed the latter, that they had no right to take away the books and furniture of the Lodge, which were the joint property of all the members, " notwithstanding which the factious junto, in defiance of every rule of justice, honour, or common honesty, in the deadest hour of the night, by force took away all the furniture, jewels and Books belonging to the Lodge and had since assembled under a pretended [and] ridiculous authority called by them the Grand Lodge of York Masons, of which one James Siddell, a tradesman in York, calls himself Grand Master." It was also reported that the Manifesto alluded to had been published and dispersed, also that the members who remained true to their allegiance had elected the said Wm. Rigge their Master and had restored Noorthouck, Bottomley and Brearly, to their rank and status in the Lodge. The following resolution was then passed by the Committee of Charity That whenever the Majority of a Lodge determine to quit the Society, the Constitution and Power of Assembling remains with the rest of the members who are desirous of continuing their alliance." After which John Wilson, William Preston‑described as a " Journeyman Printer "‑and nine others, were expelled from the Society and their names ordered to be " transmitted to all regular Lodges, with an Injunction not to receive or admit them as members or otherwise; nor to countenance, acknowledge, or admit into their Lodges, any Person or Persons, assuming or calling themselves by the name of York Masons, or by any other Denomination than that of Free and Accepted Masons, under the Authority of, or in Alliance and Friendship with, the Grand Lodge of England, of which his Grace the Duke of Manchester is at present Grand Master." These proceedings‑confirmed by Grand Lodge, February 3, 1779‑evoked a further pamphlet from the seceders, dated March z4 in the same year and issued from the Queen's Arms Tavern, St. Paul's, under the hand of " J. Sealy, Secretary " (the name is spelt indifferently Sealy and Seaby), wherein they protest against " the very disrespectful and injurious manner in which the names of several Brethren F. 11‑1 8 FREEMASONRY IN YORK 135 are mentioned" and "the false, mean and scandalous designations annexed to them." A copy of this pamphlet is to be found in the archives of the Lodge of Antiquity.
The expelled members, as we have seen, resorted to the " Deputation from the Grand Lodge of All England to the R. W. Lodge of Antiquity, constituting the latter a Grand Lodge of England South of the River Trent, dated March z9, 1779 " and were soon actively engaged under their new Constitution. Hargrove says it was granted in 1799, but this is undoubtedly a typographical error.
John Wilson, late Master of No. i, was the first Grand Master and John Sealy the Grand Secretary, the inaugural proceedings taking place on June 24, 1779‑Preston having the office of Grand Orator conferred upon him on November 3. On April icg, 178o, Benjamin Bradley was installed as the second Grand Master, Preston being appointed his Deputy Grand Master and Donaldson and Sealy were elected Grand Treasurer and Secretary respectively. The only two Lodges formed under the auspices of this " feudal " Grand Lodge were numbered one and two, the junior being the first to be constituted. The ceremony took place at the Queen's Head Tavern, Holborn, on August 9, 1779. The Lodge was named " Perseverance and Triumph," No. z and had Preston for its first Master. On November 15, 1779, the "Lodge of Perfect Observance," No. i, was constituted at the Mitre Tavern, Fleet Street‑P. Lambert de Lintot being R.W.M. Some notes respecting Lintot will be found in The Freemason for February 11, March i i and May 6, 188 z. B. H. Latrobe was Grand Secretary in 1789 and, in a report to the " Grand Lodge of All England held at York," mentioned that " at the last Q.C., 29 Dec. 1789, the decayed state of the two Lodges was taken into consideration " and a deputation was appointed to make due inquiries. This was followed by a favourable result, which led that official to remark that, " upon the whole, the prospect before us seems to be less gloomy than that we have had for some time past." As the Lodge of Antiquity preserved a dual existence, the private Lodge and the Grand Lodge (offshoot of the York Grand Lodge) being kept quite distinct (on paper)‑though virtually one and the same body‑there were, in a certain sense, three subordinate Lodges on the roll of the " Grand Lodge of England South of the Trent." Further details respecting these Lodges are given by Hughan in his 'Masonic Sketches and Reprints, p. 5 9 ; and by Whytehead in The Freemason for May 14, 1881, May 11, 1882 and December 13, 1884. Of the Antiquity Grand Lodge, it need merely be recorded that there are but two Grand Masters‑John Wilson and Benjamin Bradley‑and two Grand Secretaries‑John Sealy and, later, B. H. Latrobe. During the suspension of the Masonic privileges by the Grand Lodge of England, Preston rarely if ever attended any meetings of the Society, though he was a member of many Lodges both at home and abroad. It was at this period of his life that he wrote the passages in his Illustrations concerning the " inherent rights " of the four Lodges of 1717, which have been since adopted by the generality 136 FREEMASONRY IN YORK of Masonic historians. In the edition of 1781, referring to the subject, he observes ‑" when the former editions of this Book were printed, the author was not suffi ciently acquainted with this part of the history of Masonry in England." It may be so and the reflections in which he indulges during the Antiquity schism were possibly the result of honest research, rather than mere efforts of the imagination. However, we now follow the example, and echo the words last quoted, of the writer whose memoir is being compiled, by asking the readers of Four Old Lodges to believe that when " that book was printed, the author "‑to the extent that he took on trust the loose statements in the Illustrations‑" was not sufficiently acquainted with those parts of the history of Masonry in England." A memorial from Preston respecting his expulsion was laid before Grand Lodge on April 8, 1789, but it was not even allowed to be read. At the ensuing Grand Feast, however, in the May following, wiser counsels prevailed and, mainly through the mediation of William Birch, afterwards Master of the Lodge of Antiquity, Preston and those expelled with him in 1779, all " expressing their desire of promoting conciliatory measures with the Grand Lodge and signifying their concern that through misrepresentation they should have incurred the displeasure of Grand Lodge‑their wish to be restored to the privileges of the Society, to the laws of which they were ready to conform," the Grand Lodge, being " satisfied with their apology," ordered that they should be restored to their privileges in the Society, as recorded in Grand Lodge Minutes of May 4, 1789 and printed, with some slight variation, in the Grand Lodge Proceedings of November 25, 1789. It has been said that Preston came out of this dispute the victor. Such was far from being the case. The attitude of the Grand Lodge of England was the same from first to last‑that is to say, in the view which it adopted with regard to the great question of privilege raised by the senior Lodge on its roll. The Manifesto of the latter was revoked. The " majority " party tendered their submission. The Grand Lodge of England South of the Trent passed into the realm of tradition and the members of the Lodge of Antiquity, reunited after many years of discord, have since that period and up to the present day, worked together in such love and harmony as to render the Senior English Lodge, all that even William Preston could have desired‑viz. a pattern and a model for all its juniors on the roll.
In 1787 Preston was instrumental in forming‑or, to use the Masonic equivalent, reviving‑the grand Chapter of Harodim, particulars of which are given in his work. But it is upon his Illustrations of Masonry that his fame chiefly rests. Of this twelve editions were published in the lifetime of the author ; and the late Godfrey Higgins was not far out in his statement that it " contains much useful information, but [Preston] had not the least suspicion of the real origin of Masonry " (Anaealypsis, 1836, vol. i, p. 817). It would be possible to go much further, but we should do well to recollect that " the times immediately preceding their own are what all men are least acquainted with," to quote Horace Walpole. It was Preston's merit that he sought to unravel many historical puzzles a stage or two removed from his own in point of time ; and it must be regarded as his misfortune that he FREEMASONRY IN YORK 137 failed in his laudable purpose. He was too prone to generalize largely from a very small number of solitary facts ; and of this a striking example is afforded by his observations on the early history of the Great Schism, upon which there has already been occasion to enlarge.
Preston died, after a long illness, on April 1, 1818, aged seventy‑six, and was buried in St. Paul's Cathedral. Among the bequests in his will were ú5oo consols to the Fund of Benevolence and IC130o consols as an endowment to ensure the annual delivery of the Prestonian lecture.
Returning to the history of Freemasonry at York, the following list of Grand Masters and Grand Secretaries from 1761, though not complete, is fuller than any before published.
GRAND MASTERS. GRAND SECRETARIES.
1761‑2. Francis Drake, F.R.S. John Tasker.
1763‑4. John S. Morritt. Do.
1764‑6. John Palmes of Naburn. Do.
1767. Seth Agar. David Lambert. 1768‑70. George Palmes (elder brother Thomas Williamson. of John).
1771‑2. Sir Thomas Gascoigne, Bart. Thomas Johnson.
1773. Charles Chaloner. Nicholas Nickson.
1774. Henry Stapilton. Do.
1775. Do. Joseph Atkinson.
1776‑8. William Siddall. Jacob Bussey.
1779, Do. John Browne.
1780. Francis Smyth, Jun. Do.
1781‑2. Robert Sinclair. Do.
1783‑4. William Siddall, or Siddell. William Blanchard.
1790. Thomas Kilby. Do. 1792. Edward Wolley (afterwards called Copley, of Potts Hall, near Stokesley). Do.
Henry Stapilton (1774‑5) was undoubtedly Henry Stapilton, of Wighill, son of Henry Stapilton, of Hatfield, co. York Lord of the Manor at Wighill. Therefore, he was a forbear of the same family as Lieutenant‑Colonel Miles J. Stapylton, Past Grand Deacon and Deputy Provincial Grand Master of North and East Yorkshire since 1913.
Charles Chaloner (1773) was a member of the Guisborough family which, in modern times, has given to the Craft, Richard, Lord Gisborough, Junior Grand Warden, 1921.
George Reynoldson was appointed Deputy Grand Master under Francis Drake, and F. Agar served in the like capacity under John Palmes.
138 FREEMASONRY IN YORK It is now necessary to advert to novelties which found their way into and were considered a part of the York Masonic system. The subject is one that requires very delicate handling and it is essential to avoid giving offence, either to those who believe that genuine Freemasonry consists of three Degrees and no more; or to the other and, perhaps, larger section of the Fraternity, who are not content with the simple system known to our Masonic forefathers‑Payne, Anderson and Desaguliers. On both sides of the question a great deal might be advanced which it would be difficult to answer ; but the endeavour will be to steer clear of difficulties that beset the path‑whether we incline in the one direction or the other‑by rigidly confining statements, as far as possible, to actual facts, and by carefully eschewing (within the same limitations) those points of divergence upon which all good Masons can agree to differ.
Happily the Freemasons of England, who composed their differences and were reunited on a broader platform in 1813, are justified in leaving the consideration of all moot points of discipline and ceremonial of earlier date to the antiquaries of the Craft, against whose research even the Solemn Act of Union cannot be pleaded as an estoppel (cf. The Four Old Lodges, p. 87 (111)) .
The additional ceremonies which had crept into use shortly before the fusion of the two Grand Lodges are pleasantly alluded to by William Preston, who observes (Illustrations of Masonry, ed. 1804, pp. 339, 340) It is well known to the Masons of this country that some men of warm and enthusiastic imaginations have been disposed to amplify parts of the institution of Freemasonry and in their supposed improvements to have elevated their discoveries into nesv degrees, to which they have added ceremonies, rituals and dresses, illsuited to the native simplicity of the Order, as it was originally practised in this country. But all these degrees, though probably deserving reprehension, as improper innovations on the original system of Masonry, I can never believe that they have either proceeded from bad motives or could be viewed in any other light than as innocent and inoffensive amusements By the Solemn Act of Union between the two Grand Lodges of Free‑Masons of England, in December 1813, it was " declared and pronounced that pure Antient Masonry consists of three degrees and no more, viz., those of the Entered Appren tice, the Fellow Craft, and the Master Mason, including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch " (Book of Constitutions, 1884, p. 16).
This is a little confusing. The Degree‑as we now have it‑of Installed Master not being mentioned at all, whilst that of the Royal Arch is brought in as the complement of certain other Degrees, which, it was expressly stated, were all that existed of their kind.
The Grand Lodge of York went further, as will shortly be told ; but it is first of all necessary to observe, that until quite recently the earliest allusion to Royal Arch Masonry (at York) was to be found in the " Treasurer's Book of the Grand FREEMASONRY IN YORK 139 Chapter of Royal Arch Masons," commencing April z9, 1768 ; but the fortunate discovery of Whytehead and Todd in 1879 now enables us to trace the Degree back to February 7, 1762. " Passing over the mention of the Royal Arch by the Atholl Masons in 1752, the next in order of priority is the precious little volume at York. . . . Its chief value consists in being the earliest records of a Chapter, including a Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons, known " (see Hughan, Origin of the English Rite, 1884, p. 64).
Full particulars of this valuable Minute‑book will be found in Whytehead's article, entitled The Royal Arch at York, which appeared in The Freemason of November 7, 1879. Hughan, who has carefully examined the volume, does not consider that it could have been the first record of the Royal Arch at York, though it is the earliest preserved. The meetings are described as those of a Lodge‑not a Chapter‑up to April 29, 1768 ; and the association, though evidently an offshoot of Lodge No. 259 at the Punch Bowl, the chief officer (" P. H.") in 1762 being Frodsham, who was the first Master of that Lodge, it gradually obtained the support of the York Grand Lodge and ultimately developed into a Grand Chapter for that Degree. The special value of the volume is its record of the Warrants granted to Royal Arch Chapters in the neighbourhood of York, the first of which was petitioned for on December z8, 1769, being the date of the earliest issued by the Grand Chapter in London (" Moderns "), which was granted on February 7, 1770. The book ends on January 6, 1776, the thread of the narrative being continued in another volume, beginning February 8, 1778 and ending September io, 1781, which was recognized by Hughan amongst the books in the Grand Lodge of England. It may, however, be said that the three Principals in February 1778 were Jacob Bussey, S. ; George Kitson, H.T. ; and William Spencer, H.A. ; whilst John Coupland ,vas Secretary and Treasurer.
The York Lodge, by petition to the then Grand Master, Lord Zetland, secured its return to their archives, with the folio Minute‑book, and two old MSS., which were all at that time preserved in the office of the Grand Secretary. Four Royal Arch Warrants at least were granted, probably more.
i. Ripon . Agreed to February 7, 1770.
z. Crown Inn, Knaresborough April 1770 3. Inniskilling Regiment of Dragoons October 1770.
4. Druidical Chapter, Rotherham February 25, 1780.
These Chapters appear to have been held under the protecting wings of Craft Lodges, as is the custom now‑three out of the four preserving a connexion with the York Grand Lodge and the other, as already shown, being a regimental Lodge of the Atholl Masons. The Degree was conferred at York on Brethren hailing from Hull, Leeds and other towns, which suggests that a knowledge of Royal Arch Masonry even at that period was far from being confined to the schismatics (Atholl or Antient Masons) of London‑but of this more hereafter. The officers of the 140 FREEMASONRY IN YORK " Grand Lodge of All England " were elected " Masters of this Royal Arch Chapter whenever such Presiding Officers shall be members hereof. In case of default, they shall be succeeded by the senior members of the Royal Arch Chapter (May z, 1779)." The only copy of a York charter (R.A.) known, is given by Hughan (Masonic Sketches, pt. ii, p. 18) and was issued on July 6, 1780, to members of the " Druidical Lodge of Ancient York Masons at Rotherham," under the seal of the " Grand Lodge of All England." Hughan says that a strange form of ritual is contained among these old papers entitled " Royal Union Band of Holy Royal Arch in Templar priests. Order of Aaron,. etc.," to which only Knights Templar were eligible. The ritual, he says, is peculiar. In it Seven Pillars are referred to and the " City on top of the Hill‑the new Jerusalem " is kept prominent throughout. Part of the Minute‑book is likewise still in existence, belonging " to the Honourable Order Knights Templar assembled in the Grand Lodge room at York. Sir Francis Smyth, G.M." A unique meeting of the Royal Arch Degree (not the third, as Hargrove erroneously states) took place on May 27, 1778, in York Cathedral and is thus described : " The Royal Arch Brethren whose names are undermentioned assembled in the Ancient Lodge, now a sacred Recess with[in] the Cathedral Church of York, and then and there opened a Chapter of Free and Accepted Masons in the Most Sublime Degree of Royal Arch. The Chapter was held and then closed in usual form, being adjourned to the first Sunday in June, except in case of Emergency." This unusual gathering, in all probability, has supplied the text or basis for the " tradition " that the Grand Lodge in olden time was in the habit of holding its august assemblies in the crypt of the venerated Minster. In the Treasurer's Book it is said that " To be raised to the Fourth Degree [i.e. Royal Arch], being a member of the Grand Lodge of All England, shall pay to the Chapter ten shillings and sixpence and one shilling to the Tyler." On June z, 178o, the Grand Chapter resolved that "the Masonic Government, anciently established by the Royal Edwin and now existing at York under the title of The Grand Lodge of All England, comprehending in its nature all the different Orders or Degrees of Masonry, very justly claims the subordination of all other Lodges or Chapters of Free and Accepted Masons in this Realm." The Degrees were five in number, viz. the first three, the Royal Arch and that of Knight Templar. The Grand Lodge, on June zo, 1780, assumed their protection and its Minute‑book was utilized in part for the preservation of the records of the Royal Arch 'and Knight Templar Degrees. Hughan considers that the draft of a certificate preserved at York for the five Degrees of January z6, 1779, to November 29, 1779, " is the earliest official document known in Great Britain and Ireland relating to Knights Templar in connexion with Freemasonry " (see Hughan, Origin of the English Rite of Freemasonry, p. 68 ; and T. B. Whytehead, The Connection between the Templars and the Freemasons in the City of York, 1877).
FREEMASONRY IN YORK Of the Encampments warranted by the Grand Lodge of All England for the " Fifth Degree," i.e. the Knight Templar, two only are known, viz.
K.T. Encampment, Rotherham . . July 6, 178o.
Do., No. 15, Manchester . October io, 1786.
For particulars of the first see Hughan's A1asonic Sketches, pt. i, p. 6z ; and of the second, Yarker's Notes on the Orders of the Temple and St. John. What ultimately became of the first mentioned is unknown, but the second seems to have joined the Grand Encampment held in London, under " Thomas Dunkerley, G.M.," the Charter bearing date May zo, 1795.
It will be seen, therefore, that, though various methods were employed to preserve the vitality of the York organization, the prestige and prosperity generally of the rival Grand Lodges in London ultimately brought about its disappearance. It was never formally dissolved, but was simply absorbed in the Grand Lodge of England, formed in 1717. Notwithstanding the recognition of the Royal Arch Degree and subsequently of the Templar ceremony, the Grand Lodge of All England ‑if we except the transitory Grand Lodge formed in London‑never exercised any influence beyond Yorkshire and Lancashire; and hence all its Warrants, which have been traced from the earliest down to the latest records, were authorized to be held in those two counties only. The boast, therefore, of being " York Masons," so frequently indulged in, more especially in the United States, is an utterly baseless one, because the Grand Lodge of York (as we are justified in inferring) had outlived all its daughter Lodges‑which existed in England only‑before sinking into its final slumber at the close of the eighteenth century. Even at the height of its fortunes, the York branch of the Society was a very small one. Still, however, the relative antiquity of the Lodge‑which certainly existed in the seventeenth century and, probably, much earlier‑invests the history of Freemasonry at this traditional centre with an amount of interest which, it is hoped, will more than justify the space which has been accorded to its narration.
It does not appear to have been‑from the modern standpoint‑ever, legally, a Grand Lodge, i.e. a governing body formed by the co‑operation of other Lodges, as was the Grand Lodge of England. Noorthouck, in his Book of Constitutions, 1784, says that the " ancient York Masons are confined to one Lodge, which is still extant, but consists of very few members and will, probably, be soon altogether annihilated." Findel in his History of Freemasonry (p. 166), says of York Masonry Their right to assume the designation of Grand Lodge is, as we have seen from the foregoing history, more than doubtful and was entirely founded upon the legendary and improbable tale that a General Assembly had taken place formerly in York. A Grand Lodge, in the modern acceptation of the term, had never taken place at York. The isolated or Mother Lodge, which dates from a very early period, had, until the year 1730, neither made nor constituted any other Lodge 142 FREEMASONRY IN YORK and it was not until the publication of the London Book of Constitutions in 1723, that it laid any claim whatever to the appellation " Grand Lodge of All England." Before, however, passing from the subject, a few words have yet to be said respecting the seals used by the now extinct Grand Lodge of All England, for impressions of which I have to thank Joseph Todd; and with this description will be included, for the sake of convenience, that of some other arms, of which plates are given.
When a seal was first used by the York Masons it is now impossible to decide. The seal affixed to the York Constitutions and Certificates, as described by the Grand Secretary on December 14, 1767, in a letter to the Grand Lodge of England, was " Three Regal Crowns, with this Circumscription: Sigillum Edvini Northum. Regis " (see Hughan's Masonic Sketches, pt. i, p. 52). The same author styles this the " Counter " Seal in his Origin of the English Rite, 1884, but it is doubtful if it was used for that purpose. It may be the Old Seal of Prince Edwin's Arms, of silver, mentioned in the inventory of January 1, 1776, as " An iron screw press, with a Seal of Prince Edwin's Arms let into the fall " and also in the " Schedule of the Regalia and Records, etc.," of September 15, 1779. In the latter inventory is named " A Seal and Counter Seal, the first bearing the arms of Prince Edwin and the other the arms of Masonry." The seal‑in‑chief of the latter is of brass, and bears the legend : " + Sigil : Frat : Ebor : Per. Edwin: Coll : " above the three crowns being the year" A.D. gz6." The " Counter Seal " (of copper) contains the arms and crest, as used by the Atholl Masons, of which there will be occasion to speak further on.
It is quite clear that the first seal mentioned is the one referred to by Grand Secretary Lambert in 1767 and that it was set aside later on for the " Seal and Counter Seal " named in the inventory of 1779. Impressions of the latter are attached to the Warrant or Deputation to " The Grand Lodge of England South of the River Trent," of March zg, 1779, and are in an oval tin box, opening with movable lids on both sides, happily still preserved by the Lodge of Antiquity. It would, therefore, be made between the dates of the two inventories1776‑1779 An engraving of these seals (seal and counter seal) is to be found in Hargrove's History of York, likewise in Hughan's work, Origin of the English Rite, 1884. The seal preserved of the Grand Chapter (York) is apparently the one mentioned in the records, March 3, 178o‑" Ordered that a Seal be provided for the use of the Grand Chapter, not exceeding half a Guinea." It was paid for on April 7. The design is of an unusual kind, being a rainbow resting on clouds at each end; below is a triangle and then a crescent and the legend, " Grand‑Royal‑Arch‑ChapterYork." It has been reproduced by Hughan for the first time, who, however, is not correct in treating the seal of the " Arms of Masonry " as the counter seal of the Grand Chapter, as it is distinctly stated in the inventory oú 1779 to be that of the FREEMASONRY IN YORK 143 Grand Lodge. We owe to W. H. Rylands the correct arrangement of the seals at York.
Colonel Shadwell Clerke, when Grand Secretary, kindly placed at disposal impressions of the seals preserved at Grand Lodge. Of these, the more important will be found engraved with those from York. In order to distinguish the seals of the two Grand Lodges of England, the title " Atholl " has been used in one case. It may be pointed out that the arms used by " The Grand Lodge of Masons," as it is styled on one of the seals, are those granted to the Mason's Company, with the colours changed, the addition of beavers as supporters and with a bird assumed to be intended for a dove, but here more nearly resembling a falcon, substituted for the original crest of 4 towered castle. The other Grand Lodge, called on seal No. 6, " of Free and Accepted Masons," bears the arms as given by Dermott in 1764 and called the " Arms of Masonry " in the York Inventory of 1779. Of these arms very little need be said, as their inscriptions, like those of the seals, sufficiently describe what they represent. They can, of course, be seen by students on application to the Librarian at Freemasons' Hall, London. They include reduced copies of the arms as given in the grants to the Masons' and Carpenters' Companies in the fifteenth century‑of the Marblers, Freemasons (the towers being in this instance gold) and the Bricklayers and Tilers, as painted upon the Gateshead Charter of 1671. The date, circa 168o, of the panel formerly in the possession of W. H. Rylands is, in the opinion of some antiquaries, the earliest to which it may be attributed; most probably the blue of the field in the first and third quarters has perished. As a banner is mentioned in the Inventories of January 1, 1776 and September 15, 1779, it must have been for some little time in the possession of the Lodge at York, otherwise it could not be the same as that mentioned in the Minutes under December 27, 1779, then said to be presented by William Siddall.
The arms of the Stonemasons of Strasburg from the seal circa 1725, is coloured according to the description given by Heideloff ; and, in the case of those of the Nurenberg, also loosely described by the same author, W. H. Rylands is of opinion that the description is perhaps to be understood‑following a usual custom in heraldry, that the arms and colours were the same as those of Strasburg, only " with this difference, it is the bend that is red," that is to say, the colours were simply reversed for distinction. The arms of the city of Cologne differ from those in the seal of the Masons of that city, found on the Charter, dated 1396. No colours are to be noticed on the original seal. In a very courteous reply to a request made by Rylands for help in the matter, Dr. H6hlbaum, Stadtarchivar of Cologne, although he agreed that the colours were most probably based on those in the arms of the city, was unfortunately unable to give any definite information on the subject. Three coronets on an azure field were the arms borne by the Grand Lodge of All England‑" Prince Edwin's arms "‑and are, therefore, the same as those given on the York Seals.
York, in those days, occupied much the same position in the North of England 144 FREEMASONRY IN YORK as Bath did in the West. It was the fashionable resort and had its regular season." Many wealthy families had their town houses in the cathedral city and these are still in existence, though degraded to offices and warehouses, whilst the once fashionable quarters have become distinctly slummy. As seen in the foregoing pages, the York Lodge, merging into the self‑styled Grand Lodge of All England, had for its rulers men of importance and it undoubtedly exercised considerable influence within its limited sphere of operations.
CHAPTER IV HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS " HE Minutes of that Schismatic body, commonly, but erroneously, termed the "Ancient Masons," begin in the following manner: TRANSACTIONS OF THE GRAND COMMITTEE OF THE MOST ANCIENT AND HONOURABLE FRATERNITY of FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS At the Griffin Tavern in Holborn, London, Feb. 5th, 175 z. Mr JAMES HAGARTY IN THE CHAIR.
(A note in the original states that " The above Mr. James Hagarty is a painter and lives now in Leather Lane, London.") Also present the Officers of Nos. z, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) 8, 9 and io, being the Representatives of all the Ancient Masons in and adjacent to London.
Brother John Morgan, Grand Secretary, Informed the Committee that he being lately appointed to an office on board one of His Majesty's ships, he recd. orders to prepare for his departure and therefore advised the Grand Committee to chose a new Secretary immediately.
Upon which Bro. John Morris, past Master of No. 5, and Bro. Laurence Dermott of Nos. 9 and Io, and past Master No. 26, in Dublin, were proposed and admitted as candidates for the office of Grand Secretary.
And Grand Secretary Morgan was ordered to examine the Candidates separately and report his opinion of their Qualifications.
After a long & minute Examination, Relative to Initiation, Passing, Instalations and General Regulations, etc., Bro. John Morgan declared that Bro. Laurence Dermott was duly qualified for the Office of Grand Secretary.
Whereon, the Worshipful Master in the Chair put up the Names of John Morris and Laurence Dermott, seperately, when the latter was Unanimously chosen Grand Secretary; and accordingly he was installed (in the Ancient Manner) by the F. III‑I 145 146 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Worshipful Mr James HagArty, Master of No. 4, then presiding officer, assisted by Mr John Morgan, late Grand Secretary and the Masters present.
After which Bro. Morgan (at the request of the president) proclaimed the new Grand Secretary thrice, according to ancient customs, upon which the new Secretary received the usual salutes and then the President and late Grand Secretary, John Morgan, delivered the books, etc., into the hands of the new Secretary, Upon certain conditions which was agreed by all parties, which conditions the said Worshipful Bro. James Hagarty can explain.
The Grand Committee unanimously joined in wishing Br░. Morgan Health and a successful voyage and then closed with the Greatest Harmony. Having adjourned to Wednesday, the fourth of March next.
The explanation of this valediction is found in an entry in the Minute‑book against John Morgan's name‑" Gone on board a stationed ship." The Committee which acted at the meeting of February 5, 175z‑the first recorded meeting‑continued to officiate until September 14 of that year, when, as will presently be seen, they reconstituted themselves into a Grand Committee of twenty‑five members. There is an echo of an earlier meeting in the following document.
Hughan, in 1tilasonic Facts and Fictions, reproduces from a book discovered in Freemasons' Hall, London, the following RULES & ORDERS to be Observ'd By the Most ANCIENT and HON... Society of FREE and ACCEPTED MASONS.
As Agreed and Settled by a Committee appointed by a General Assembly held at the Turk's Head in Greek Street, Soho, on Wednesday, the 17th of July, 1751, And in the Year of MASONRY 5751 Phil McLou hlin James Shee By Sam' Quay g } f JosP' Kelly & Jn░ MORGAN, Gd Secrety Vizt For the GRAND.
They are as follows 1st THAT the Masters and Wardens do meet on the First Wednesday of every Month at the Turk's head, in Greek Street, Soho, or such other place as shall be agreed on, there to hold a Monthly Committee for the better Regulation and Govern ment of the Lodges AND to hear and determine all Matters and Disputes that may or shall arise in any of the Regular Lodges. AND that the Chair shall be taken the First Night by the Master of the Senr Lodge and every other Night by the other Masters each in his turn according to Seniority, until such time as there shall be a Grand Master & Grand Wardens appointed, then every Grand Lodge Night, the Grand Master to take the Chair; and in his Absence by the Deputy Grand and in the Absence of both by the Sent Grand Warden and in their Absence by the "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 147 Junr Grand Warden, if all the Grand Officers shou'd be Absent, then the Master of the Eldest Lodge & so on by all the Masters in their turn according to Seniority.
2nd THAT such meeting do consist only of the Masters and Wardens of all Regular Lodges and in the Absence of the Mastr or Warden, a Past Mastr may attend and bear the office in their absence for the time being and to have a Voice in the Grand equal to the present Members.
3rd AND if any Members do not appear before the Roll is call'd the sd Members shall be Fine'd in the Sum of Twopence and in case of Absence the whole Night, Sixpence, Except Sick, Lying in Confinement, or three Miles from the place of Meeting, that none be admitted but Mast Ward░$ & Past Mast of Regular Lodges, & such as have been Regularly IVstalld and at the time of their Comeing to be members of a Regular Lodge of ANCIENT MASONS.
4th THAT No Brother be made either a Master or Warden of any Lodge except he hath been made a Mason One half Year, and Member of a Regular Lodge for that time.
5th No Person shall be made a Mason in any Lodge until first his Name, Occupation, and Place of Abode shall be reported to the Secretary with the time he is intended to be made in Order that the Secretary may apprize all Lodges of the same.
6th THAT no Old Mason be admitted a Member of any Lodge except he hath been made in a Regular Lodge and hath a proper Certificate of his good behaviour and his not owing anything in such Lodge and in case a Member of any Regular Lodge shall be desirous to become a Member of any other with an intent to belong to two or more Lodges then such Lodge he sues to come into must be assur'd that he is not indebted to the Lodge he then belongs to‑Registy 6d.
7th THAT all Complaints and Appeals must come before this Lodge by Petition.
8th No Admission or Warrant shall be granted to any Brothers to hold a Lodge until such time they have first form'd a Lodge of Ancient Masons and sitt regularly in a credible house and then to apply by Petition and such Petition to be Attested by the Masters of three Regular Lodges who shall make a Proper Report of them.
9th THAT on St. John's day the 24th of June & St. John's day the z7th of December the Master of every Lodge shall deliver into the Secretary of the Grand Lodge the Names of the Masters & Wardens that are appointed to serve for the Ensueing Half Year.
148 THAT on the first Grand Lodge Night after each St. John's day the Master of every Lodge shall deliver into the Grand Secrety the Names of the Members of his Lodge together with their Half Year's Dues. THAT is the Members of each Regular Lodge for the use of Indigent Brethren or otherways as the Grand Lodge shall think Proper, One Shilling each Member pr Quarter.
THAT if a Lodge should grow to Numerous, that Lodge to appoint Masters & Wardens to form a New Body, they applying to the Grand Lodge for Warrants & Constitution in one Month after the first Sitting Night & that no Lodge shall sitt on the First Wednesday of each Month, it being Grand Lodge Night, when the Mast & Wardens are requir'd to attend.
THAT every Person who shall be made a Mason in any Regular Lodge shall pay for his Register in the Grand Lodge Book for the sum of One Shilling.
THAT No Person or Member of the Grand Lodge at the time of Sitting shall interrupt the Grand Master or Grand Officers or any Brother then Speaking to the Grand Master ti'1 such Brother hath done and not then to Speak without first asking liberty in a Proper manner. Nor to hold any Private Committees during the Sitting of the Lodge, nor depart the Lodge without leave from the Grand Master under Penalty of being Fine'd at the Discretion of the Grand.
HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND i oth THAT if any Member of a Private Lodge shall be desireous of leaveing the Lodge he belongs to join another, he must have a proper Certificate from the Mast` of that Lodge and Notice to be given to the Secrety of the Grand Lodge of his leaveing the same, and the Mastr of the Lodge the sd Brother shall join shall report him to the Grand Lodge, in Order to have him Register'd in the Grand Lodge Book to ye Number of the Lodge he is then removed to and to Pay for the same the sum of Sixpence.
15th THAT the following be the Charges & Paid for the Constitution of a New Lodge.
Viz, FOR the Warrant . , o io 6 Regester for each Member . ň 0 1 0 Each Tyler J Grand Lodge . 0 3 6 J Tyler AND that all Warrants Constitutions Registers and Petitions for Constitutions be the Fees of ye Grand Secretary and that no Petitions be receiv'd but such as are wrote by the sd Secrety and he paid for the same.
11th 12th 13th 14th "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" i6th THAT the Grand Master have Power to Call a Committee at Pleasure or Deputy Grand Master or Grand Warden or whoever shall be in the Chair in their Absence ; & such Committee to Consist of Masters of Lodges only, & their Resolutions to be laid before the Grand Lodge the next insueing Night after such Committee held and that the sd Committee have Power to Adjourn from time to time not exceeding three Grand Lodge Nights.
THAT an officer, viz. Masters & Wardens of all Regular Lodges under the Constitution of this Grand Lodge who thro Negligence or Omission will be absent on a Grand Lodge meeting (he or they having a proper Summons sent him or them) shall be fin'd as the Grand Rules Specify and that all such fines shall be paid by the Body such Absentee belongs to and that if any of the Members refuse paying his or their Devidend of said fines. Such Member upon his Refusal shall be Excluded.
118th THAT upon the death of any of our Worthy Brethren whose names are or may be hereafter Recorded in the Grand Registry, &c., the Mr. of such Lodge as he then belonged to Shall immadiately Inform the G.S. of his Death and the intended time of his funeral, and upon this notice the Grand Secretary shall summon all the Lodges to attend the funeral in proper Order, And that Each Member shall pay One Shilling towards Defraying the expenses of said funeral or otherwise to his widow or nearest friend provided the Deceased or his friends Realy want and Require the same, otherwise the money so raised to be put to some other Charitable use, or as the Committee shall think proper, &c.
It is further Agree'd (To support the Dignity of this W.G. Lodge) that no Mem. hereof (on any G.L. meeting) be admitted to Sit herein without his proper Cloathing and jewell &c. Except upon some great Emmergency, in which case the Transgressor shall give Sufficient Reason for so doing.
The following Agreement in the First Register of the Ancients is in Laurence Dermott's well‑known Handwriting Whereas it is highly expedient for the Universal Benefit of the Ancient Craft that a Grand Master and Grand Lodge should govern and direct the proceedings of the several Ancient Lodges held in and about the Cities of London and West minster. And as the present low condition of the Ancient Society of Free and Accepted Masons renders the hope of obtaining a Noble Personage to preside over us at this time very precarious.
In order to preserve the present remains of the true Ancient Craft &c., We, the under Named, being the present Masters and Wardens of the Several Masonic Meetings called Lodges of true Ancient Masonry aforesaid, do agree (pursuant to the powers vested in us by our Respective Brethren of the several Lodges) to form a Grand Committee (we mean such a Committee) as may supply the deficiency of a Grand Master until an opportunity offers for the choice of a Noble Personage to govern our Ancient Fraternity. And that we will therein (by the Authority 1149 ISo HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Aforesaid) make Statutes and Laws for the better government and well Ordering of the said Fraternity, Receive petitions, hear Appeals and Transact Business (that is to say, such Business as ought to be peculiar to a Grand Lodge) with Equity and Impartiality. Dated in our Grand Committee Room on Thursday, the fourteenth day of September, New Stile, 175z, And in the year of Masonry 5752.
In the presence of: No. 2 John Doughty, Master Richd. Coffy, S.W. ? Peter Britain, J.W.
No. 4 Geo. Hebden, Master Hon. Ed. Vaughan, S.W.?Chr. Pidgeon, J.W.
No. 5 Richd. Stringer, Master Owen Tudor, S.W. ? Barth. Scully, JAX'.
No. 6 Edwd. Ryan, Master John Dally, S.W. ? John Wilson, J.W.
No. 8 Thos. Blower, Master Alexr. Fife, S.W. ? John Smith, J.W.
No. i i Andrew Francis, Master Wm. Turner, S.W. ? William Weir, J.W.
No. 12 John Cartwright, Master James Ryan, S.W. ? Barnaby Fox, J.W.
James Hagarthy and Henry Lewis, P.M.'s of No. 4, and Thos. Kelly, P.M. of No. 6, Lau.‑Dermott, G.S.
And Whereas several of the Lodges have congregated and made Masons without any Warrant (not with a desire of Acting wrong, but thro' the Necessity above mentioned), in order to Rectify such irregular proceedings (so far as is in our power) it is hereby Ordered That the Grand Secretary shall write Warrants (on Parchment) for the Unwarranted Lodges‑viz., the Lodges known by the Title of No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and that all the Warrants shall bear date July the Seventeenth, One Thousand Seven hundred fifty and One, being the day on which the said Lodges met (at the Turk's Head Tavern, in Greek Street, Soho) to revive the Ancient Craft.
That the Secretary shall leave proper spaces for the Grand Master, Deputy G.M., and Grand Wardens to sign all the said Warrants according to Ancient Custom.
That as soon as we shall arrive at the Great happiness of installing proper Grand Officers, the possessors of the Unsigned Warrants shall present them to the Grand Master for His Worship's Signature or Renewal, Until which time the said Warrants, as well as those which have or maybe (thro. necessity) granted in the like manner, shall be deemed good and lawfull.
Lastly, this our Regulation shall be Recorded in our Registry, to shew posterity how much we desire to revive the Ancient Craft upon true Masonical principles. Signed by Order, Lau. Dermott, G.S.
In the margin is written: " Apr. 14, 175 2, N. Stile, Geo. Hebden, Mastr. No. 4, in the Chair." W. R. Smith, writing in The Freemason, October 17, 1925, gives the following Summary of Reasons for considering the First Grand Committee to consist of more than the five who signed the Rules i.‑Jno. Morgan signs for " the Grand " Committee. The Committee must, therefore, have been larger than the four, for they sign for themselves.
2.‑The first Lodges were granted Warrants dated July i7, I751.
"ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS " 151 3.‑The Rules must have been drawn up between July 17, 1751, and February 5, 1752, for John Morgan, who signs them as Grand Secretary, resigned on that latter date.
4.‑The Minutes of February 5, 1752, the first Minutes, speak of no fresh appointment.
5.‑The Agreement also speaks of no break in the existence oú the Committee to September, 1752, The five who drew up the Rules are not on the Committee mentioned in the Agreement.
Of Laurence Dermott, the Grand Secretary of the Antients, it may be said, without erring on the side of panegyric, that he was the most remarkable Mason of that time. " As a polemic," observes a judicious writer (Mackey, Encyclopcedia of Freemasonry), " he was sarcastic, bitter, uncompromising and not altogether sincere or veracious. But in intellectual attainments he was inferior to none of his adversaries and, in a philosophical appreciation of the character of the Masonic Institution, he was in advance of the spirit of his age." Yet although a very unscrupulous writer, he was a matchless administrator. In the former capacity he was the embodiment of the maxim, de l'audace, encore de Z'audace, toujours de l'audare, but in the latter he displayed qualities which we find united in no other member of the Craft, who came either before or after him. In A Defence of Laurence Dermott and the Ancients, reproduced by Sadler in Masonic Reprints and Revelations, it is claimed that the upward progress of the Antients as an organized body may fairly be dated from Dermott's appointment as Grand Secretary.
As Grand Secretary and later as Deputy Grand Master, he was simply the life and soul of the body with which he was so closely associated. He was also its historian and, to the influence of his writings must be attributed, in a great measure, the marvellous success of the Antients.
The epithets of " Antient " and " Modern "applied by Dermott to the usages of his own and of the older Society respectively, produced a really wonderful result. The antithesis at once caught the public ear and, what is perhaps the strangest fact connected with the whole affair, the terms soon passed into general use, among the Brethren under both Grand Lodges. The senior of these bodies, it is true, occasionally protested against the employment of expressions which implied a relative inferiority on the part of its own members, but the epithets stuck and we constantly meet with them in the Minute‑books of Lodges under the older system, where they were apparently used without any sense of impropriety.
The memoirs of Laurence Dermott, for the most part inscribed by his own hand, are given us in the records of the Antients. By this is not meant that we have there his autobiography, but the personality of the man was so marked, that, with brief exceptions from the time the Minutes commence, down to the date of his last appearance in Grand Lodge, the history of that body is very largely composed of personal incidents in the career of its Secretary and Deputy Grand Master.
Some curious anecdotes may be gleaned from these old records ; and, if 152 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Warburton's dictum be sound and he set more value on one material historical anecdote, than on twenty new hypotheses in Philosophy, or a hundred good criticisms‑we cannot do better than trace the fortunes of Laurence Derm_ ott under the guidance of his own hand.
But before entering upon this task, a few preliminary words are essential. Laurence Dermott was born in Ireland, 1720 ; initiated into Masonry, in Ireland, January 14, 1740; installed as Master of No. 26, Dublin, June 24, 1746, which Lodge, according to the Pocket Companion for Freemasons (Dublin, 173 5), then met at the Eagle Tavern on Cork Hill and, in the same year, became a Royal Arch Mason. Shortly after this he came to England and, in 1748, joined a Lodge under the regular establishment, but had shifted his allegiance, and become a member of Nos. 9 and io, on the Roll of the Antients, when elected Grand Secretary by the latter, February 5, 1752, after having, as we have seen, satisfied his predecessor, that he was well suited for the office. This office he laid down in 1771 ; and, on March 27, that year, was appointed Deputy Grand Master, being succeeded, at his own request, by William Dickey, December 1777. He was again Deputy from December 27, 1783, until the recurrence of the same festival in 1787, when‑also at his own request‑he was succeeded by James Perry. His last attendance at Grand Lodge occurred June 3, 1789 and he died in June 1791, the authority for this latter date being W.M. Bywater, in his Notes on Lau. Dermott and his Work. Bywater was P.M. and historian of the Royal Athelstan Lodge, now No. icy, originally an Antient or Atholl Lodge. There is no allusion to his death in the Atholl Records ; and the only one met with in those of other Masonic jurisdictions is the following " June 4, 1 792. Resolved, that in order to show the just regard and respect of this Grand Lodge for our late Bro. Laurence Dermott, the patron and founder thereof, it be recommended to every member of this Grand Lodge to appear on St. John's Day next, with Aprons bordered with black or other marks of mourning," which is in the Early History and Constitutions of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, pt. ii, 1878, P. 119.
Dermott‑who, the Minutes of July 13, 175 3, inform us, " was obliged to work twelve hours in the day, for the Master Painter who employed him "‑in all probability owed his appointment as Grand Secretary to the influence of James Hagarty, in whose employment it is very possible he was at the time.
As time advanced, his circumstances in life improved, for, in 1764, the officers of No. 31 offered to become his security to the amount of C1,ooo, if he was chosen Grand Treasurer; in 1766 he was able to subscribe five guineas towards the relief of a brother in Newgate and ;E i o to the charity; in 1767 he " made a volluntary gift of the Grand Master's Throne, compleat, which cost in the whole C34 " ; and in 1768 he is described in the records as a Wine Merchant, in which business he appears to have continued until his death.
His attainments were of no mean order. The Minutes of the Stewards' Lodge ‑March 21, 1764‑informs us that, an " Arabian Mason having petitioned for relief, the Grand Secretary conversed with him in the Hebrew language," after "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 153 which he was voted úI Is. Of Latin he possessed at least a smattering, for when Grand Master Mathew, on being asked by him to name the text for a sermonJune 12, 1767‑replied, In principio erat sermo ille et sermo ille erat apud Deum erat clue ille sermo Deus‑the Secretary at once made a bow and said, Fungor officio meo. His education, Bywater points out (op. cit., p. 6), is attested by the correspondence which occasionally appears in the pages of the Transactions of the Antients ; while his firm and vigorous handwriting is indicative of his character, which was energy ‑frequently resisted, but, nevertheless, energy irresistible. He lectured on Masonic subjects and he wrote songs. It was the custom of the period to include songs at the end of Masonic books and he adopted the custom. Bywater also adds that he sung them to the Brethren, perhaps feeling that " A verse may finde him, who a sermon flies." Of his conscientiousness in the performance of his duties, the following, taken from the Minutes of the Stewards' Lodge, affords a good illustration March ig, 1766. N.B. The Grand Secretary was fined forswearing an oath, which fine he paid immediately ; and was ordered to withdraw, during which time the Stewards' Lodge order'd that the G.S. should be excused and that the fine shou'd not be inserted among the Transactions of the Steward's Lodge. Notwithstanding this lenitive order, the G.S. thinks he cannot violate that part of his Instalation Ceremony, which expressly says, that he shall not favour the undeserved. LAU. DERMOTT.
Therefore I have made this note.
Although frequently debarred by sickness from actual attendance at the meetings of Grand Lodge towards the closing years of his Secretaryship, the records afford numerous examples of his devotion to the best interests of the Society. Thus, under March 7, 1770, we find Heard a second letter from G. S. Dermott, humbly proposing that no part of the Grand Fund be appropriated, expended, disbursed, nor ordered towards defraying the charges of any Publick Feast, Musick or Procession for the future, the Funerals of Indigent Brethren (only) excepted‑and which was unanimously approved of.
In addition to his manifold labours as Secretary, he took upon himself the task of compiling a Book of Constitutions for the Antients. This work‑which will be hereafter considered‑passed through no fewer than four editions during the author's lifetime and, if his fame rested on nothing else, would alone serve as a lasting monument of his zeal and ability. Originally published at his own risk, its sale must have been very remunerative ; and on September 29, 1785, when the thanks of Grand Lodge were voted to him for " giving up his property of Ahiman Ke!Zon to the Charity," the endowment must have been a very substantial addition to that fund.
The expression Ahiman Ke7,on, which Dermott explained in a secondary title 154 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND as " A Help to a Brother," has received various interpretations. Dr. Crucefix has rendered it as a corruption of three Hebrew words‑achi, man, ratson‑signifying " the thoughts or opinions of a true and faithful Brother." Eight English editions were published in 1756, 1764, 1778, 1787 (these within the lifetime of Laurence Dermott), i 8oo, i 8oi, 1807 and 1813. The title has also been adopted by other jurisdictions, notably Ireland, Pennsylvania, Maryland and South Carolina.
It is worthy of notice, that in Ahiman ReZon, 1764 (second edition), whilst explaining the difference between " Antient and Modern " [Masonry], the author says : " I think it my duty to declare solemnly, before God and man, that I have not the least antipathy against the gentlemen, members of the Modern Society ; but, on the contrary, love and respect them." " Such," he adds in the third edition, fourteen years later, was my declaration in the second edition of this book ; nevertheless, some of the Modern Society have been extremely malapert of late. Not satisfied with saying the Antient Masons in England had no Grand Master, some of them descended so far from truth as to report, the author had forged the Grand Master's hand‑writing to Masonic warrants, etc. Upon application, His Grace the most Noble Prince John, Duke of Atholl, our present R.W. Grand Master's father, avowed his Grace's hand‑writing, supported the Ancient Craft and vindicated the author in the public newspapers.
He then goes on to say As they differ in matters of Masonry, so they did in matters of calumny ; for while some were charging me with forgery, others said, that I was so illiterate as not to know how to write my name. But what may appear more strange is, that some insisted that I had neither father nor mother ; but that I grew up spontaneously in the corner of a potatoe garden in Ireland. I cannot reconcile myself [he continues], to the idea of having neither father nor mother ; but . . . be that as it may, as I do not find that the calumny of a few Modern Masons has done me any real injury, I shall continue in the same mind as express'd in the declaration to which this notice is written.
In Masonic circles Dermott was probably the best abused man of his time and he revenged himself by holding up the members of the rival Society (i.e. the regularly constituted Grand Lodge of the Moderns) to the ridicule of the public. Of this, one example must suffice. Describing their innovations, he says There was another old custom that gave umbrage to the young architects, i.e. the wearing of aprons, which made the gentlemen look like so many mechanicks, therefore it was proposed, that no brother (for the future) should wear an apron.
This proposal was rejected by the oldest Members, who declared that the aprons were all the signs of Masonry then remaining amongst them and for that reason they would keep and wear them. [It was then proposed, that (as they were resolved to wear aprons) they should be turned upside down, in order to avoid appearing mechanical. This proposal took place and answered the design, for that "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 155 which was formerly the lower part, was now fastened round the abdomen, and the bib and strings hung downwards, dangling in such manner as might convince the spectators that there was not a working mason amongst them.
Agreeable as this alteration might seem to the gentlemen, nevertheless it was attended with an ugly circumstance : for, in traversing the lodge, the brethren were subject to tread upon the strings, which often caused them to fall with great violence, so that it was thought necessary to invent several methods of walking, in order to avoid treading upon the strings.] After many years' observation on these ingenious methods of walking, I conceive that the first was invented by a man grievously afflicted with the sciatica. The second by a sailor, much accustomed to the rolling of a ship. And the third by a man who, for recreation, or through excess of strong liquors, was wont to dance the drunken peasant.
Although the passages within crotchets were omitted after 1787, the remainder appeared in every later edition, including the final one of 1813. That such coarse observations could ever find their way into a work of the kind may occasion surprise ; but we should do well to recollect that when " journeymen painters " take to writing Books of Constitutions, some little deviation from the ordinary methods must be expected. But we gain a clearer insight into the real character of the man from the lines with which he concludes this portion of his work, wherein he expresses a hope‑renewed in the two succeeding editions published before his death‑that he may " live to see a general conformity and universal unity between the worthy masons of all denominations "‑a hope, alas, not destined to fulfilment.
Mutatis mutandis, the description given by Burton (History of Scotland, vol. ii, p. 344) of the split in the Associate Synod, will exactly describe the breach between, and reunion of, the Masons of England After long separation, these bodies, which had been pursuing their course in different lines, re‑united their forces. But, in the meantime, according to a common ecclesiastical habit, each body counted itself the Synod and denied the existence of the other, save as a mob of impenitent Schismatics.
As the earliest records of the Antients are in the handwriting of Laurence Dermott and date from his election as Grand Secretary, it is impossible to say how far, as an organized body, their existence should be carried back. The note to the Minutes of September 14, 175z, already quoted, affords the only clue to the difficulty and, as will be seen, is not of material assistance. It states that a General Assembly of Antient Masons was held at the Turk's Head Tavern in Greek Street, Soho, On July 17, 1751, when the Masters of z, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 were authorized to grant Dispensations and Warrants and to act as Grand Master. And the Masters of three Lodges " did actually exercise such authority, in signing the warrant No. 8, from which [so the words run] this note is written, for Dermott never received any copy or manuscript of the former Transactions from Mr. Morgan, late Grand Secretary: Nor does Laurence Dermott, the present Grand Secretary, think that 156 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Bro. Morgan did keep any book of Transactions,‑though there is no certainty that he did not." This, notwithstanding that the Minutes of the Grand Committee contain the following entry Be it Remembered that M` John Morgan, late Grand Secretary, had a certain claim on the Manuscripts here said to be delivered to Laurence Dermott. Which claim was acknowledged by the G d. Committee as good and lawful and for that and other Good Reason which cannot be committed to writing. The Worshipful Grand Committee did agree with Brother John Morgan, late Grand Secretary, that the new Secretary, Lau. Dermott, should be solemnly bound never to deliver the said Manuscript (viz., a Large folio bound in White Vellum) to any person, But him the said John Morgan or his order in writing.
From this we learn that there were six Lodges in existence prior to July 17, 1751, but the exact dates of their constitution there are no means of determining; still it is not likely that the oldest of these Lodges was formed before 1747.
The members, for the most part, seem to have been composed of mechanics and shopkeepers (Sadler, Masonic Facts and Fictions, p. 68) ; many of them were evidently from the Sister Isle, as will be seen from the names of those who comprised the Committee for framing the regulations.
The proceedings of the Grand Committee, held March 4, 175z‑Bro. John Gaunt, Master of No. 5, in the chair‑are thus recorded by Laurence Dermott Formal complaints made against Thomas Phealon and John Macky, better known by the name of the " leg of mutton masons." In course of the examination, it appeared that Phealon and Macky had initiated many persons for the mean con sideration of a leg of mutton for dinner or supper, to the disgrace of the Ancient Craft. That Macky was an Empiric in phisic ; and both impostors in Masonry. That upon examining some brothers whom they pretended to have made Royal Arch men, the parties had not the least idea of that secret. That D= Macky (for so he was called) pretended to teach a Masonical Art, by which any man could (in a moment) render himself invisible. That the Grand Secretary had eNamined Macky and that Macky appeared incapable of making an Apprentice with any degree of propriety. Nor had Macky the least idea or knowledge of Royal‑Arch Masonry. But instead thereof, he had told the people whom he deceived, a long story about 12 white Marble Stones, etc., etc. And that the Rainbow was the Royal Arch, with many other absurdities equally foreign and rediculous.
Agreed and ordered‑that neither Thomas Phealon nor John Mackey be admitted into any ancient Lodge during their natural Lives.
A footnote on this page of the Minutes states This was the first time that Laurence Dermott acted as principal Secretary, nor did he take any fees before the 27th April, 175 2.
The only allusion to the Royal Arch, of earlier date than this Minute, will be found in Dr. Dassigny's Serious and Impartial Enquiry into the Cause of the present "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 157 Decay of Freemasonry in the Kingdom of Ireland, 1744. Reprinted by Hughan, in Masonic Memorials of the Union, 1874; also in Masonic Magazine, vol. ii, p. 368; Vol. iii, pp. 5, 62, 111.
The Minutes of the Grand Committee held on April i, 175 z, are also of interest The Copy of the Bye‑Laws for private Lodges as written by the late Grand Secretary was read and compared with Br. Dermott's Copy of the Bye‑Laws of his former Lodge, No. z6, in the City of Dublin and, the latter, being deemed the most correct copy, it was Unanimously Resolved, that the most correct copy should be received & acknowledged as the only Bye‑Laws for private Lodges in future and public thanks given to Bros. Philip M'Loughlin and J. Morgan for their good intentions and trouble in drawing up former Bye‑Laws.
The new President called on John Morgan, James Hagan and Laurence Dermott, to know what success they had in petitioning Lord George Sackville to accept the Chair. Their report was that they had waited on Lord George Sackville at Somerset House, in the Strand, that having read the petition, His Lordship told them politely that he had the highest veneration for the Ancient Craft and wished to promote it. But he was engaged to attend his father [the Duke of Dorset] Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and was inform'd that the Grand Lodge of Ireland had lately chosen him Grand Master and that upon his return to England he would accept the Chair, or recommend them to another Noble Man. Unanimously Resolved, Ordered that the thanks of the Ancient Craft be given to the Right Honourable Lord George Sackville for His Lordship's polite and very kind answer.
Lord George Sackville was Grand Master of Ireland in 1751 and 175 z, but he never occupied the Chair of the Antient Grand Lodge of England.
At the meeting of the Grand Committee held on May 6, 175 z A motion was made by John Hamilton, Past Master of No. 7 : That this Grand Committee be removed back to the Turk's Head Tavern, in Greek Street, Soho, where it had been long held under the title of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Old Institutions. This motion was not seconded and, therefore, dropt.
Ultimately the Grand Committee decided to remove to the Temple Eating House, in Shire Lane, near Temple Bar. There is no confirmation of John Hamilton's statement that the Grand Committee had long met at the Turk's Head Tavern as a Grand Lodge and W. R. Smith thinks (The Freemason, October 24, 19z5) it seems probably to refer to preliminary meetings held by the promoters of the General Assembly.
Shire Lane, it may be stated, commenced on the north side of Temple Bar and ran across the site of the existing side of the Royal Courts of Justice. In earlier times it divided London from the fields, hence the name Shire Lane.
On June 3, 175 z, the Grand Committee met at the Temple, Shire Lane, when, having no Grand Master or Grand Wardens to install, the Grand Secretary was 158 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND re‑installed " according to the antient custom of installing Grand Secretaries and he was proclaimed and saluted after which he repeated the whole ceremony of installing Grand Officers &c., in the manner which he had learned from Br. Edward Spratt, the celebrated Grand Secretary of Ireland." In the Grand Committee held July i, 175 z, a complaint against Bro. Willoughby was heard and he was ordered to refund nine shillings to a Brother whom he had wronged. " Whereupon Bro. Moses Willoughby declared they might expell him, for he would not conform to the Rules of any Society upon Earth by which he should lose nine shillings." Expelled accordingly.
On August 5, 175 z The Grand Secretary again urged the necessity of chusing Grand Mr. upon which the Worshipful Master in the Chair made an Excellent Speech, wherein he labour'd to fire the Brethren with a spirit to pursue the Grand Design; and con cluded with saying " Future Ages will bless your memories for preserving and reviving the Antient Craft in England." On September z, in the same year, it was agreed that every sick member should receive one penny per week from every registered Mason in London and Westminster ; after which " the Lodge was opened in Antient form of Grand Lodge and every part of real Freemasonry was traced and explained " by the Grand Secretary, " except the Royal Arch." On September 14, 1752, there was an Emergency Meeting of the Grand Committee at the Temple Eating House, with George Hebden, W.M. of No. 9, in the Chair, the Minute of which reads as follows It was resolved that Dispensations and Warrants should be issued under the Grand Seal by the Grand Secretary, but those must be confirmed by the next Grand Master according to a Regulation inserted in the front of the Grand Registry Register.
Then follows a foot‑note to the entry which reads An order of this sort was made in a General Assembly of Antient Masons at the Turk's Head Tavern in Greek Street, Soho, upon the 17th day of July, 1751, wherein the Masters of Nos. z, 3, 4, 5, 6, and seven were authorized to Grant Dis pensations and Warrants and to act as Grand Master. And Richd. Price, Master of No. 3 ; Henry Lewis, Master of No. 4 ; John Gaunt, Master of No. 5 ; and Christopher Byrne, Master of No. 6, did actually exercise such Authority in signing the Warrant of No. 8 to James Bradshaw, Thomas Blower and Richard Darling Guest for holding a Lodge at the sign of the Temple and Sun in Shire Lane, Temple Bar, London, from which Warrant this note is written. For Dermott never received any copy or manuscript of the former transactions from Mr. Morgan, the late Grand Secretary, nor does Laurence Dermott, the present Grand Secretary, think that Brother John Morgan did keep any book of transactions in this form, though there is no certainty that he did not.
" ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS " 159 At the meeting of the Grand Committee on October 6, 1752, a motion was made from the Chair That application be immediately made to some honourable Antient Brother to accept the honour of the Grand Mastership or. Recommend us another. Resolved, it is the unanimous opinion of the Grand Committee that the Craft has flourished most and best when governed by a noble Grand Master. For though a General or Grand Committee have power to form new laws for the Fraternity, yet, to render them binding or render stability, a Grand Master is absolutely necessary to confirm them.
Finally it was arranged that every Brother should make due enquiries concerning proper persons and report the result at the next meeting.
At the meeting held in November 1752, the names of Lords Chesterfield, Ponsonby, Inchiquin and Blesington, as suitable noblemen for the office of Grand Master were laid before the Grand Committee, all being said to be Antient Masons.
Philip Dormer, fourth Earl of Chesterfield, K.G., who succeeded to the title in January 1725‑6, was the author of Chesterfield's Letters. In 1728 he was appointed Ambassador to the Court of Holland; in 173o he was made K.G. ; and from 1730‑3 he was Lord Steward of the Household. In 1744 he was admitted into the Cabinet and, from 1744‑6, he was Lord‑Lieutenant of Ireland.
Ponsonby Brabazon, Viscount Duncannon of the Fort of Duncannon, Co. Wexford and Baron Bessborough, was created Baron Ponsonby of Sysonby, Leicester, in the Peerage of the United Kingdom. In 1707 he was Captain of the Grenadiers in the Enniskillen or 27th Regiment; Sheriff and Governor of Co. Kilkenny in 1713 and of Co. Kildare in 1714. He was Privy Councillor to George I and George II; Commissioner of Revenues in 1739, in which year he was created Earl of Bessborough ; in 1751 he was Mareschal of the Irish Admiralty; and, afterwards, Lord Justice of Ireland; Vice‑Admiral of Munster in 175 5.
The family of Inchiquin descends in an unbroken male line from Brian Borrihmer, Prince of Thomond, North Munster and chief of the Dalgais, who became supreme monarch of Ireland in ioo2 and was slain in battle in the decisive victory of the Irish over the Danes at Clontarf, April z3, 1014. The Lord Inchiquin here referred to was William, the fourth Earl.
William Stewart, Viscount Mountjoy and Baron Stewart, also a Baronet, was created Earl of Blesington December 7, 1745. He was the only surviving son of William, the 2nd Viscount (16gz‑1727). He was Grand Master of Ireland in 1738 and 1739 and, upon his election, a picture was engraved of him, which is the earliest known portrait of a Noble Grand Master wearing all the insignia of his office. He was created a Privy Councillor of Ireland in 1746 and afterwards appointed Governor of Co. Tyrone. He died in Charles Street, Berkeley Square, W., August 14, 1769, when all his Peerage dignities became extinct.
Each of these names was duly considered by the Grand Committee and finally it was " Ordered that the Grand Secretary shall draw up a proper petition i 6o HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND To the Right Honourable Philip, Earl of Chesterfield, an Antient Mason, begging his Lordship's Sanction as Grand Master." The Secretary returned thanks for the honour done him in appointing him the Committee to wait on Lord Chesterfield and begged the Grand Committee would postpone the business until they had made choice of a more proper place to receive and install his Lordship, the Temple Eating House being very unfit for that business. The friends of the landlord objected to the Grand Secretary's request, " upon which there were many altercations on both sides, not fit to be written." The result was that the whole business was postponed.
At the meeting on December 6, 1752, it was Resolved unanimously; that the Lodges, who by neglect or disobedience have forfeited their Rank and Number, shall be discontinued on the Registry and the Junior Lodges who have proved themselves faithful friends of the Antient Craft, shall henceforth bear the Title or Number so forfeited: The distribution to be according to Seniority. The Grand Secretary desired to know whether there was any other books or Manuscripts more than had been delivered to him upon the znd of Feb. i 75.z. To which several of the Brethren answered that they did not know of any; others said they knew Mr. Morgan had a roll of parchment of prodigious length, which contained some historical matters relative to the ancient Craft, which parchment they did suppose he had taken abroad with him. It was further said, That many Manuscripts were lost amongst the Lodges lately Modernized, where a vestige of the ancient Craft [word erased] was not suffered to be revived or practized. And that it was for this reason so many of them withdrew from Lodges (under the Modern sanction) to Support the true Antient System. That they found the Freemasons from Ireland and Scotland had been initiated in the very same manner as themselves, which confirmed their system and practice as right and just, Without which none could be deem'd legal, though possessed of all the books and papers on Earth.
The Grand Secretary (Dermott) produced a very old Manuscript, written or copied by one Bramhall of Canterbury, in the reign of King Henry the seventh; which was presented to Mr. Dermott in 1748, by one of the descendants of the writer ‑‑on perusal it proved to contain the whole matter in the fore‑mentioned parchment, as well as other matters not in that parchment.
Br. Quay moved " that the thanks of the General committee be given to G. S. Dermott ; " upon which Bn. James Bradshaw [and others] protested against any thanks or even approbation of the Secretary's conduct, who, instead of being useful, had actually Sung and lectured the Brethren out of their senses. The Secretary said‑if he was so unfortunate as to sing any brother out of his Senses, he hoped the Worshipful Master in the Chair and the Grand Committee, would allow him an hour's time and he would endeavour to sing them into their senses again.
The request was granted with great good humour, the Secretary made proper use of his time and the W. Master clos'd and adjourned the Grand Committee to the Five Bells Tavern in the Strand.
The name of Abr‑ Ardizorf appears in the Minutes of this date. He was excluded on the day of the General Assembly, July 17, 1751, being " Deemd un‑ "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 161 worthy of ye Society," but had evidently been re‑admitted. His address is given as Broad Court, Bow Street, Covent Gard░, but his occupation is not stated. Several resolutions of a financial character were passed in the early part of 175 3. On January 3, that every member of a Regular Lodge in and about the metropolis‑at this time there were no others‑should contribute fourpence a month towards raising a Charity Fund; on February 7, that the officers of Lodges might pay ten shillings per week to a sick member and seven to a member confined for debt, with the assurance of being recouped from the Grand Fund; and, on April 4, that one shilling be spent by each member at every meeting ; also that Lodges pay two shillings and sixpence for each newly‑made Mason, one shilling for joining members and " that the G. Secretary be free from Contributions or reckonings, whilst being entitled to every benefit of the Grand Lodge, except a vote in chusing Grand Officers." Lodges Nos. 2 to 17 were represented at this meeting.
At an Emergency Meeting held at the King and Queen, Cable Street, Rosemary Lane, on July 13, 175 3 The Grand Secretary humbly begged that the Lodge would please to appoint some certain person to deliver the summons's for the future, that he, the sd Secretary was under the necessity of delivering or paying for delivery for some months past as he was obliged to work twelve hours in the day for a Master Painter who employed him.
It was ordered that the Grand Tyler or the Grand Pursuivant should deliver the summonses. The W.M. in the Chair thanked the Grand Secretary for the last new song which he had composed and hoped " that the applause of his Brethren would induce Br. Dermott, G.S., to compose another against the next St. John's Day," which the Grand Secretary promised to attempt.
The first country Lodge on the roll of the Antients was constituted in this year. A petition for some Brethren residing at Bristol was read October. 3, when it was ordered " that the Grand Secretary shall proceed according to the antient custom of the Craft during the inter Ma gistrum." The London Lodges were usually established by means of a provisional dispensation in the first instance‑e.g. " June icg, 1753.‑Ordered a dispensation for John Doughty, for the purpose of congregating and making of Freemasons at the One Tun in the Strand, from this day unto the first Wednesday in July next " (Grand Lodge Minutes).
At the meeting of the Grand Committee held at the Five Bells Tavern in the Strand, December 5, 1753, when the Chair was taken by McLachlan McIntosh, Master of No. 3 The G.S. made a motion, i.e. That, as the Fraternity had not made choice of any of the Noble personages formerly mentioned in these Transactions and it being doubtful whether the Antient Craft Cou'd be honour'd with a noble G.M. at this 162‑ HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND time, he humbly beg'd that the Brethren wou'd make choice of some worthy and skilfull Master to fill the Chair for the space of six months successively. Accordingly Bro. Robert Turner, Master of No. 15, was nominated and unanimously Chosen to fill the Grand 1`Iaster's Chair for six months and, being instal'd and saluted.
His Worship chose Bro. William Rankin for his Deputy, who was also immediately install'd, saluted.
Then the Lodge proceeded in the choice of Gd. Wardens, when Bro. Samuel Quay, Past Master of No. z, was chosen Senr. Gd. Warden, and Bro. Lachlan McIntosh, of No. 3, was chosen junior Gd. Warden, who were also install'd and saluted according to Ancient Usage, and concluded with a most agreeable harmony.
The Committee then adjourned to St. John's Day, December 27, when the officers were again installed, the previous ceremony, for some reason, having been deemed irregular.
The Grand Committee now, of course, became transformed into Grand Lodge on the second anniversary of the appointment of Laurence Dermott, which was possibly one of the reasons which induced the members at the December meeting to vote him a jewel of the value of five guineas. This jewel was presented to him at the meeting of Grand Lodge held on February 6, 1754 and it was intended to be his own property and not that of Grand Lodge, nevertheless, a foot‑note to the Minute says that he delivered the jewel to his successor, William Dickey and that it was worn by succeeding Grand Secretaries. The " Grand Committee of the Antients, which subsequently developed into their `Grand Lodge,' was no doubt originally their senior private Lodge, whose growth in this respect is akin to that of the Grand Chapter of the Moderns, which, commencing in 1765 as a private Chapter, within a few years assumed the general direction of R. A. Masonry and issued Warrants of Constitution " (Atholl Lodges, p. ix).
On March 14 following, a Grand Committee of Masters was held at the Thistle and Crown, Church Court, Strand, the Grand Master being in the Chair. On the recommendation of the Grand Secretary, it was resolved to hold a monthly Com mittee of Masters at the Crown, St. Paul's Churchyard under the name of the Committee of Inspection to consider the merits of petitioners for charity.
The following Minute of the Grand Lodge held on June 5, 1754, is of value, particularly as supporting Sadler's opinion (Masonic Facts and Fictions) that the proceedings of the regular Grand Lodge in the early years of its existence were not entirely harmonious, at which opinion he arrived by a knowledge of the difficulties and contentions that beset the early career of its rivals. The Minute of the Antient Grand Lodge for the date mentioned reads as follows Heard the complaint of Brother Samuel Galbraith & others against John Hamilton, Master of No. i g, wherein it appeared beyond Hamilton's contradiction that the said Hamilton had wilfully villified every part of a Master Mason so as to render the Charge incapable of being committed to writing, &c., &c., &c. Agreed Unanimously (in the presence of the said John Hamilton) that it is "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 163 our opinion That John Hamilton, late Master of No. I9, is Unworthy the Name of a Freemason, and consequently unworthy of this or any other good Society. Ordered That this Transaction shall be recorded in the Grand Lodge Books to inform our Worthy Successors that the foregoing Character of the said Hamilton is the well proved and undoubted Opinion of us the Grand Officers and Officers of No. 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 18, 20, 27, 30, 31, 35, the whole composing a Grand Lodge of 4 Gd. Officers i Gd. S.
14 Masters 28 Wardens 23 Pastmasters Amounting in the whole to 70 Members.
Witness, by Order, Lau : Dermott, G.S.
Upon which John Hamilton was turn'd down stairs and a General Order given that he should not be admitted into any Antient Lodge directly nor indirectly.
Sadler adds A Grand Ejector would have been an important personage in those days. It will be observed that the indefatigable Dermott never did things by halves. Not only were the direct or ordinary portals barred against the admission of this culprit, but access by such indirect means as trap‑doors, windows and chimneys was likewise denied him.
In all probability, however, the term " indirect " referred to the possibility of his seeking admission to a Lodge as a visitor on the introduction of some member. John Hamilton figured in another scene later on. On March 2, 175 7, he made an appeal for reinstatement and asked that he might be permitted to make a statement, when he would prove that the sentence against him was both cruel and unjust. After much discussion this privilege was granted. Then, according to the Minutes He said that the former complaint against him was groundless and malicious and carried against him by the wickedness and cunning of an Imposter, viz., Laurence Dermott, the Secretary, who had imposed on the whole Craft in saying that he was regularly made in Ireland, &c., whereas the said Dermott was only a clandestine Mason, made by James Hagan and others at a house in Long Acre, some years before. That his whole drift was to keep the Society in ignorance and with his singing and tricks to lull them on until they had accumulated a considerable sum of money and then to rob them. The late Grand Master, E. Vaughan Esq., stood up and said he found himself very unhappy in hearing such a vile character of the Grand Secretary, whom he had taken for a most deserving Brother and, therefore, earnestly moved the said Secretary should be immediately ordered to make his defence. This motion was put in execution, when the Secretary arose and begged leave to read a certain regulation, which, being carried, he read as follows 164 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND If a complaint be made against a Brother by another Brother and he be found guilty, he shall stand to the determination of the Lodge ; but if the complaint be made against a Brother, wherein the Accuser cannot support his complaint to conviction, such Accuser shall forfeit such penalty as the person so accused might have forfeited had he really been convicted of such complaint.
Then the Grand Secretary addressed himself to the Chair and said: " Right Worshipfull Sir and Brethren‑This is the Antient and most equitable Law made and observed by our ancestors, always approved and confirmed by you and, there fore, by this Law I stand or fall," to which the Right Worshipfull in the Chair replied : " As the Law of Masons has decreed, so shall all things here be done." Then his Worship called on the Accuser and told him he must prove his assertion. The Accuser ordered James Hagan before the Lodge, who, being asked whether he did make Lau. Dermott, G.S. a Freemason, he answered and declared he did not, neither did he ever teach him anything relative to Masonry, nor could he devise what reason Mr. Hamilton had for saying so. The Grand Master then asked Mr Hamilton if he had any other person to call on this occasion, upon which Lau Rooke rose and said that he verily believed that Br. John Hamilton's accusation was true. Being asked his reason for thinking so, he answered because Br. Hamilton told him so and at the same time swore to it in such a manner as to leave no doubt behind.
In defence Dermott was able to produce evidence from Thomas Allen, P.M. of No. 2, that he (Dermott) had faithfully served all Masonic offices in a Lodge held in his house in the City of Dublin before coming to England. Charles Byrne, the senior Master of No. 2, proved that Dermott had served the offices of junior and Senior Deacon, Senior Warden and Secretary of Lodge 26 under the Irish Constitution, of which he was installed Master on June 24, 1746, all being prior to his coming to England. Then Dermott produced a certificate of good conduct signed by Edward Spratt, Grand Secretary of Ireland. In the end it was Resolved, it is the opinion of this Grand Lodge that John Hamilton, late of No. icg, is unworthy of being admitted into a Masons Lodge or any other good Society; and therefore it is hereby ordered that the said John Hamilton shall not be admitted within the door of any Antient Lodge during his Life; and the said John Hamilton having been several times excluded for mal‑practices and again re‑instated, yet still continues in his vile offences and his clandestine makings are not the least.
There was another breeze on April 2, 175 5, when, according to the Minutes James Eastman, the Master of No. 18, stood up and declared that his business to the Grand Lodge on this night was to make a formal declaration that neither he nor any of the members of his Lodge would contribute to the Grand Funds, nor attend this Grand Lodge for the future.
Upon which the R.W.G. Master told Mr. Eastman that he was wellcome to stay away and, further, that if he knew anybody of like principles in this assembly he was also at liberty to take him or them.
" ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 165 Later in the proceedings G. W. Galbraith beg'd leave to resign his office on acct. of the ill‑usage which he had recd. at the hands of Lau. Rooke, the Master of No. 17. The Grand Warden was reconciled to his Office and Laurence Rooke declared off the Grand Charity, and demanded two shillings which he had formerly contributed to the Fund for relief of worthy Brethren in Distress.
The Grand Master told him that taking him in every sense he did realy believe him to be one of the poorest creatures in London, he wanted merit to receive a single farthing out of any Charitable Fund in the Universe.
An important resolution was passed at the Grand Lodge held on September 4, 1754, when it was ordered That our monthly meetings shall be published in the Daily Advertiser, with the Grand Secretary, L. Dermott's name annexed; that the said Secretary shall ! draw up such advertisements as prudence shall direct him and the expenses attending such publications shall be reimbursed him, the said Secretary, on every Lodge meeting.
At the next meeting on October z, 1754, Dermott recommended that a set of Grand Lodge jewels should be ordered and, at the same time, he thanked the Grand Lodge for the jewel which had been presented to him in the preceding February.
The Grand Lodge met on November 6, 1754, at the Bells, when a Committee of Charity, to be styled the Stewards' Lodge, was appointed, the proceedings of which were read at the next annual meeting of Grand Lodge. The functions of this Stewards' Lodge were identical with those of the Committee of Charity in the regular Grand Lodge, now relegated to the Board of Benevolence and, in part, to the Board of General Purposes. Several Lodges in arrears were declared vacant, and a Minute of October z introduces us to a practice unknown, under any other Masonic Jurisduction. It runs‑" Bro. Cowen, Master of Lodge No. 37, proposed paying one guinea into the Grand Fund for No. 6 (now vacant). This proposal was accepted and the Brethren of No. 37 are to rank as No. 6 for ye future." Robert Turner, the first Grand Master, who had been continued in office for a second term of six months, was succeeded by the Hon. Edward Vaughan on St. John's Day in December. During the administration of the latter, the first of a long series of Military Warrants was issued by this Grand Lodge, a fee of a guinea was imposed on every new Charter and the Grand Secretary was ordered to install and invest the several officers of Lodges, in cases where the retiring Masters " were incapable of [this] performance." In the Minute‑book of this date Dermott has made the following memo This year, 175 5, the Modern Masons began to make use of Certificates, though the Antient Masons had granted Certificates time immemorial.
166 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND In 1756 Dermott published the first book of Laws or Constitutions of the Antients under the title of Ahiman Re!Zon : Or a Help to a Brother, to which reference has already been made. The following extracts are given as showing the high opinion which the author had formed of Freemasonry and what ought to be the attitude of individual members A Mason in regard to himself is careful to avoid all manner of intemperance or excess, which might obstruct him in the performance of the necessary duties of his laudable profession or lead him into any crimes which would reflect dishonour upon the Antient Fraternity.
He is to treat his inferiors as he would have his superiors deal with him, wisely considering that the Original of Mankind is the same; and though Masonry divests no man of his Honour, yet doed the Craft admit that strictly to pursue the Paths of Virtue whereby a clear Conscience may be preserved is the only Method to make any Man noble.
A Mason is to be so far benevolent, as never to shut his ear unkindly to the plaints of wretched poverty; but when the Brother is oppressed by Want, he is in a peculiar manner to listen to his Sufferings with attention ; in consequence of which, Pity must flow from his breast and Relief with prejudice, according to his capacity.
A Mason is to pay due obedience to the authority of his Master and Presiding Officers and to behave himself meekly amongst his Brethren, neither neglecting his usual Occupation for the sake of company, in running from one Lodge to another, nor quarrel with the ignorant for rediculous Aspersions concerning it; But at his leisure Hours he is required to study the Arts and Sciences with a diligent mind, that he may not only perform his duty to his great Creator, but also to his Neighbour and himself; For to walk humbly in the sight of God, to do justice and love Mercy are the certain Characteristics of a Real, Free and Accepted Antient Mason; Which Qualifications I humbly hope they will possess to the end of Time ; and I dare venture to say that every true Brother will join with me in Amen.
Therefore, to afford succour to the Distressed, to divide our Bread with the industrious Poor and to put the misguided Traveller in his Way, are Qualifications inherent to the Craft and suitable to its Dignity and such as the worthy Members of that great Body have at all times strove with indefatigable pains to accomplish.
At the meeting of Grand Lodge held on June z, 1756, the question arose as to where the funds could be found for the purchase off‑andlesticks. After a long and heated discussion Dermott proposed that the sum of one guinea should be levied on every new Warrant granted in future, instead of the small amount hitherto paid to the Grand Secretary. This was agreed to unanimously and it was ordered That the thanks of this Grand Lodge shall be given to our Grand Secretary for his Excellent proposal and intreat him to continue in the study of the Interest and Honour of the Antient Craft.
The Earl of Blesington was elected Grand Master on December z7, 1756 and, in his absence, was installed by proxy. For four years he ruled over the "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 167 Society nominally, for he was present at none of its meetings. This, however, was not his fault for, as Lepper and Crossle point out in the History of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, " the times were abnormal, the Seven Years War having broken out in 1756 and once again his services were required in his native country to raise means to relieve the poor during the long period of distress." His Deputy was William Holford, but the management of affairs appears to have been left almost entirely in the hands of Laurence Dermott.
At the meeting on March 2, 1757, it was ordered That no person be made a Mason in an Antient Lodge under the sum of 'C1, 5s. 6d. and cloath the Lodge if required.
That a General Meeting of Master Masons be held on the 13th Inst., to compare and regulate several things relative to the Antient Craft ; [and that] the Masters of the Royal Arch shall also be summon'd to meet, in order to regulate things relative to that most valluable branch of the Craft.
The Minutes of March 2, 1757, inform us that, on the date in question, Laurence Dermott produced a certificate, under the seal of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, signed by Edward Spratt, Grand Secretary. The latter was appointed Deputy Grand Secretary, December 27, 1742, succeeded to the higher office, June 24 1743 and brought out a Boob, of Constitutions for the use of the Lodges in Ireland, in 1751. The compiler styles himself " only a faithful Editor and Transcriber of the Work of Dr. Anderson," which appeared when "Lord Mountjoy," afterwards " Earl of Blessington," was Grand Master of Ireland, who appointed a select committee of the Grand Lodge, over which he presided, to compare the customs and regulations in use there, with those of the English Brethren and found " no essential differences," except in those rules of the latter relating to the Stewards' Lodge, which were therefore omitted.
The " Charges, General Regulations " and " the manner of constituting a Lodge," were copied by Spratt from Dr. Anderson's Constitutions of 1738. Dermott appears to have done precisely the same thing in his Ahiman Kezon, if, indeed, he did not copy at second hand from Spratt. Both compilers give the Old and New Regulations, in parallel columns, in the same manner as they are shown by Anderson, but, instead of taking the former from the edition of 1723, they reproduce the garbled and inaccurate version of 1738. Regulations XXIII to XXXIrelating to the Stewards' Lodge and to Feasts‑also XXXVII and XXXVIII, are omitted in the Irish and the Antient codes ; XXXIII and XXXIV are compressed into one Law (XXIV) ; and the No. XXXIX of Anderson is represented by the No. XXVII of Dermott and Spratt. The Old Regulations of the two latter terminate with this number. But they add a New one‑XXVII‑which is identical with the XL of Dr. Anderson and contains the ten articles or rules passed on the motion of Deputy Grand Master Ward, in 1736. O'd and New Regulation XXXIX in the Constitutions of 1738, are substantially reproduced in O.R. and N.R. XXVII of Ahiman Re!Zon, 1756. According to both codes, the 168 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Old Land Marks, to which the Section refers, are to " be carefully preserved " ; but Spratt and Dermott omit the injunction in the Old Regulation, requiring proposed alterations in the laws to be submitted " to the Perusal of the youngest Enter'd Prentice " and the statement in the New one (XXXIX),‑that the Grand Lodge can make `░ NEw REGULATIONS without the consent of All the Brethren, at the Grand Annual Feast." In other respects, the Old Regulations, as given in Ahiman Re!Zon, 1756, are simply copied from Anderson or Spratt. The New Regulations, however, of the former, are not quoted by Dermott with the same fullness : but, as an example of the source of authority, whence the laws of the Antients were derived, it may be interesting to state, that the compiler of their Constitutions, adopted in its entirety Anderson's New Regulation VIII, consisting of a series of laws, passed by the original Grand Lodge of England in 1723, 1724 and 1735 respectively. Here Dermott simply walked in the footsteps of Spratt, who had done precisely the same thing in 1751 and the former also followed the latter, in curtailing the number of Old Regulations to XXVII and of New Regulations to XXVIII.
Indeed, in one respect only, which may be deemed material or otherwise, according to the fancies of individual readers, are the Irish and the Antient Grand Secretaries at variance. In the " Manner of Constituting a Lodge," we learn from Anderson and Spratt that the Grand Master is to say certain words and use " some other Expressions that are proper and usual on that Occasion, but not proper to be written." Dermott puts the same words into the mouth of the Grand Master, but requires them to be said " after some other Ceremonies and Expressions that cannot be written." The Royal Arch is alluded to in Ahiman Re!Zon, 175 6, termed "that part of Masonry." The first edition made its way into favour without any direct official sanction. The Brethren for whose use it was designed were syled the " Antient York Masons in England " ; the publication itself was dedicated to the Earl of Blessington, with the object, no doubt, of gaining the consent of that peer to figure as the first noble Grand Master‑a scheme which was eminently successful and reflects the greatest credit upon the sagacity of the Grand Secretary.
Lord Blessington attended no meetings of the Grand Lodge, but it is not a little singular that Dermott secured the services as titular Grand Master of the very nobleman under whose presidency the Grand Lodge of Ireland conformed to the laws and regulations enacted by the Regular or Original Grand Lodge of England. A second edition of Ahiman ReZon appeared in 1764 and extended to 224 pages, of which all but 96 were devoted to poetry and songs. It contained a " Philacteria " for persons desiring to become Free‑Masons, also a description of Modern Masonry. In the latter, Dermott introduced a catechetical method of arguing and decided that Freemasonry, as practised in the Antient (but not in the Modern) Lodges, was universal; that a Modern Mason might with safety communicate all his secrets to an Antient Mason, but not vice versa; that " a person made in the modern manner, not after the antient custom of the Craft, had no right "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 169 to be called free and accepted‑his being unqualified to appear in a Master's Lodge, according to the universal system of Masonry," rendering " the appellation improper " ; that a Modern could not be initiated or introduced " into a Royal Arch Lodge (the very essence of Masonry), without going through the Antient Ceremonies." He also laid down that the number of Antient Masons, compared with the Moderns, was as ninety‑nine to one.
In this edition we first meet with disparaging allusions to the older Society ; but in Ahiman ReZon, 1778, these increase in volume and are often couched in most offensive terms. For example, a note to Charge III, which forbids the initiation of women or eunuchs, has, " This is still the law of Antient Masons, though disregarded by our Brethren (I mean our Sisters) the Modern Masons." Also in another place it is urged by Dermott that the premier Grand Lodge, not having been established by the Masters and Wardens of five Lodges, was " defective in form and capacity " ; whilst, on the other hand, he contends that " the Grand Lodge of Antient Masons received the old system without adulteration ! " But Dermott certainly finds weak spots in the harness of his adversaries, when he inveighs against a statement in the Freemasons' Calendar and another by Samuel Spencer, Grand Secretary to the older Institution. The former alludes to the Ancient York Constitutions having been " entirely dropped at the revival in 1717 " ; the latter, made in reply to an Irish Mason who was an applicant for relief, informs him, " Our Society is neither Arch, Royal Arch, or Antient ; so that you have no right to partake of our Charity." Such, remarks Dermott, was the character given them by their own Grand Secretary about fourteen years ago (Grand Lodge Minutes, December 5, 1759) ; how much they have changed for better or worse is no business of mine (Ahiman Re!Zon, 1778).
Many regulations originally taken from Anderson or Spratt are omitted in the third edition of Ahiman Re!Zon, e.g. New Regulations III and IV; whilst this is counterbalanced by the insertion of new laws passed by the Seceders, such, for example, as the privilege of voting accorded to Past Masters (N.R. XII) and the right of the Grand Master to make Masons at sight (O.R. XIII).
A fourth edition of the work appeared in 1787 and a committee of Grand Officers, with the nine Excellent Masters, was appointed, on March 4, 1795, to assist the Deputy Grand Master in bringing out a fifth, which was published in i 8oo, under the editorial supervision of Thomas Harper, upon whom also devolved the task of seeing the subsequent editions of 18o1, 1807 and 1813 through the press.
" The Royal Arch," says Laurence Dermott, " I firmly believe to be the root, heart, and marrow of Masonry." This opinion is expressed in his Ahiman Re!ton of 1756 and, doubtless, did much to popularize the Degree. The publication in question was not then one of authority, though it soon became so ; but not until 1771 can the Royal Arch be said to have formed an integral part of the system of Masonry practised by the Antients. It was wrought, no doubt, in the so‑called Antient Lodges from a much earlier period, but only as a side or by Degree. In 170 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND the list of subscribers prefixed to the work, seven names have the letters " A. M." appended. This Kloss reads as signifying " Arch Mason " (Geschichte der Fraumaurerei, 1847, p. 383) and he, therefore, concludes that in 1756 the Degree was very restricted in its scope. Here, however, the great Masonic critic has made too hasty a deduction from the evidence before him. The seven subscribers were all actual or Past Grand officers and, in every case, their Masonic rank was placed opposite their names. Thus‑" Edward Vaughan G.M., A.M." (Grand Master, Antient Masons) and so on. That Jeremiah Coleman, whose name also appears on the list, but without the letters " A.M.," was certainly an Arch Mason, doubtless many others, is to be inferred from the following notification which appeared in the Public Advertiser for 1756 (see Freemasons' Magazine, February 18, 1865 ; The Freemason, September 26, 18 84) To the Brethren of the Most Antient and Honourable, Free and Accepted Antient York Masons‑this is to give notice that your company is desired, viz. such as are concerned in E[xcellent] G[rand], commonly called [Royal] A[rch], at Bro. Sargent's, the Prince of Wales' Head, in Caple‑Street, near Wellclose Square, this day, at six in the evening, to accommodate P. L. R. S. as your forefathers were. By the order of P. T. Z. L. J. A., President. Jer. Coleman, Sec'y.
Kloss attributes the introduction of new Degrees into Britain to the influence of the French Masons, though he is careful to point out that the innovators in each country hood‑winked their compatriots by speaking of the novelties as foreign importations. There is apparently little doubt, however, that the Degrees of Installed Master and of the Royal Arch, had their inception in the Scots Degrees, which sprang up in all parts of France about 1740. The Minute‑books of two Lodges (Royal Cumberland, 41, Bath, January 8, 1746; Sarum Lodge, October icy, 1746) prove that it had taken root in this country some years at least before the period of time assigned as that of the commencement of the Separation. The records of the Lodge of Industry, Gateshead, supply information of an analogous if not identical character. These inform us that on July 1, 1746, it was " Enacted at a Grand Lodge, That no brother Mason should be admitted into the dignity of a Highrodiam " for less than Zs. 6d., or into that of " Domaskin or Forin " for less than 5 s. " Highrodiam " is very suggestive of " Harodim," of which it may have been a corruption; but the word " Domaskin " cannot be explained. The two Degrees or steps were, probably, some form of " Scots Masonry "‑a conclusion confirmed by the " N.B." which follows the entry given above. This reads : " The English Masters to pay for entering into the said Mastership Zs. 6d. per majority " (Masonic Magazine, vol. iii, 1875‑6, pp. 73, 75).
It is a'curious circumstance, that the only knowledge we possess concerning the Royal Arch before 1752 arises from an incidental allusion in a work of 1744 and an entry in the records of the Antients, informing us that Dermott became a member of that Degree in 1746. The former, occurs in Dassigny's Serious and Impartial Enquiry. Their meaning is not free from obscurity, but we are justified "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS " 171 in inferring that a few years before 1744 some person in Dublin pretended to have been made " Master of the Royal Arch " at York and thereby deluded many worthy people ; that " at length " a " Brother who had some small space before attained that excellent part of Masonry in London, plainly proved that his doctrine was false " ; also, that the Degree was restricted to Brethren who had passed the chair.
But this only proves that a side or by Degree, as yet unrecognized by the governing bodies at York and the three capitals, had found its way from London to Dublin and it is not certain from the language employed, whether in 1744, more than a single person at the latter city, was in possession of it.
An Arch‑Mason, therefore, was one who had received a Degree or step beyond the recognized afid legitimate three. Out of this was ultimately evolved the Degree of Installed Master, a ceremony unknown, in the older system, until the second decade of the nineteenth century, of which there is no trace among the Antients, until the growing practice of conferring the Arch upon Brethren not legally qualified to receive it, brought about a constructive passing through the chair, which, by qualifying candidates not otherwise eligible, naturally entailed the introduction of a ceremony, additional to the simple forms known to Payne, Anderson and Desaguliers. According to Kloss the Degree of Installed Master was identical, in nearly every respect, with one of the grades of Scots Masonry known on the Continent (op. cit., p. 424).
A Lodge under the title of Royal Arch, Glasgow, was erected by the Grand Lodge of Scotland on August 6, 175 5. But though from this it may be inferred that the innovation had penetrated into North Britain, the Charter only empowered the members to " admit and receive Apprentices, pass Fellow‑Crafts and raise Master Masons " (D. Murray Lyon, in a letter dated March 13, 1885). In the same way, a knowledge of the Degree by the Masons of Philadelphia, in 175 8, may be presumed from the fact that a Lodge constituted there in that year by the Antients bore a similar appellation (C. E. Meyer, History of the Jerusalem Chapter, No. 3, Philadelphia). Next in point of date, apart from any records of the Antients, supreme or subsidiary, we find the Royal Arch well established at York, 176z ; London, 1765 ; in Lancashire, 1767 ; at Boston (U.S.A.), 1769 ; and in Ireland, 1772.
The Royal Arch Minutes of the Antients commence November 5, 1783 and recite certain resolutions passed in the Grand Lodge, December 4, 1771 and in the Grand Chapter, January 3, 1772. To the latter there is a preamble to the effect that some persons had " lately pretended to teach Masonical Mysteries, Superior to, or necessary to be added to the Mystery of the Royal Arch " ; wherefore it was resolved That it is the clear opinion of this Grand Chapter that Royal Arch Masonry is (in itself) so stupendiously Excellent that it Is, truly, what the Roman Masons of Old said, Ut Nihil posit cogitare : Nothing cou'd be imagined more. Therefore to attempt an amendment or add to the Mysteries of the Holy Royal Arch, wou'd be a profanation of that which every good man (especially a Free‑Mason) wou'd amd ought to preserve pure and undefiled.
172‑ HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Inasmuch as at this period, the original Grand Lodge of England was coquetting with the myriads of Degrees which were then in existence on the Continent (Kloss, OP. Cit., p. 427), it is almost demonstrably clear that, had not Dermott drawn the line at the Royal Arch, the older Society would have eventually followed him, in adopting any number of foreign novelties, with the same complaisance which was shown in 1811 and 1813.
The Grand Chapter on the same occasion‑January 3, 177z‑took into consideration the matter referred to it in December 1771 and decided that those Brethren who had " been introduced 'into Royal Arch Masonry) contrary to Antient Custom should be remade gratis upon a recommendation from their respective Lodges." At the meeting held November 5, 1783, it was resolved " that this Chapter do perfectly coincide with the foregoing resolution and that masters and pastms. (Bond fide) only ought to be admitted Masters of the Royal Arch." It was also further agreed that the names of all Royal Arch Masons should be recorded in a book to be called Seper Enholah Kabbim, i.e. the Register of Excellent Masters ; that the Grand Lodge should meet at least twice in the year and, on one of those occasions, in conjunction with the Grand Officers select a certain number of Excellent Masters, which was not to exceed nine persons, who were to examine all persons undertaking to perform any of the ceremonies relative to the Royal Arch, the installation of Grand Officers, or to Processions. These Brethren, who were indifferently styled the nine Excellent Masters or Worthies (see Minutes of No. 194, now the Middlesex Lodge, No. 143), subsequently had their functions enlarged.
Royal Arch certificates were issued by the Antients in 1791 and the Degree is accorded great prominence in the editions of Ahiman Ke!Zon, published in 18oo and later years. Nevertheless, it does not appear to have been fully appreciated by the Antients, until the novelty was invested with so much importance by the Moderns, who decorated and embellished the Degree with many fanciful alterations and additions of their own creation.
The earliest Royal Arch Minutes are among the York Records; next in point of date are those of the body which ultimately became the Grand Chapter, tolerated, if not actually recognized, by the earlier Grand Lodge of England. The latter commence June 12, 1765, at which date the fee for passing the Arch was five guineas. In the following year, Lord Blaney, Grand Master and James Heseltine, Grand Secretary of the older Grand Lodge of England, became members, also Grand Master and Scribe respectively of the "Fourth Degree." On March 11, 1768, Edward Gibbon, the historian, was proposed by Dunkerley and Rowland Holt " and unanimously approved of " ; but there is no record of his exaltation or admission. In 1769 Warrants of Constitution were issued and, in the next year, the title of Grand and Royal Chapter was assumed. In 1773 the use of a distinctive apron was forbidden, until the Companions were allowed to wear such " in the Grand Lodge and in All private Freemason's Lodges." The Duke of Cumberland was elected perpetual patron in 1785. In 1796 the Grand Chapter became the "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 173 Grand Lodge of Royal Arch. The Earl of Moira was exalted in 1803 and the Duke of Sussex became a member in 18io. But the Degree was not formally recognized by the Society over which these Brethren in turn presided, until the Union and, when a complaint was presented from one Robert Sampson who had been expelled from Royal Arch Masonry‑December 29, 1791‑" for declaring his intention of exalting Master Masons for 5s. each." It was resolved‑November zi, 1792‑"that the Grand Lodge of England has nothing to do with the proceedings of the Society of Royal Arch Masons." On March 18, 1817, the two Grand Chapters followed the example of the Grand Lodges with which they were severally connected and amalgamated, under the title of the " United Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons of England." The Royal Arch Degree was originally conferred in the Lodge both by Antients and Moderns‑expressions which, having regard to the dates whereon this " Innovation in the Body Of MASONRY " was made by these two bodies respectively, may here be employed in their ordinary or popular signification. Chapters were first brought into use by the latter and the earliest of which a record has been preserved was well established in 1765. This, as previously stated, developed into a Grand Body and issued Warrants of Constitution to subordinate Chapters, after which the Degree gradually ceased to be worked surreptitiously, by Lodges under the older system. The York Brethren also met as a Chapter from April 29, 1768. Of this practice but one early example among the Antients has been found ; it occurs in the records of No. 174 Lodge, now the Royal Gloucester Chapter, No. 130 and is of value in more ways than one. First of all, it establishes the fact that the Royal Arch was not always worked in the Antient Lodges, for No. 174 was constituted April 22, 1772 and did not become acquainted with the Degree until October 7, 1783, on which date (we next learn) a Brother of No. 74 under the Irish Registry, attached to the second battalion of the 1st (or Royal) Regiment, assisted by three other " Arch Masons, held a Chapter for the purpose of Raising several Brethren to this Sublime Degree, in order to their holding a Chapter in Southampton." Under both Grand Lodges, the practice of " passing Brethren through the chair," or, in other words, of conferring upon them the Degree (without serving the office) of Installed Master, which had crept into the ritual of the Antients, was very common. Numerous examples of the. custom are given in the following Lodge Histories: Anchor and Hope, Bolton, No. 37 (G. P. Brockbank and James Newton) ; Relief, Bury, No. 42 (E. A. Evans) ; British Union, Ipswich, No. 114 (Emra Holmes) ; and under the Antients, Enoch, London, No. I I (Freemasons' Chronicle, vol. iv, p. 323) ; and St. John's, Bolton, No. 221 (G. P. Brock bank). In Nos. 37 and 42 it lasted until 1846 and 1850 respectively.
Undue stress has been laid upon the custom which prevailed under the two Grand Lodges of England, of requiring Brethren, who had already graduated under one system, to go through the ceremonies a second time under the other. The fees for registration may have been at the bottom of the whole affair and, in each 174 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND case, as the admission of Brethren from the rival camp in the capacity of visitors ‑until a comparatively late period‑plainly indicates, a re‑making was more a protest against the regularity than the validity of the Degree to which the postulant had been previously admitted. Lodges and Masons who went over to the enemy were said to have apostatized by the body with whom they were formerly in communion and all kinds of terms, of which " translated " is perhaps the most singular and expressive, are used in the records of Lodges to describe the status of a Brother who was " healed " or re‑made. But the practice of re‑making appears to have been dispensed with, in cases where an entire Lodge shifted its allegiance, or where a Warrant of Constitution was granted by either Grand Lodge to petitioners who had graduated under its rival (see W. Kelly, Freemasonry in Leicestershire, p. 24). Thus, the Minutes of No. 86, two months before it was chartered by the Antients, inform us that it was agreed to " make no new Masons for the feuther, till such time as we can procure a New Warrant, as the one we now act under is Illeagel, Being Modderant Constitution." The Warrant was granted in due course, but there is no mention of re‑makings until a much later period, when the entries become very instructive. For example, in the year 1774, two Brethren were remade, both of whom had been made in Scotland‑in the Union and Crown (now No. 103) and in the Kilwinning Lodges respectively.
Inasmuch as the Antients were then on the best possible terms with the Grand Lodge of Scotland, over which the Duke of Atholl ‑also their own Grand Master ‑at that time presided, the process of legitimation here resorted to was wholly uncalled for and unnecessary. But the entries tend to prove, that Brethren on passing from one Masonic jurisdiction to another, were re‑made, not because there were essential differences between the ceremonial observances peculiar to each system, but rather as a disciplinary requirement and from motives of policy.
Notwithstanding the bitter feud between the rival Grand Lodges of England, the Lodges on the two rolls worked together, on the whole, with greater love and harmony than might have been expected. Sometimes in a so‑called Antient Lodge the Business was Modern ; oftener still, Lodges under the older system, followed the method of working in vogue among the Antients.
Of a divided allegiance there are a few examples. Thus, the present Royal Gloucester Lodge, Southampton, No. 130, was warranted by the Antients in 177z and by the older Society twenty years later. Sometimes the members met in one capacity, sometimes in the other. Often it was resolved to abandon one of the Constitutions ; but which was to be dropped, the members could never finally decide, though each in turn was temporarily renounced on a variety of occasions. At the Union, however, the Lodge wisely clung to its original Charter, thus obtaining a higher position on the roll.
The members of both Societies constantly walked together in processions and their common attendance at church on these and similar occasions is very frequently recorded. A singular instance of their acting in concert is afforded by a Masonic address presented to Prince Edward‑afterwards Duke of Kent "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 175 ‑January 9, 1794, on his approaching departure from Canada. At the foot are two signatures, one to the left, the other to the right of the page‑the former being that of " William Grant, D.G.M. of Modern Masons," the latter that of " Thomas Ainslie, D.G.M. of Ancient Masons." A paragraph in the address runs We have a confident hope that, under the conciliating influence of your Royal Highness, the Fraternity in general of Freemasons in his Majesty's dominions will soon be united.
To which the Prince replied You may trust that my utmost efforts shall be exerted, that the much‑wishedfor Union of the whole Fraternity of Masons may be effected.
The first officers of the Grand Lodge of England according to the Old Institutions were the Grand Master, Deputy, Wardens and Secretary, all of whom, except the Deputy, were elected year by year. The appointment of this officer was one of the prerogatives of the Grand Master, but in practice some experienced Brother was recommended for the office and the approval of the Grand Master followed as a matter of course. A new office, that of Treasurer, was created in 1754 and, in 1768, William Dickey was elected Deputy Grand Secretary. A Grand Pursuivant, also a Grand Tyler were appointed in 1771. In the following year there was a Grand Chaplain and a Sword‑bearer pro tempore, but the latter office, though apparently revived in 1788, did not become a permanent one until 1791A Deputy Grand Chaplain was among the officers for i 8og.
The Stewards' Lodge, or Committee of Charity, was invested with full power to hear complaints of a Masonic nature and to punish delinquents according to the laws of the Craft. Its chief function, however, was to deal with petitions for relief and the following are examples of the various grounds on which such applications were rejected January 17, 178 1. From a certified Mason of No. 15 3, Ireland‑" he having resided in London upwards of three years and never Inquired after a Lodge or visited." June 16, 1784. From James Barker of No. 81. "It appearing to the Stewards' Lodge, his being lame and otherwise disfigured at the time of being made, he ought not to be relieved." August zo, 1788. From Robert Brown‑on the ground of his " haveing no other certificate " than that of a Knight Templar, which had been granted him by " the Carrickfergus True Blue Lodge, No. 25 3, under the Registry of Ireland." November icg, 1788.‑From an applicant‑" not appearing to have any concern in Masonry from the time he was made." August 15, 1804.‑" Resolved, That T. Sculthorpe, being a person not perfect in body, but deformed and much below the common stature of man, was a very improper person to become and is now unfit to continue, a Member of this most ancient and honourable Fraternity‑and consequently not entitled to the advantages or privileges of Masonry in any Degree whatever." 176 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND April 17, 1805.‑From a member of the Union Lodge at Elbing‑" A Modern ? not able to make himself known as an Antient Mason." Sometimes very interesting points of Masonic Law were discussed or determined at the meetings of this body, e.g.
April 16, 1777.‑Dermott stated, that "although the Grand Master had full power and authority to make (in his presence, or cause to be made) Masons, when and where he pleased, yet he could not oblige any Lodge to admit the persons (so made) as members, without the unanimous consent of such Lodge and if the Grand Master made use of his privelidge in making of Masons, he ought to have made a sufficient number of them to form a Lodge and grant them a warrant, by which means they would be intitled to Registry, otherwise not." December 18, 18iI.‑A memorial was read from No. 225, complaining that one of their members had been refused admittance by No. 245, " on the ground of his being a Quaker, when, tho' regularly admitted on his solemn affirmative, the officers of No. 245 contended was a violation of the principles of the Constitution." The stewards were of opinion " that there did not appear any censure to either of the Lodges in what had been done, but upon a question so novel and peculiar, recommended that the final disposal of the matter be postponed until next Stewards' Lodge." The subject is not again mentioned in these records, but the Minutes of the Royal Gloucester Lodge, No. 130, inform us, that in a letter dated April 13, 1796, the Grand Secretary of the Antients had communicated to that body the decision of Grand Lodge, that a Quaker was ineligible for initiation, a ruling that is now obsolete.
It has been shown that the laws and customs of the Antient Masons were based on Irish originals. The former, Dermott simply appropriated from Spratt, the latter he appears to have introduced gradually into the ritual of the Seceders. But the author of Ahiman ReZon was by no means content to follow in the footsteps of any guide and boldly struck out a path of his own, which has become the well beaten track traversed by the Freemasons of England. The epithet of Moderns which he bestowed on the Brethren, under whose laws and customs he had been admitted into Masonry in his native country, was singularly out of place and, had the journeyman printer been as well skilled in polemical exercises as the journeyman painter, the former might completely have turned the tables on the latter.
In the first edition of his Ahiman Re!Zon, Dermott observes with regard to the New Regulations, " they have been wrote at different Times, by order of the whole Community," an admission which it would have taxed his resources to explain, had the slip been harped upon with the same wearisome iteration as in the somewhat parallel case of William Preston.
The extent to which Dermott added to, or improved upon, the ceremonies of the Craft, can only form the subject of conjecture, though the balance of probability inclines strongly in one direction.
Whatever customs or ceremonies Dermott had acquired a knowledge of in his Lodge, No. 26, Dublin, it may be taken for granted that he assisted in passing "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS " I77 on‑very much as they were taught to him‑in England. The By‑laws of the Lodge in question were adopted as a standard for the guidance of the Antient Lodges before Dermott had been two months installed as Grand Secretary. From this source (or from Scotland) must have been derived the office of Deacon, which was unknown to the older Grand Lodge of England until the Union. They are first named in the Minutes of the Antients on July 13, 175 3.
The degree of Installed Master, as well as that of the Royal Arch, may have been wrought in the Dublin Lodges before Dermott severed his connexion with the Irish capital. But neither of them derived at that time any countenance from the Grand Lodge of Ireland, by which body, indeed, if we may believe a writer in the Freewasons' Quarterly Review, 1844, p. 420, the proposal of their Grand Master the Earl of Donoughmore, in 1813, to acknowledge the Royal Arch Degree, met with such little favour, that they passed a vote of censure upon him and were with difficulty restrained from expelling him from Masonry altogether.
It is abundantly clear, however, that during the pendency of the Schism no other Degrees were recognized by the Grand Lodges of Ireland and Scotland, than the simple three authorized by the earliest of Grand Bodies.
On March 13, 175 7 the Grand Secretary "traced and explained the 1st, Zd and 3d part of the Antient Craft and Settled many things (then disputed) to the intire satisfaction of all the Brethren present, who faithfully promised to adhere strictly to the Antient System and to cultivate the same in their several Lodges." Forty‑six Brethren, representing twenty‑five out of the forty‑six Lodges, were present on this occasion.
In the following June a regulation was made, forbidding the officers of Lodges ‑under the penalty of forfeiture of warrant‑to admit as member or visitor, " any person not strictly an antient Mason, Certified Sojourners excepted." In the following year‑March 1, 175 8‑a letter was read from the Grand Lodge of Ireland, announcing " a strict union with the Antient Grand Lodge in London." In Masonic Facts and Fictions, Sadler reproduces (p. 86) the following copy of a letter sent to the Earl of Blesington by the Deputy Grand Master; which was read in the Grand Lodge, by the Grand Secretary on December 6, 175 8 My Lord and Rt. Worshipful Sir We, the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the Old Institution beg leave to return your Lordship our most sincere and hearty thanks for the great Honour your Lordship has been pleased to have done the Fraternity in condescending to be our Grand Master for two years last past and we hope your Lordship will excuse our non‑attendance in a public manner which we shou'd have gladly done, but were given to understand that it would be more agreeable to your Lordship if sent by our Secretary in this private manner.
The number of Warrants sign'd by your Worship is a convincing proof of the Prosperity of the Craft under your Lordship's sanction. And we have pleasure to assure your Worship That (notwithstanding the troublesome time of War, the bane of all good Society) we have not only been able to relieve a good number of F. 111‑3 178 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Indigent Brethren, but have also bought a Hundred pounds Stock in the 3 P.C. Annuities, 1726 and have still money enough in the Grand Lodge Chest to answer all demands that are likely to be made on us. We are sensible that it will be very pleasing to your Lordship to hear of the great number of Worthy Freemasons Ardently and Industriously engaged in Brotherly love and Charitable works. As such we most humbly entreat your Lordship may be pleased to continue to us the great honour of being our Grand Master for the year 1759 and as Masons we firmly promise that it shall be our constant care to endeavour by every laudable means to deserve the great Honour conferred on Your Lordship's Most Oblidged most Humble Servants and faithfull Brethren WILLIAM HOLFORD, D.G.M.
To this letter there came the following reply I aryl very sensible of the great Honour done me by the Fraternity and very glad to hear of their Prosperity and with all my heart accept their kind offer and shall always be willing to promote the Antient Craft.
The letter is signed " Blesinton " and that spelling is frequently adopted in Masonic literature, but in official documents the spelling is always " Blesington." There is an interesting Minute under date of December 5, 1759, which reads The Grand Secretary made a long and labour'd speech against any victuler being chosen a Grand Officer, which gave great offence to some persons in the Grand Lodge. The D.G.M. put the Question, viz.
Whether the Secy., Lau. Dermott, for his last Speech, Merited Applause, or Deserved Censure.
For applauding the Secretary 44 Against . 4 Upon which the R.W. Deputy said, " Brethren, there are 44 votes for the Secretary and 4 against him, by which it seems there are only 4 Publicans in the Room." A note in the Minute‑book dated December 16, 1759, states that one Carroll, from Ireland, had petitioned the Grand Lodge of England (Moderns) for assistance and had been told Your being an Antient Mason, you are not entitled to any of our Charity. The Antient Masons have a Lodge at the Five Bells in the Strand, &c. Our Society is neither Arch, Royal Arch, or Antient, so that you have no right to partake of our Charity.
The next Grand Master was the Earl of Kellie, at whose accessionDecember 27, I 76o‑the number of Lodges on the roll was eighty‑three, being an increase of twenty‑four during the presidency of Lord Blesington. The most noteworthy were Nos. 65, Prov. G. Lodge of Nova Scotia (1757) and 69, Philadelphia (1758).
Thomas Alexander Erskine, 6th Earl of Kellie (for thus the name is spelled "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 179 in official documents, and not Kelly, the common form) was styled Viscount Fentoun, until he succeeded to the peerage on the death of his father in 1756. He was known as the Musical Earl, his composition and his performance on the violin being famous, while his " coarse joviality made him one of the best‑known men of his time." Dr. Burney says that the Earl " was possessed of more musical science than any dilettante with whom he was ever acquainted." He devoted himself to music, and studied at Mannheim under the elder Stamitz. For many years he was director of the concerts held at Edinburgh on St. Cecilia's Day by the Society named after the saint.
The Grand Officers of the previous year were continued in their offices and the " general thanks of the Fraternity " were conveyed to Laurence Dermott, who in reply " asked the Grand Lodge to believe two things, 1st, that he thought himself as happy in his Secretaryship as the Great Pitt was in being Secretary of State ; and idly, that he would exert his utmost powers for the Good of the Antient Fraternity, so long as he lived." The services of the Grand Secretary were again recognized in a very marked and unusual manner in the following June, when the Deputy Grand Master proposed that he should be " toasted with the No. of his years," and it was " unanimously agreed that Laurence Dermott, Esq., Grand Secretary, shall be Drank in form with 39, being now in the 39th year of his Age‑which was accordingly done." A footnote, however, in his own handwriting, informs us that " the Secretary was in his 41st year." On September 1, 1762, it was ordered, on the motion of the Secretary, who appears to have taken the lead in legislation, as well as in other things, that no one after October 2, ensuing, should be made a Mason, for a less sum than two guineas, of which five shillings was to be paid to the Fund of Charity, and one shilling to the Grand Secretary: Also, that the whole sum should be paid on the night of entrance, under the penalty of a guinea, to be levied on the warrant, which was to be cancelled within six months, in default of payment.
That this prudent regulation was not immediately complied with, at least in all quarters, there is evidence to show, for the records inform us‑under December 27, 1762‑that " David Fisher, late Grand Warden Elect, having attempted to form a Grand Lodge of his own and offered to Register Masons therein for 6d. each, was deem'd unworthy of any office or seat in the Grand Lodge." On March 2, 1763, one Robert Lockhart petitioned for a dispensation to make Masons at the sign of the White Hart in the Strand and such dispensation was granted him to continue in force for thirty‑one days. In the Freemasons' Magazine for January 1795 there is the following reference to this incident Soon after William Preston arrived in London, a number of Brethren from Edinburgh resolved to institute a Freemasons' Lodge in this city and applied to the Antient Grand Lodge in London who immediately granted them a Dispensation.
The Lodge was soon afterwards regularly constituted by the officers of the Antient Grand Lodge in person. It moved to the Horn Tavern, Fleet Street, then the 18o HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Scots Hall, Blackfriars and then to the Half Moon, Cheapside, where it met for a considerable time. At length, Mr. Preston and other members having joined a Lodge under the English Constitution, at the Talbot, Strand, they prevailed on the rest of the Lodge at the Half Moon to petition for a Constitution. Lord Blaney, at that time Grand Master, readily acquiesced and the Lodge was soon after constituted a second time, in ample form, by the name of the Caledonian Lodge.
On December 7, 1763‑the Grand Secretary was " Warranted and Impower'd to call and congregate a General Lodge in the town of Birmingham and there to adjust and determine all complaints, disputes, or controversies, in or between the members of the Lodge No. 71 (or any other Brethren), in Birmingham aforesaid." Matthew Beath was elected Grand Treasurer, June 6 and the members of No. 11o were admonished " for admitting Modern Masons into their Lodge," September 5.
This appears to have been the first appointment of a Grand Treasurer. The officers of Lodge No. 31 stated that if Dermott was chosen for the office they " would give undeniable security for any trust reposed in him not exceeding ,Cli,ooo." Dermott, however, declined to accept nomination.
On June 5, 1765, it was proposed That Every Past Master shall be a Member of and have a vote in all Grand Lodges during his continuance [as] a Member of any Lodge under the Antient Constitution.
11 This proposal occasion'd long various debates, several of the Masters and Wardens argued strenuously against the motion, while the presiding officer and three Masters were the only persons who spoke in favour of it." At length Grand Warden Gibson, who was in the Chair, put an amendment to the meeting, which was carried by a majority of zz votes‑there being 48 " for the past masters " and z6 " against them "‑Whereupon, it was " ordered and declared that from and after the third day of December 1765, all and every Regular past master, while a member of any private Lodge, shall be a member of this Grand Lodge also and shall have a vote in all cases except in making New Laws‑which power is vested in the Master and Wardens, as being the only true Representatives of all the Lodges, according to the Old Regulation the tenth." In the ensuing year‑March 5, 1766‑the Grand Master, with his Grand Officers and others, in fourteen coaches and chariots, drove in procession to the Grand Master's house near Soho Square, thence through Hampstead and Highgate, returning to the Five Bells Tavern in 'the Strand to dine.
Grand Lodge was not opened on June 24, 1766, but, instead, the Brethren, by permission of the Grand Officers, all met at the " Angell, in Whitechapel and walked in procession to Stepney Church, where a sermon founded on the general regulations of the Craft was preached by the Rev. Mr. Parker Rowlands, our most worthy Brother. After the sermon the Fraternity, amounting to a vast number, with their bands of Musick walked in like manner to the Angell aforesaid, where they separated, and each Lodge went to dine at the houses where held.'; "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" The question of a successor to Lord Kellie came up at the meeting of Grand Lodge in December 1766, in consequence of his continued absence from London. Dermott informed Grand Lodge that he knew of a fit and proper person for Grand Master who was possessed of a fortune of C16,ooo per annum, but who could not be communicated with for two or three weeks. The election was accordingly postponed. This was the Hon. Thomas Mathew, Provincial Grand Master for Munster in 1757, who, according to the Minutes of the Antients, was so " fond of the Craft that wherever he resided, whether in Great Britain, Ireland, or France, he also held a Regular Lodge among his own Domesticks." Mathew was a member of an old Catholic family, and father of the first and grandfather of the second Earl of Llandaff, with whose demise the peerage became extinct. He is described in Irish Masonic documents as of " Annfield in the county of Tipperary, Esq." He seems to have had no legal claim to the title of " Hon." During the nominal presidency of Lord Kellie, sixty‑two Lodges were added to the roll. Of these, seven were formed in regiments or garrisons and eight in the colonies or abroad. Omitting Philadelphia‑which received a second and third Warrant in 1761 and 1764 respectively‑we find that Lodges under the Antients were established at Charles Town, South Carolina, 1761 ; Amsterdam, 1762 ; Torlola, Marseilles, Leghorn, and Jamaica, 1763 ; St. Helena, 1764; and Minorca, 1766.
Thomas Mathew was privately installed early in 1767. The legality of the installation of the Grand Master in private was demurred to, November z 5, 1767 ; and the Deputy Grand Master stated " that the late Grand Master, the Earl of Blesinton, had been only privately installed by the Grand Officers and Secretary in his Lordship's library in Margaret Street." In the result, the installation of Grand Master Mathew was " declared regular." The Grand Master confirmed the statement made as to the installation of Lord Blesington, but stated his willingness to be re‑installed if it was the wish of Grand Lodge. He had previously been present at a Grand Lodge of Emergency held at the Five Bells, Strand, on June 1 z, 1767, when a sermon was ordered to be preached at St. Clement's in the Strand on St. John's Day, June 24 and a dinner to be provided. All the Grand Officers were present at that service, with the exception of the Grand Master and the Grand Secretary, both of whom were absent through illness. It was ordered that the ringers of St. Clement's should be paid one guinea, five guineas to be distributed among the poor of the parish and the beadles to be paid half a guinea.
On June 24, 1768, there was the customary procession, but Grand Lodge was not opened. The Minutes tell us that This day the Grand Officers and Brethren of several Lodges assembled at Deptford in Kent, where they heard an excellent sermon preached by the Rev. Parker Rowlands and from thence walked in Masonical procession to the Assembly Room at Blackheath, where they dined in form, but they did not think it proper to open Grand Lodge.
182 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND There now occur frequent entries‑" G. S. Dermott absent in the Gout," which must have necessitated the assistance of a Deputy Grand Secretary, to which office we find that William Dickey, Jun., P.M. No. 14, was elected, June 1, 1768. According to the Minutes of the Lebeck's Head Lodge, No. 246, under the Regular Grand Lodge, known as the Moderns, Dickey had been initiated, passed and raised in that Lodge, from No. 14, of the Antients, on September 2o, 1765. He retained the office of Deputy Grand Secretary of the Antients until 1771, and was subsequently Grand Secretary, 1771‑7; Deputy Grand Master, 1777‑81 ; President of the Grand Committee, 1782 ; and again Deputy Grand Master from December 27, 1794, until his death, July 27, 18oo.
The Grand Secretary and his Deputy had frequent disputes and the former accused the latter‑June 6, 177o‑of having resigned his post " when he [Dermott) was so ill in the gout that he was obliged to be carried out in his bed (when incapable to wear shoes, stockings, or even britches) to do his duty at the Gd. Steward's Lodge." At the next meeting of Grand Lodge‑September 5‑Dermott " beg'd the Grand Lodge would please to do him justice, otherwise he shd be under the disagreeable necessity of publishing his case." The Grand Secretary afterwards said " he should not give therh any further trouble concerning his affairs and that henceforth he would resign and for ever disclaim any office in the Grand Lodge." Further recriminations were exchanged on December 5. The records state, " Many warm disputes happen'd between Laurence Dermott, William Dickey, junior and others, the recording of which would be of no service to the Craft nor to the various speakers." At a subsequent meeting, held December icg, it was unanimously agreed that William Dickey had been in fault and the public thanks of the Grand Lodge were returned to Laurence Dermott for his great assiduity in his office.
John, third Duke of Atholl, was chosen Grand Master, January 3o and installed March 2, 1771, at the Half Moon Tavern in Cheapside. Dermott was appointed Deputy Grand Master; and on March 6, when Dermott occupied the Chair for the first time as Deputy Grand Master, William Dickey, Jun., was elected Grand Secretary. These two men worked in thorough accord from this time, although the election of the latter took place in opposition to the wishes of the former, who favoured the claims of a rival candidate for the Secretaryship‑which, to say the least, savoured slightly of ingratitude, since it was on the motion of William Dickey, Jun., that Dermott was recommended to the Duke of Atholl for the office of Deputy.
During the last four years of Dermott's Grand Secretaryship, twenty‑two new numbers were added to the roll, which would show an apparent list of 167 Lodges in 1771, as compared with 145 at the end of 1766. But this is misleading, because the Antients constantly allotted a vacant instead of a further number to a new Lodge. Of this practice there are some thirty examples down to the close of 1770; and therefore, assuming that in every case a new Warrant had received a new number, a grand total of at least 197 Lodges would have been reached by 1771. Within the "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 183 same period about 339 Lodges were constituted by the older Grand Lodge of England.
On the side of the Antients, two military Lodges and one each in Calcutta and Madras, were among the additions to the roll during the four years preceding 1771.
At a Grand Lodge, held September 4, 1771, Grand Secretary Dickey put the following question: " Is His Grace the Duke of Atholl Grand Master of Masons in every respect ? " which being answered in the affirmative, the proposer said, " he had several times heard it advanced that the Grand Master had not a right to inspect into the proceedings of the Royal Arch." The Secretary further complained of many flagrant abuses of that " most sacred part of Masonry and proposed that the Masters and Past Masters of Warranted Lodges be conven'd as soon as Possible, in order to put this part of Masonry on a Solid Basis." Meetings accordingly took place in October and November, with the proceedings of which Grand Lodge was made conversant by the Deputy Grand Master, December 4, 1771.
Dermott " expatiated a long time on the scandalous method pursued by most of the Lodges (on St. John's Days) in passing a number of Brethren through the Chair, on purpose to obtain the sacred Mystry's of the Royal Arch. The Deputy was answered by several Brethren, that there were many Members of Lodges, who from their Proffesions in Life (The Sea for Example) that could never regularly attain that part of Masonry, tho' very able deserving Men." Ultimately it was resolved unanimously‑" That no person for the future shall be made a Royal Arch Mason, but the legal Representatives of the Lodge, except a Brother (that is going abroad) who hath been 12 months a Registered Mason; and must have the Unanimous Voice of his Lodge to receive such Qualification." The case of those Brethren who " had been admitted among the Royal Arch Masons Illegaly," the Deputy suggested should be left to the next Grand Chapter, which was agreed to. This is the first mention of Grand Chapter in these records and there are no Royal Arch Minutes before 1783, although the Degree itself is referred to in 175z On March 4, 1772, it was resolved " that the Master and Wardens of every Lodge (within five miles of London) shall attend the Grand Lodge on every St. John's Day; on default thereof the Lodge shall pay ten shillings and sixpence to the Charitable Fund." This regulation was made more stringent in the following September, when it was ordered that the same officers and within the same radius, should attend all meetings of the Grand Lodge, when duly summoned by the Grand Secretary, or else pay a fine of five shillings and threepence, which was " to be levy'd on the Warrant." In the same year‑April 8‑" James Cock, P. Master No. 9, moved that a Chaplain (for the Grand Lodge) should be appointed annually, which was approved of and the Rev. Dr. James Grant was elected accordingly." Also, on June 3, 184 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND it was " agreed that a brother be appointed pro tempore to carry the Sword at Public Processions and that B`░. Nash, Jnr. of No. z, carry the same next St. John's Day." At a Grand Lodge, held September z, a letter was read from T. Corker, Deputy Grand Secretary‑Ireland‑stating that " he cannot find any traces of the agreement, which was made between the two Grand Lodges in 1757," also, " that nothing could have been more advantageous to our poor fraternity than a strict adherence to such a resolution." Resolved, " that a Brotherly connexion and correspondence with the Grand Lodge of Ireland, has been and will always be found, productive of Honour and advantage to the Craft in both Kingdoms." A resolution in identical terms was passed with regard to the Grand Lodge of Scotland.
The reply of the latter was read May 3, 1773. It stated that the Grand Lodge of Scotland were of opinion that the Brotherly intercourse and correspondence (suggested), would be serviceable to both Grand Lodges. (See Lawrie, History of Freemasonry, 1804, pp. 205‑9).
The entente cordiale between the two Grand Lodges may have been due in a great measure to the fact, that the Duke of Atholl, then at the head of the Fraternity in the south, became Grand Master‑elect of Scotland, November 30, 1772 and Grand Master a year later. Indeed, at this, as at all other stages of his career, Dermott probably made the most of his opportunities and so sagacious a ruler of men must have been fully alive to the importance of securing the friendship of the Masons in the Northern Kingdom. The Minutes of the same meeting‑May 3‑then proceed In order to preserve (for ever) the Harmony subsisting between the two Grand Lodges, We [the Grand Lodge of England] think it necessary to declare that (from this time) no warrant should be granted by the Grand Lodges of England and Scotland, to any part of the World where either of them have a Provincial Lodge Established.
The next entry which will be transcribed, occurs under December 15, 1773 and is worthy of all praise.‑" Ordered, That any Lodges running in arrears with their Landlords, [and not paying the same] on or before St. John's Day, the Warrant shall be forfeited." On June i, 1774, Grand Secretary Dickey having reported that several Lodges assembled under an authority from a set of gentlemen called Modern Masons, it was resolved If any Lodge under the antient Constitution of England, from the time hereafter mentioned, viz., Europe, Six Months; Asia, Two Years; Africa and America, Twelve Months; to be computed from the 24th day of June 1774; that shall have in their possessions any Authority from the Grand Lodge of Moderns, or in any manner assemble or meet under Such Authority, Shall be deemed unworthy of associating with the members of the Antient Community, and the Warrant they "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 185 hold under this Rt. W. G. Lodge shall be immediately Cancel'd : Compleat notice of which the G. Sectry shall give to all Warrd Lodges under the Ancient Sanction. Resolved‑That all Antient Masons (of Repute) under the Sanction of the Moderns, that may be inclined to obtain an Authority from this R. W. G. Lodge, Shall, by applying any time before the 24th June 1776, be Warranted and the Expence of Such Warrant to be Charged only as a Renewal.
The death of the third Duke of Atholl‑from whom a letter was read September 7, expressing satisfaction that the " Antient Craft is regaining its ground over the Moderns "‑caused the election of Grand Officers to be postponed from December 7, 1774, until March ', 1775.
On the latter date, the Grand Secretary reported the following transactions of the Grand Master's Lodge Feb. 25, '775.‑Admitted. His Grace John the [fourth] Duke of Atholl [nephew of the third Duke] into the first, second and third Degree ; and after proper instructions had been given [it was] proposed that [he] should be Immedi ately Installed Master of the Grand Master's Lodge, which was accordingly done. The Grand Master's Lodge, throughout its history, before and after the Union, has always held the Number i.
Upon the Secretary reading the above transactions, His Grace the Duke of Atholl was unanimously elected Grand Master, and, on the 25th of the same month, duly installed in the presence of the Duke of Leinster and Sir James Adolphus Oughton, former Grand Masters of Ireland and Scotland respectively. In 175z General Oughton was Provincial Grand Master for Minorca, under the older Grand Lodge of England and informed that body " that the Craft flourished there in full vigour; that they adhered to their Rules [of] Decency and Regularity so strictly and invariably, that neither the envious, malicious, or inquisitive could find the least ground to exercise their Talents " (Grand Lodge Minutes‑' 723‑1 8' 3‑June ' 8, 1752). William Dickey was continued as Secretary and the new Grand Master " signed a Warrant appointing Bror Lau : Dermott, Esq., to be His Grace's deputy; and ordered that the said Deputy should be installed whenever his present indisposition would admit him to attend; which was in September in the same year. A series of discussions then took place relative to a lengthy correspondence between William Preston and the Grand Lodge of Scotland, which has been already referred to.
In the following year‑March 6‑it was ordered, " That in future every Modern Mason, remade under this Constitution, shall pay to the Charitable Fund, etc., Six Shillings, unless they produce a certificate of their having been made a Modern and in that case shall pay only three Shillings to the Fund." On St. John's Day (in Christmas) '777, " Dermott informed the Brethren that he had petitioned the Grand Master for liberty to resign his office of Deputy. His age, infirmities and twenty years' service, having constrained him to take such measures." A letter was then read from the Duke of Atholl, expressing approval 186 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND of William Dickey as Deputy Grand Master and stating that he had accepted the office of Grand Master of Scotland, " as he imagined it might accrue to the advantage of Antient Masonry in England by indubitably showing the tenets to be the same." At the same meeting gold medals were voted both to the new and to the retiring Deputy. Dermott availed himself of this respite from administrative labour to bring out a third edition of his Ahiman Ke!Zon (1778).
Dickey gave notice‑March 4, 1778‑" that on the first Wednesday in June next, he wou'd proceed to dispose of the Warrants, laying at this time dormant, for the support of the Fund of Charity " ; and in the June following it was resolved " that the Senior No. have the preference by paying to the Charity úi, is. od." This was rescinded on September 2, 1778.
On March 3, 1779, Charles Bearblock, P.M., No. 4, was elected Grand Secretary ; and on the motion of " Past Deputy Grand Master Dermott," it was resolved " that every Lodge within the Bills of Mortality, in future do pay to the fund of Charity Ten Shillings and sixpence for every new made member." The Quarterly Communication was not held on June 7, 178o, nor the Festival on St. John's Day, June 24, in consequences of the disturbances caused by the Gordon Riots.
On October 18, 1781, Lodge No. 213, in the Royal Artillery, was constituted at New York by the Rev. W. Walter, who, according to the customary practice, was empowered to act as Deputy Grand Master for three hours only, together with the Masters and Wardens of Nos. 16q, zio, 212, 134 (Scotland), and 359 (Ireland). In 1787 this Lodge purchased the ninth place on the List for five guineas. It became No. 17 at the Union, and it is now the Albion Lodge, Quebec.
On February 6, 1782, William Dickey was unanimously chosen President of the " Grand Committee," the Dukes of Atholl and Leinster having respectively declined, the former to retain, the latter to accept, the position of Grand Master if elected.
After an interregnum of a year and a quarter‑March 6, 1783‑William Randal, Earl of Antrim, was elected to the chair, Laurence Dermott was appointed Deputy and Robert Leslie was chosen Grand Secretary in the place of Charles Bearblock, " discharged from that office." On March 2q, 1784, there was a Grand Lodge of Emergency, at which Dermott presided, followed by a meeting of the Grand Committee, under the presidency of William Dickey, when a letter was read from the Deputy Grand Master, com plaining of an irregular and incorrect circular issued by the Grand Secretary, also of his having usurped the power of the Grand Master and Deputy, " more particularly in a dispensing power for congregating and forming a new Lodge." After much discussion, it having been recommended " that every matter heard before the Committee should be lost in oblivion," Dermott and Leslie " were called in and gave their assent thereto." The Grand Committee supported Dermott on the points of law involved in the dispute, but excused Leslie of having done wrong otherwise than by misconception.
"ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 187 In the following September Dermott " informed the Lodge that he would not act, not advise or suffer the Grand Master to act, with the present Grand Secretary, who he declared incapable of his office and, if again re‑elected, he would request leave of the Grand Master to resign his office." Leslie expressed surprise at the use of language as unmasonic as it was unmanly, especially after the Deputy had agreed to bury all differences in oblivion and charged the latter with having " descended to the grossest personal scurrility, unbecoming a Man, Mason, or Gentleman." The Grand Secretary was re‑elected, but afterwards " begged leave to decline any contest for the office " and, persisting in his resignation, a new election was ordered to take place in March, but on December i, it was carried by a unanimous vote, that the thanks of the Grand Lodge be conveyed to Bro. Leslie, Grand Secretary.
On the St. John's Day following, a letter was read from Dermott, objecting to the proceedings of the last Grand Lodge, particularly of its having " attempted to rescind the confirmed acts of a Grand Lodge [held] in due form." In support of this contention a great many authorities were cited, as will be seen from the following extracts.
The only business which you can do with propriety this day is to proclaim the Grand Masters and officers elect, leaving the Installation until a further day. I am not officially acquainted with the proceedings of the last meeting, but from what I have learnt they were erroneous, in attempting to rescind the formed acts of a Grand Lodge in due form (September i). It is amazing! ! that amongst such a number of Officers, Old Masons and even Candidates for the Secretaryship, none sh'd be found to point out the futility of such a measure, or remember the difference between a Grand Lodge inform‑a Grand Lodge in due form‑and a Grand Lodge in ample form, terms so materially significant, definite and useful in the general government of the Fraternity, as to have been constantly observed and continued amongst the Craft in this kingdom for upwards of 858 years. It requires but a moderate share of commonsense to know that no Act, Law, Regulation, Order, or Decree can be revised or rescinded or repealed without a power equal to that by which it was first made and formed.
For truth of this see Doct'. Anderson's Constitutions (1738), p. 16z; D'Assigny (1744), p. 5 6 ; Spratt's Constitutions (1754) ; and Ahiman ReZon. Furthermore, suppose the last Grand Lodge of December i was a Grand Lodge in due form, or what is much more important, a Grand Lodge in ample form (his Lordship Presiding), I say in such case the Grand Lodge could not rescind nor appeal any Rule, Order or Decree made by a former Grand Lodge (in due or ample form) without giving previous notice thereof in the general summonses, which was not the case on the first of December last. Hence it is manifest the present Grand Lodge are under the indispensable necessity of proclaiming the Earl of Antrim Grand Masterelect (with choice of Deputy).
The letter concludes with the following words 1[88 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Thus it is that justice may be obtained and harmony continued without endangering the Constitution or even giving a just cause of offence to any party. That Health, Prosperity, and Unanimity may attend on each of you is the earnest wish of R.W. and W. Brethren, Your most sincere friend and very obedient servant, Lau : DERMoTT, D.G.M.
The missive was read aloud more than once and, after a solemn pause, a vote of censure was unanimously passed on the writer, " the contents of the said letter and the conduct of the D.G.M.," appearing to the Grand Lodge " arbitrary, if not altogether illegal." The behaviour of Leslie at this juncture cannot be too highly commended. A new generation had sprung up, which was ill disposed to brook the petulance of the Deputy. Nothing but the forbearance of the Grand Secretary prevented an open rupture, in which case Dermott must have gone to the wall ; but in a noble letter to the Earl of Antrim, written September 1[o, 1[784, Leslie thus expresses himself: " I again beg your Lordship's pardon, when I hint that a continuance of your former Deputy may be most agreeable to the Grand Lodge and that the want of his assistance would be irreparable." On January 31[, 1785, " a letter [was] read from the Grand Master, appointing Lau. Dermott, Esq., his Deputy and wishing that any difference between the R.W.D[eputy] and Secy Leslie might be buried in oblivion‑the said letter was read twice and the R.W.D. put the same into his pocket without any motion being made thereon by the Lodge." The vote of censure passed at the previous meeting was removed. Dermott returned thanks, declined taking upon himself the office of Deputy Grand Master and repeated that " he would not work with Secy Leslie, upon which the Grand Lodge got into confusion and disorder for some time," being closed eventually by Dermott.
The following entry in the Minutes of the Stewards' Lodge tends to prove that, about this time, the bonds of discipline were much relaxed : June 1[5, 1[785.‑" B` Weatherhead Master of No. 5 was fin'd one shilling for swearing and he also chaling'd the Master of No. 3 to turn out to fight him with sword and pistol and us'd the W" G. J. Warden [Feakings] in a Redicules manner, which oblig'd him to close the Lodge before the Business was compleated." In March 1785 Leslie made way for John M'Cormick, but was again elected Grand Secretary, December i, 179o, an office which he filled until the Union; and a gold medal was voted to him December 1, 1813, " for his long and faith[ful] services as Grand Secretary for more than thirty years." Lord Antrim was installed as Grand Master, June 7, 1785, at the Paul's Head, Cateaton Street, to which tavern Grand Lodge had now removed and, at the same meeting, invested Laurence Dermott as his Deputy. In the following September the sum of one guinea was fixed as the amount to be paid when Modern Masons were made Antient. From this it may be estimated that the latter were more than holding their own in the rivalry which existed, an inference still further sustained "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" by the language of a communication addressed by the Grand Secretary to the Grand Master, March zo, 1786, informing him " that the Provincial Grand Lodge of Andalusia, which had been under the government of the Moderns for upwards of twenty years, had offered for a Warrant under the Antients," also that the said Grand Lodge consisted of none under the degree of an Ensign and who had refused to act longer under the authority of the Moderns, " tho' the Duke of Cumberland is said to be their Grand Master." At the following meeting the Deputy Grand Master ordered that a Grand Lodge of Emergency be summoned to meet on September z9, on which day the Grand Lodge met at the Paul's Head, when Dermott presided. It was then ordered that the Pursuivant and Tyler should wear their cloaks. One of the resolutions passed was a vote of thanks to Dermott for his condescension in giving Ahiman Re7,on to the Charity.
Dermott joined the public procession on St. John's Day, June 24, 1786, when he met the other officers at 9 a.m. " at the sign of the Black Prince, Newington, with all the respectable Lodges throughout the cities of London and Westminster and formed on the bowling green for procession to Camberwell Church and heard an excellent sermon on the ocasion by the Rev. Dr. Milne and after divine service proceeded to Grove House, Camberwell and dined in usual form and drank the toasts." At a Grand Lodge held December z7, 1787, opened by Dermott, James Perry, Junior Grand Warden, who had been recommended to the Grand Master for the office by Dermott himself, was invested as Deputy Grand Master. He then moved That the thanks of the G.L. be given to R.W. Lau : Dermott, Esq., P.Dep. G.M., who after forty‑seven years zealously and successfully devoted to the service of the Craft, had now retired from the Eminent station which he held, and to whose masonic knowledge and abilities, inflexible adherence to the Antient Laws of the Fraternity, and Impartial administration of office, the Fraternity are so much indebted.
The motion was carried without a dissentient vote ; and it was further resolved, " that a Committee be formed, consisting of the Grand Officers, to consider the best means of conferring some signal mark of the approbation of the Grand Lodge on the said Mr Deputy Dermott " and to report accordingly.
Laurence Dermott attended Grand Lodge in the following June, and was also present at Communications held on June 4, 1788, March 4 and June 3, 1789. After the last date the Minutes are altogether silent with regard to his name and even his death is unrecorded.
There were also present at the meeting on March 4, in addition to James Perry and Laurence Dermott, Thomas Harper, Senior Grand Warden; and James Agar, Junior Grand Warden, all of whom were voted, at different times, gold medals by the Society. In 1813 the Duke of Kent selected Thomas Harper, then Deputy I9o HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Grand Master, James Perry and James Agar, then Past Deputy Grand Masters, to assist him, on behalf of the Ancients, in preparing the Articles of the Union. Bywater informs us (op. cit.) that for some years Dermott resided in King Street, Tower Hill, but subsequently removed to Mile End, where, with his wife, he resided until his death, which took place in June 1791. His will was proved by Elizabeth Dermott, the sole executrix, on July 15, 1791, and is as follows In the Name of God, Amen. I, Laurence Dermott, of the parish of St. Botolph, Aldgate, in the county of Middlesex, wine merchant, being of sound mind and memory, make this my last will and testament. Item. I bequeath my immortal soui to the immortal Creator of all things, my body to the earth, and all my worldly riches I bequeath to my dearly beloved wife, Elizabeth Dermott, which I appoint my whole and sole Executrix of this my last Will and Testament, the fifth day of June in the year of our Lord, One thousand seven hundred and seventy.
LAU : DERMOTT.
Signed and sealed in the presence of WM. WHITTAKER, FRANS. ALLEN, WILLIAM SMITH.
The place of his burial has never been ascertained, although Bywater made strenuous efforts to locate it.
When Dermott resigned the office of Grand Secretary (1770) there were 167 Lodges on the roll ; at the close of 1789 there were 25 8, showing an increase of 91. But within the same period, about 46‑as nearly as can be traced‑were constituted, or revived at vacant numbers, thus making a grand total of 137 new Lodges.
The expansion of the rival organization, between the same dates, was as follows 119 Lodges were added to its roll after 1770 and before 1780 ; and 125 during the ten years ending 1789, forming a total increase Of z44. But the real position of the Atholl Grand Lodge is not disclosed by these figures. In the Colonies and wherever there were British garrisons, the new system was slowly but surely undermining the old one. Forty‑nine Military Lodges had been constituted by the Antients down to the close of 1789 (sixty‑seven were chartered subsequently, making a total of 116) and the influence they exercised in disseminating the principles of which Dermott was the exponent, will be treated with some fullness hereafter. In this place it will be sufficient to say, that to the presence of so many Army Lodges in North America was mainly due the form which Masonry assumed when the various States became independent of the mother country. The actual number of Lodges working under what was styled the Antient Sanction at the period under examination cannot very easily be determined. For example, on October 24, 178z, there were four Lodges (the Union, St. George, Virgin, and Thistle) at work in Halifax, Nova Scotia, which, according to J. Fletcher Brennan, P. 375 of History of Freemasonry in the Maritime Provinces of British America (1875), "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 191 were" under Dispensation from the Warranted Lodges, Nos. 15 5 and 21 I ." Lodges St. George, Virgin and Thistle were held in the Nova Scotia Volunteers, the Royal Artillery and the 82nd Foot respectively : they are not included in the forty‑nine Military Lodges or the sixty‑seven mentioned above. Many local Warrants were granted subsequently by the Provincial Grand Lodge, but as none of these were exchanged for Charters from London until 1829, it would now be difficult to trace the dates they originally bore, but that at least seventeen Lodges were constituted under this jurisdiction, probably more, before the year 1790, there is evidence to show. Unfortunately the Atlioll records do not give the Lodges in existence under Provincial establishments and the earliest printed list was not published until 1804. In that year, however, we find that the Province of Gibraltar comprised 9 Lodges, Jamaica 15, Quebec ii, Niagara 12 and Halifax z9.
The Grand Lodge of England, previous to the death of Dermott, demanded no fees from Nova Scotia. The Provincial body was virtually an independent organization, paying tribute to none and exacting the respect due to any independent Grand Lodge of Freemasons. On August 7, 1787, Dermott wrote to Adam Fife, first Master of the Virgin Lodge: " Pecuniary submission is not the aim of the Mother Grand Lodge. To cultivate and establish the true system of Antient Masonry, Unity and Brotherly Love is the only point in view " (Brennan, op. cit., p. 424). In other parts of the world, Provincial Grand Lodges under the Antients also warranted a large number of subsidiary Lodges, but these, in the absence of lists, it is now, for the most part, impossible to identify. One of these bodies, however, before severing its connexion with England‑September 25, 1786‑had no fewer than forty‑six Lodges on its roll, all of which, up to that date, must be regarded as having been remote pendicles of the " Grand Lodge of England according to the Old Institutions." James Perry continued to serve as Deputy until December z7, 1790, when he was succeeded by James Agar and, on the same day, Robert Leslie was invested as Grand Secretary in the place of John M'Cormick‑awarded a pension of a shilling a day during the remainder of his natural life " for his ffaithful services to the Craft." The remuneration of the Secretary was not large at this time, as the following Minutes show: June 3, 1790‑‑" A Motion was made to Raise the G. Secretary's Sallary and by the shew of hands it was carried to allow him io G[uineas], added to the five and to receive it Quarterly or half yearly, as he pleased to take it." Dec. 5, 1792‑" Ordered, That the sum of three shillings be in future paid to the Grand Secretary for a Master Mason's Grand Lodge Certificate; he paying the expense of parchment and printing the same." On the death of the Earl (and Marquess) of Antrim in 1791, John, fourth Duke of Atholl, was again elected Grand Master and installed January zo, 1792. In this year‑March 7‑it was Resolved and Ordered That a general uniformity of the practice and ceremonies of the Antient Craft may be preserved and handed down unchanged to posterity, the Lodges in 192 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND London and Westminster shall be required to nominate a Brother from each Lodge, who must be a Master or Past Master and otherwise well‑skilled in the Craft, to be put in Nomination at the Grand Chapter, in October of each year, to be elected one of the nine Excellent Masters ; who are allowed to visit the Lodges ; and should occasion require, they are to report thereon to the Grand Chapter, or the R.W. Deputy Grand Master, who will act as he shall deem necessary.
At the following meeting, held June 6, the Minutes of the preceding one were confirmed, also those of the Royal Arch Chapter relating " to the appointment of nine Excellent Masters to assist the Grand Officers for the current year." On November 18, 18oi, according to the Minutes of the Stewards' Lodge " A Motion was made and seconded that the nine Excellent Masters for the time being should have a Medal emblematic of their office, which should be given up, when they went out of office, for their successors, which was agreed to, subject to the opinion of Grand Lodge " ; and on June i, 1803, Grand Lodge " Ordered, That to prevent the intrusion of improper persons into the Grand Lodge, each member shall sign his name and rank in his Lodge, in a book provided for that purpose, in the outer porch. And the Excellent Masters for the time being shall be required, in rotation, to attend early, and carry the same into effect." In the ensuing September, in order " to accelerate the business of Grand Lodge," it was unanimously ordered " that the Grand Master or his Deputy do grant such Warrants as are vacant to Lodges making application for the same, giving the preference or choice to the Senior Lodges : And that the sum of Five Guineas, to be paid into the Fund of Charity, shall be the established fees for taking out such Senior warrant." On March 4, 1794, it was ordered‑that Country, Foreign, and Military Lodges (where no Grand Lodge was held) should pay five and London Lodges ten shillings and sixpence to the Grand Fund of Charity upon the registry of every new‑made Mason, exclusive (under both scales) of the Grand Secretary's fee, of a shilling. The Metropolitan Lodges were also required to pay a further sum of one shilling per quarter for every contributing member.
According to the Minutes of the Stewards' Lodge of November zo, 1793, the " annual compliment to the Secretary for the year 1793 " was placed at fifteen guineas ; on September 18, 1799, it was increased to thirty and on March z6, 18oo, it was lowered to ten.
James Agar was succeeded by William Dickey, who, December z7, 1794, again undertook the responsible duties of Deputy Grand Master, a position for which he was more eminently qualified than any man.
Until the December meeting of 1797, there is nothing of moment to record; but on that occasion " it was moved by Bro. Moreton of No. 63 and seconded by Bro. M░Gillevery of No. 3, That a committee be appointed by this R.W. Grand Lodge, to meet one that may be appointed by the Grand Lodge of Modern Masons, and with them to effect a Union." But, alas, the time for a reconciliation had not "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 193 yet arrived and it will therefore occasion no surprise that " the previous Question was thereupon Moved and Carried almost unanimously." The negotiations which preceded the fusion of the two Societies are very fully entered in the Atholl records, but the story of the Union will be best presented as a whole and, for this reason, its narration is postponed.
On July 3, 1798, a meeting took place for the purpose of establishing a Masonic Charity for educating and clothing the sons of indigent Freemasons ; a subscription was opened to carry this object into execution; and six children were immediately put upon the establishment. Donations of ten and two hundred guineas were voted by Grand Lodge in 1803 and i 8ocg respectively to this meritorious institution; and, on March 4, 1812, the London Lodges were ordered to pay five shillings, and the other Lodges half that sum, at every new initiation, to be added to its funds.
The Duke of Atholl was present at a Grand Lodge held May 6, 1799, when it was deemed essential " to inhibit and totally prevent all Public Masonic Processions and all private meetings of Masons, or Lodges of Emergency, upon any pretence whatever and to suppress and suspend all Masonic meetings, except upon the regular stated Lodge meetings and Royal‑Arch Chapters, which shall be held open to all Masons to visit, duly qualified as such." It was further resolved, " That when the usual Masonic Business is ended, the Lodge shall then disperse, the Tyler withdraw from the Door and Formality and Restraint of Admittance shall cease." Two months later‑July 12, 1799‑an Act of Parliament was passed‑39 Geo. III, cap. 79‑which will be referred to in another chapter; and from that date until the year 1802, no new Warrants were granted by the Atholl Grand Lodge, which contented itself with reviving and reissuing those granted and held before the Act in question was added to the statute‑roll.
At the death of William Dickey, Thomas Harper was selected to fill his place and received the appointment of Deputy, March 4, 1 This office he held until the Union and, during the protracted negotiations which preceded that event, was the leading figure on the Atholl side. He served as Senior Grand Warden from 1786 to 1788, was presented with a gold medal, March 3, 1790 and became Deputy Grand Secretary (by appointment of Robert Leslie), December 27, 1793. According to the Grand Chapter Register, he was made a Royal Arch Mason in No. 19o, at Charlestown, South Carolina and the date given is 1770. Here there is evidently a mistake, as the Lodge bearing that number was only constituted in 1774 ; but an earlier one (No. 92) was established at Charlestown, under the same jurisdiction, in 1761 and it is probable that the numbers of the two Lodges have been confused. At the period of his nomination as Deputy Grand Master, he was a member of both Societies and had served the stewardship in the older one, by which, as we shall afterwards see, he was successively expelled and reinstated during the somewhat tortuous proceedings which have yet to be recounted. The Lodge No. 19o here referred to was afterwards the Grand Lodge of Ancient York Masons of South Carolina and amalgamated with the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of the same State in 1817.
F. III‑4 194 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND Edward Harper, of the same address as Thomas Harper, viz. z07, Fleet Street, served as Deputy Grand Secretary under Leslie from December z7, x 8oo, until the Union. He was presented with a Gold Medal on December i, 18 13.
Beyond an addition to the minimum fee for installation, which was increased to two and a half guineas on December 4, 1 804 (and to three guineas on March 4, xc9xz), there are no entries calling for attention till we reach the year 18 o6, when the Minutes of the Stewards' Lodge, under April 16, inform us of a report made to that body by Grand Warden Plummer, to the effect that certain members of Nos. z34 and z64 " had lately taken upon themselves to address the Duke of Kent and requested His Royal Highness to adopt and take upon himself the office of Grand Master, to which address [the Duke] had been pleased to return an answer, under the impression that [it] had been written by the order, or under the sanction, of the Grand Lodge." At a subsequent meeting the incriminated parties " were severely reprimanded from the chair " and warned that similar conduct would be more severely dealt with in the future (Minutes of Stewards' Lodge, May z i, i 8o6).
On March 4, 1807, the Deputy Grand Secretary was granted an annual stipend of twenty guineas and it was ordered, " That in future, no Brother be permitted to hold or take upon himself the office of Master of a Lodge, unless he shall be first duly registered in the books of Grand Lodge." In the following year‑March z‑the Resolution passed May 6, 1799, inhibiting all Masonic Processions and Lodges of Emergency, was repealed; and on June i, salaries of thirty and twenty pounds respectively were voted to the Grand Pursuivant and Grand Tyler.
On September 4, 18 x x, on the motion of James Perry, it was resolved : " That from and after Saint John's day next, no Brother shall be eligible to be elected Master of any Lodge, unless he shall have acted for twelve months as Warden in the said Lodge and that he shall not be entitled to the privileges of a past Master, untll he shall have served one whole year in the chair of his Lodge." This was finally approved December 4, 1811. A rough memorandum, pinned into the Minutebook and endorsed " G. L. Extraordinary z3 Oct.," gives the same resolution, but in place of the last fourteen words (italicised above), has‑" until he shall have served full two months as Master in ye Chair of his Lodge." At the same period, as we shall presently see, the older Grand Lodge was also carrying out changes in its procedure, in view of the impending reconciliation. The Duke of Atholl presided at a special Grand Lodge, held May 18, 1813, in honour of H.R.H. the Duke of Kent, " Provincial Grand Master for Canada." The royal visitor " expressed in the warmest terms his unchangeable affection and attachment to Masonry `according to the Antient Institution' and to the Grand Lodge of England, in which those principles were so purely and correctly pre served." He further said, " that upon every occasion he should be happy to cooperate with them in exerting themselves for the preservation of the Rights and Principles of the Craft and that, however desirable a Union might be with the other fraternity of Masons, it could only be desirable if accomplished on the basis "ACCORDING TO OLD CONSTITUTIONS" 195 of the Antient Institution and with the maintenance of all the rights of the Antient Craft." The italicised expression is somewhat curious, considering that Prince Edward (afterwards Duke of Kent), when appointed Provincial Grand Master of Lower Canada by the Duke of Atholl‑March 7,179z‑held a similar office under the Prince of Wales, Grand Master of " the other fraternity." Prince Edward was accorded the rank of Past Grand Master‑under the older Masonic systemFebruary io, 1790 and, in the same year, became Provincial Grand Master for Gibraltar, an office he retained until i 8oo.
The Duke of Atholl resigned in favour of the Duke of Kent, November 8, 1813. The latter was installed as Grand Master, December i, and on the St. John's day following, the Freemasons of England were reunited in a single Society.
CHAPTER V THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1]61‑1813 HE first Lodge to adopt a distinctive title, apart from the sign of the tavern where it met, was the University Lodge, No. 74, in 173o. This was followed by the Grenadiers Lodge, No. 18q, in 1739 ; after which, the constitution in the latter year of the Parham, the Court‑House, the Bakers and the Basseterre Lodges in the West Indies, led to the usage becoming a more general one. Inasmuch, however, as the " signs of the houses " where the Lodges met were shown in the Engraved Lists, these, in some instances at least, must doubtless have been substituted for distinctive titles, in cases even where the latter existed. Thus the Grenadiers and the Absalom Lodges, Nos. iio and iig, are only described in 176o as meeting at the King's Arms and Tun, Hyde Park Corner and the Bunch of Grapes, Decker St., Hamburgh, respectively. This view is borne out by the list for 176o, wherein, out of 245 Lodges, one English Lodge only‑the last on the roll‑No. 245, the Temple Lodge, Bristol, appears with what may be termed, in strictness, a distinctive name. Nos. i and 70 are indeed styled respectively the West India and American and the Stewards' Lodges, but in each case the sign of the tavern is shown and these designations appear to have merely meant that the former Lodge was frequented by one class of persons, the latter by another. The same remark will hold good as regards the Scott's Masons Lodge, No. 115, which, according to the Engraved List for 1734, met at the Devil, Temple Bar, in that year.
But although only a single English Lodge has a name affixed to it in the list for 176o, no fewer than twelve Lodges in the West Indies, as well as four in Germany and the same number in Holland, appear with distinctive titles in the same publica tion. The majority of the West Indian Lodges bore saintly appellatives. Those in Germany were the Union of Angels, Frankfort 0742); the St. George, Hamburgh (1743) ; the St. Michael's, Mecklenburg (1754) ; and the Grand Lodge Frederick, Hanover (1755). In Holland there were the Lodges of Orange, Rotterdam and of Charity, Peace and Regularity, at Amsterdam. Other Lodges, for example, Solomon's Lodge, Charles Town, South Carolina (1735) and Providence Lodge, in Rhode Island (1757), bore distinctive titles before 176o, but in these and many similar cases the later lists are misleading, as both the Lodges named were only given places corresponding with their actual seniority, some years after the publication of the list under examination, the former being assigned No. 74, the latter No. 224, which were filled in the first instance by Lodges at Bristol and Santa Croix respectively.
z96 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 197 In 1767, the Lodge of which the Duke of Beaufort, Grand Master, was a member, assumed a distinctive title in lieu of the " sign of the house "‑the Sun and Punch Bowl‑whereby it had previously been described and the practice soon became very general. The happy designation bestowed on the New Lodge at the Horn may have helped to set the fashion, but at any rate, the Old Lodge at the Horn became the Old Horn Lodge in 1768. In the same year original No. 3 took the title of the Lodge of Fortitude and, in 1770, the senior English Lodge assumed the now time‑honoured designation of the Lodge of Antiquity.
The Lodges were re‑numbered in 1740, 1756, 1770, 1781 and 1792 and, as the same process was resorted to at the Union (1813), again in 1832 and 1863, much confusion has been the result, especially when it has been sought to identify Lodges of the past century with those still existing in our own. Some of the difficulties of this task have been removed, but the unmethodical way in which vacant numbers were allotted during the intervals between the general re‑numberings will always render it a somewhat puzzling undertaking to trace the fortunes of those Lodges of bygone days, which are undistinguished from the others, save by numbers and the names of the taverns where they assembled.
The positions on the roll during the numeration of 1756‑69 of the Lodges at Charlestown and Rhode Island are noticed elsewhere. The former found a place on the roll in the first instance as No. 251 and is described in the Engraved List for 1761 as Solomon's Lodge, Charles Town, S. Carolina, 1735. Immediately above it, strange to say, at the Nos. 247‑z 5 o, are four other South Carolina Lodges, stated to have been constituted, the two earliest in 1743 and 175 5, the two latest in 1756 respectively. In the list for the following year, however, a vacant niche was available at the No. 74 and Solomon's Lodge accordingly was shifted there from its lower position, the Lodge immediately below it being described as No. 75, Savannah, in the Province of Georgia, 1735. In the same way the Nos. 141‑143 on the list of 1756 were filled by Minorca Lodges up to the year 1766, but in 1768 they were assigned to Lodges in Boston and Marblehead (Mass.) and in Newhaven (Connecticut) respectively. At the next change of numbers (1770) the four remaining Lodges in South Carolina, misplaced in the official list, were lifted to positions on the roll tallying with their respective seniority. St. John's Lodge, New York, which was first entered in the Engraved List of 1762, was on the same occasion placed‑according to the date of its constitution‑among the Lodges of 175 7.
Certificates signed by the Grand Secretary were first issued in 175 5, in which year, it may be stated, the practice of " smoaking tobacco " in Grand Lodge during the transaction of business was forbidden, the Deputy Grand Master (Manning ham) observing, " that it was not only highly disagreeable to the many not used to it, But it was also an Indecency that should never be suffered in any solemn assembly." Lodges, more particularly during the first half of the eighteenth century, were, in many instances, formed long before they were constituted. The latter ceremony was of a very simple character. Usually it was performed by the Deputy Grand 198 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 Master in person and a record of the circumstance, duly attested by the signatures of the Grand or acting Grand Officers, forms, not uncommonly, the first entry in a Minute‑book. The officers were elected quarterly or half‑yearly, the former practice being the more frequent of the two. But one method was substituted for the other, with very little formality, as the following entries attest March 1, 1762.‑Agreed that every quart=. it be a ballotten for a new Master and Wardens.
December 20, 1762.‑This night it was agreed that Election‑night should be every six months. (Minutes of the Moira Lodge, No. 9z.) The installation of officers was devoid of the ceremonial observances peculiar to the Antients and, though the novelties of one system ultimately penetrated into the other, they were not considered orthodox or regular by Brethren of the Older School until the somewhat unconditional surrender of their Grand Lodge which preceded the Union. In what is now the Friendship Lodge, No. 6, we learn from the Minutes that, March 16, 175 8, "it being Election Night, the Send. Ward░. took the Chair; the Junr Ward░ [the] S.W. ; y░ Secretary [the] Jr. W░. ; and Br. J. Anderson was Elected Secretary." In the Moira, No. 92, on March 6, 176o, " Br Dodsworth, by desire, accepted of the Master's Jewell." The services of the Right Worshipful Master, as the presiding officer was then styled, were frequently retained throughout several elections, whilst, in case of illness or inability to attend the meetings, they were as summarily dispensed with. Thus, in a London Lodge, on February 2, 1744, the Master having " declared on the box," being sick, another Brother was forthwith elected in his room. (Minutes of Lodge, No. 163, now extinct.) Wine and tobacco were often supplied in the Lodge room. In one of the country Lodges it took several bottles to audit the Treasurer's account and, when that was done and the balance struck and carried out, it was a common practice to add a postscript of " One bottle more " and deduct that from the balance. (T. P. Ashley, History of the Royal Cumberland Lodge, Bath, No. 41, p. 25.) The following By‑law was passed by a London Lodge in 1773 : " That on account of the great expense incurr'd by allowing wine at supper and, in order to prevent the bad consequences arising therefrom, no liquor shall be paid for out of the Lodge Funds which is drunk out of the Lodge Room, except beer or ale drank at supper." In the Treasurer's Accounts of the same Lodge, under October zo, 1777, there is an entry recording the payment of one shilling and sixpence for Herb Tobacco for the Lodge of Instruction, an offshoot of the Lodge, established on the motion of Brother Wm. White‑afterwards Grand Secretary‑in 1773. (Brackstone Baker, History of the Lodge of Emulation, No. zi, 1872, pp. 8, 9.) By some Lodges, however, the consumption of liquors during the period of Masonic labour was strictly forbidden; and in the Moira Lodge, now No. 9z, THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 199 on February 4, 1765, a " Br Hutchinson paid a fine of 3 pence for drinking in ye Lodge." Frequently the Lodge, besides its normal functions, also discharged those of a benefit society. In such cases there was a limit as to the age of admission and persons over forty were generally ineligible as candidates. The rules ordinarily guard against an influx of members that might press with undue weight upon the finances. People following certain callings, such as soldiers, sailors, bricklayers and constables, were in most cases declared incapable of membership ; while there was frequently a general proviso that no one whose employment in life was either prejudicial to health or of a dangerous character should be proposed for admission. Virtually they were trades‑unions and, in one instance, a regulation enacts that the " proposed " must not " occupy any business which may interfere or closs [clash] with [that of] any member already entered." (Minutes of Lodge No. 163, now extinct.) The following is from the same records December z, 174z.‑A motion was made, Seconded and agreed to N.C., that the Box shou'd be shut up from this night for six months from all benefits (Deaths & Burials excepted), unless to such members who, during the aforesaid time, shall produce a person to be made a Mason, or a person to be entr'd a member ‑Which member so producing such shall Immediately become free.
The first two Degrees were usually conferred on the same evening, the third could also be included by dispensation. The fees and dues ordinarily charged in Lodges about the year 176o were as follows : for initiation and passing, 'Ci is. ; raising, 5 s. ; quarterage, 6s. It was customary for all who were present at a meeting to pay something " for the good of the house." Usually each member paid a shilling ; visitors from other Lodges, eighteenpence ; and St. John's men, or Brethren unattached, two shillings. Until comparatively late in the century, visits were freely interchanged by the Masons under the rival jurisdictions. If the visitor, though not personally known, could pass a satisfactory examination; this was sufficient; and even in cases of defective memory, the administration of an " obligation " generally qualified a stranger for admission. Of this custom two examples will suffice.
December 4, '1758.‑Brother Glover, of St. John's Lodg, being an Ancient Meason, having taken his obligation of this Lodg, paid the ujal fine of two shilling and became a member. (Minutes of the Moira Lodge, No. 9z.) October 15, 176z.‑Evald Ribe, M.D., Member of St. Edward's Lodge at Stockholm, took the obligation, & was proposed to become a member, & carried N.C. (Minutes of No. 246.) The usage at this period seems to have been, that Extraneous Brethren, as they are commonly termed in the records both of the Regular Masons and the Antients‑or, in other words, persons who had been admitted into Masonry under other jurisdictions‑were allowed to visit freely in the Regular Lodges. They Zoo THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 were apparently re‑made‑in the sense of going through the ceremonies a second time‑if they so wished, but not otherwise. According to the Minutes of the Lodge at the Lebeck's Head, William Dickey was present as a visitor several times before he was " made a modern Mason of," in conformity, there can be little doubt, with his own desire, as he did not become a member of the Lodge and, therefore, no pressure could have been put upon him. Evidently he could, had he liked, have attained membership in No. 246 in the same simple manner as Dr. Ribe, in connexion with whom, it may be observed that the first Deputation for the office of Provincial Grand Master at Stockholm‑under the Grand Lodge of England‑was granted by Lord Blayney in 1765 ; and that no Lodge constituted under it appeared on the English roll until 1769. As the earliest Lodge in Sweden for which a Charter was granted by the Antients was only established in 1773, St. Edward's Lodge, Stockholm, if of British origin, must, therefore, have been an offshoot of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, under a patent from which body a Lodge was erected at Stockholm in 1754. (Laurie, History of Freemasonry, 1804, p. 1340 Lord Aberdour held the office of Grand Master from May 18, 1757, until May 3, 176z, having filled the same position in Scotland from December 1, 1755, until November 3o, 1757. In the latter capacity he granted a Warrant of Con stitution to some Brethren in Massachusetts, empowering them to meet under the title of St. Andrew's Lodge, No. 8z. The petitioners were Antient Masons, in the sense of belonging to the body distinguished by that popular title. These, as observed by Findel (History, p. 353), "transplanted the dissensions prevailing in England and formed two opposing camps over the ocean." This Lodge, which was established November 13, 1756, resolved, in December 1768, to keep the Festival of St. John the Evangelist and "that none vulgarly called `Modern Masons ' be admitted to the Feast." (Proceedings, Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, 1870, PP‑ 159, 16z.) It ultimately became the Massachusetts Grand Lodge of Antient Masons and amalgamated, in 179z, with the St. John's Grand Lodge of the same State, as the governing body under the older Grand Lodge of England was then designated.
Precisely as in the mother country, the Masons were divided into two denominations and, even whilst Lord Aberdour was at the head of the Craft in both kingdoms, the Antients in St. Andrew's Lodge and the so‑called Moderns in the other Boston Lodges were at open variance. This is the more remarkable, because about the very time when a difference of procedure between the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the original Grand Lodge of England was alleged to exist by the Brethren of Massachusetts, a letter was written by Dr. Manningham to a correspondent in Holland, informing him, in substance, after having consulted Lord Aberdour and several other Scottish noblemen and gentlemen that were good Masons, that the Masonic ceremonies were identical under the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the older Grand Lodge of England, both of which knew only three orders, viz., Masters, Fellow‑Crafts and Apprentices.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 201 Lord Aberdour was succeeded as Grand Master by Earl Ferrers in 1762 and the latter gave place, in turn, to Lord Blayney on May 8, 1764.
During the administration of this nobleman, the Dukes of York, Cumberland and Gloucester became members of the Society, when it was ordered by Grand Lodge, that they should each be presented with an apron, lined with blue silk and that in all future processions they should rank as Past Grand Masters, next to the Grand Officers for the time being.
In April 1766, a new edition of the Book of Constitutions was ordered to be printed under the inspection of a committee.
In the same month, at the Committee of Charity, a complaint was made that the Lodge at the Old Bell in Bell Savage Yard, Ludgate Hill, had been illegally sold. It appeared from the Respondents that they were Foreigners and had made (as they apprehended) a fair purchase thereof, had paid a valuable consideration for the same and did under that Constitution hold a regular Lodge at the Fountain in Ludgate Hill. It was determined under these circumstances that in Equity they had a Right to the Constitution and that they should be permitted to hold their Lodge under it, but that for the Future the sale of a Constitution should on no account be held valid, but [it] should immediately be considered as Forfeited.
A further illustration of the practice last referred to is afforded by the Minutes of the same tribunal for April 8, 1767, on which date a Br░ Paterson reported that the Constitution of the Lodge No. 3, held at the Sun and Punch Bowl, had been sold or otherwise illegally disposed of, that the same was purchasd by a Number [of] Masons, who now meet by virtue thereof, under the name of the Lodge of Friendship, at the Thatched House in St. James St. And that B`░ French was the person principally concerned, together with the Brethren of the Lodge formerly held at the Sun and Punch Bowl.
The decision of the committee was postponed but as a mark of high respect to his Grace the Duke of Beaufort and the Noblemen and Honourable Gentlemen meeting under the name of the Lodge of Friendship and in consideration of their being very young Masons [it was ordered], that the Constitution No. 3 shall remain with. them, even tho' it should appear upon further enquiry, that this affair hath been transacted contrary to the Constitution, but at the same time resolved, that this shall not be looked upon as a Precedent for the future on any account whatsoever.
A week later, the Minutes of the last Committee of Charity were read in Grand Lodge and confirmed, " except that part of them which related to Brother French," by whom an apology was made " in open Quarterly Communication." At this meeting the Duke of Beaufort was elected Grand Master and, in the following year, a vacancy occurring, he appointed French to the office of Grand Secretary.
ioz THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 At the Committee of Charity, held January zo, 1768, two letters were read from the Grand Lodge of France, desiring a friendly correspondence with the Grand Lodge of England, which was cheerfully agreed to. This was ratified at the ensuing Grand Lodge, held January z8.
At the April meeting of the same body, it was carried by a majority, that the practice of Brethren appearing armed in Lodges was an innovation upon the ancient usages and customs of the Society and it was resolved that " the Grand Master be requested to forbid such practice in future." In the following October, the Deputy Grand Master, who presided, informed the Committee " that the Duke of Beaufort was resolved to have the Society incorporated and proposed that the Brethren present should take into serious consideration the most effectual means to raise a fund for defraying the expense of building a hall." A week later, the Hon. Charles Dillon, Deputy Grand Master, explained in Grand Lodge the plan he had submitted at the Committee of Charity. Ten resolutions were thereupon passed, which were ordered to be printed forthwith and transmitted to all the Lodges on record. By these it was provided, that certain fees should be paid by the Grand Officers annually, by new Lodges at their constitution, by Brethren at initiation or joining and for dispensations. Many further articles or regulations were subsequently added. No. XI‑November icy, 1773requires each Lodge to transmit to the Grand Secretary a list of its members, with the dates of their admission or initiation ; also their ages, together with their titles, professions, or trades ; and that five shillings be transmitted for every initiate and half‑a‑crown for each joining member as registration fees ; and that no person initiated into Masonry, after October z8, 1768, shall be entitled to partake of the General Charity, or any other of the privileges of the Grand Lodge, unless his name be duly registered and the fees paid as above.
Article XII, enacted February zz, 1775, is simply a plan of granting annuities for lives, with the benefit of survivorship, or in other words it merely provides the machinery for a tontine.
The following is the XIIIth regulation Subscribers of Cz5 as a loan, without interest, toward paying off the hall debts, to be presented with a medal, to wear as an honourable testimony of their services and to be members of the Grand Lodge; a like medal to be given to every Lodge that subscribes, to be worn by the Master; and every subscribing Lodge is allowed to send one other representative to the Grand Lodge, besides the Master and Wardens, until the money be repaid.
A copy of the intended Charter of Incorporation was circulated among the Lodges, three of which, including the Stewards and the Royal Lodge, memorialized Grand Lodge, to discontinue the project; another, the Caledonian Lodge, actually entered a caveat against it, in the office of the Attorney‑General.
On April 27, 1769, the question was put, whether the Caledonian Lodge, THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 203 No. 325, should be erased, "but on Bro. E. G. Muller, Master of the said Lodge, publickly asking pardon in the names of himself and his Lodge, the offence was forgiven." Muller, however, was expelled from Masonry, February 7, 1770, "having brought an action against B`░. Preston, Master of the Ionic Lodge, who assisted in turning him out of the Committee of Charity for his gross misbehaviour there " (Grand Lodge Minutes). The Master, Wardens and Secretary of the Caledonian Lodge were likewise expelled, April 26, 1771, " for sending a letter to the P.G.M. of the Austrian Netherlands reflecting upon the Grand Lodge of England in the grossest terms " (ibid.).
The Deputy Grand Master then stated that 168 Lodges had declared in favour of Incorporation and 43 against it and " a motion being made whether the Society should be Incorporated or not‑it was carried in the affirmative by a great majority." The design of incorporating the Society by act of parliament was abandoned in 1771, when, in consequence of the opposition it encountered, the Hon. Charles Dillon himself moved that the consideration of the bill should be postponed sine die, which was agreed to.
Meanwhile, however, a considerable sum had been subscribed for the purpose of building a hall and, on April 23, 1773, a committee was appointed to assume a general superintendence of the undertaking. It consisted of the Present and Past Grand Officers, Provincial Grand Masters, the Master of the Stewards' Lodge and the Masters of such ten other Lodges, within the Bills of Mortality, as they might nominate at their first meeting. Preston, who was himself a member of this committee, says that " every measure was adopted to enforce the laws for raising a new fund to carry the designs of the Society into execution and no pains were spared by the committee to complete the purpose of their appointment." Indeed, the new board soon usurped some of the functions of the Committee of Charity and a great deal of the ordinary business of the Society was remitted to it for consideration and despatch.
In the following year‑November 25, 1774‑the committee reported the purchase of premises in Great Queen Street at a cost Of C,3,I5o. The foundation stone of a New Hall was laid May 1, 1775, the building itself was opened May 23, 1776 and dedicated in solemn form t0 MASONRY, VIRTUE, UNIVERSAL CHARITY and BENEVOLENCE.
Although the leading occurrence during the presidency of the Duke of Beaufort was the plan of an Incorporation by Royal Charter, there are other of the proceedings under the administration of that nobleman to which it is necessary to refer.
The increase of foreign Lodges occasioned the appointment of a new office, viz., that of Provincial Grand Master for foreign Lodges in general, which was bestowed on John Joseph de Vignoles, Esq. The metropolitan Lodges were also placed under the control of a General Inspector or Provincial Grand Master; but the majority of the London Lodges disapproving the appointment, it was soon after withdrawn. (Preston, Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, p. 308.) zoo THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 In 177o a friendly alliance was entered into by the Grand Lodge of England with the National Grand Lodge of the United Provinces of Holland and their dependencies. The former undertook not to constitute Lodges within the jurisdic tion of the latter and the Grand Lodge of Holland promised to observe the same restriction with respect to the Grand Lodge of England in all parts of the world. In the same year the Lodges were again renumbered, by closing up the vacancies on the roll and moving the numbers of the existing Lodges forward.
On April 2.6, 1771, the following resolutions were moved by Bro. Derwas of the Stewards' Lodge and approved of in the following November. None of them, however, appear to have been carried into effect 1. That the law made the zd of March 1731 giving a privilege to every acting steward at the Grand Feast, of nominating his successor, be abrogated.
z. That there shall in future be 15 stewards instead of 1 z.
3. That these 15 stewards shall be nominated by the Lodges within the Bills of Mortality in rotation, beginning with the senior Lodge; each of such Lodges having power to nominate one person at the annual Grand Feast, to serve that office for the year ensuing.
4. That if any of the 15 Lodges in turn to nominate a steward shall decline or omit to do so, then the privilege to pass to the next Lodge in rotation.
Similar proposals, for throwing open the privilege of the Red Apron to all the metropolitan Lodges in succession, were made at a much later date, but the remaining resolutions, affecting the Grand Stewards' Lodge or the body of its members, passed by the older Grand Lodge of England, prior to the fusion of the two Societies, will now briefly be summarized.
At a Grand Lodge held February 3, 1779, a representation was made by the Master and other Brethren of the Stewards' Lodge, that it had been usual of late for Brethren who served the office oú Steward, to neglect all attendance upon the Stewards' Lodge afterwards as members ; and when summoned and called upon for their subscriptions, to declare that they never considered themselves as members, whereby the fund of that Lodge was greatly injured, their books and accounts left in a very irregular state and the actual members much disgusted. To obviate these complaints, a resolution was passed in the following terms Whereas it appears from the Book of Constitutions to have been the invariable usage of the Society, to appoint the officers of the Grand Lodge from such Brethren only who have served the office of Grand Steward, Resolved, that in future, no Brother be appointed a Grand Officer, until he shall have served the office of Steward at a Grand Feast; nor unless he be an actual subscribing member of the Stewards' Lodge at the time of his appointment.
On April 18, 1792, it was ordered, "that the Stewards' Lodge be placed at the head of the List of Lodges without a Number " and this position it retained THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 105 at the Union. It had previously borne the following numbers: 117 (1736), 115 (1740) 70 (1756), 6o (1770), 47 (1781).
In 1794, the Board of Stewards raised the price of the tickets for the Grand Feast from half a guinea to one guinea, but the alteration being objected to, it was declared improper by the Committee of Charity.
Lord Petre was elected Grand Master in 1772 and the first edition of the Illustrations of Masonry, which appeared in that year, was published with his official sanction. This was a distinct innovation upon the ordinary usage with regard to Masonic publications, none hitherto, the Books of Constitutions alone excepted, having received the imprimatur of the Grand Lodge. The same patronage was extended to the second edition, which appeared in 1775, in which year the author was appointed Deputy or Assistant Secretary under James Heseltine, with a salary and his Illustrations of Masonry, as well as the Freemasons' Calendar for 1777 and an Appendix to the Book, of Constitutions‑brought out under his editorial supervision ‑were advertised for sale in the printed proceedings of the Grand Lodge of England for November 13, 1776. Through the same medium Hutchinson's Spirit of Masonry and the oration delivered by Dr. Dodd at the dedication of Freemasons' Hall, were also recommended to the Fraternity.
The Rev. William Dodd, LL.D., was appointed Grand Chaplain May i, 1775, on which date the foundation‑stone of the new hall was laid with Masonic honours. The dedication of this building gave rise to another new office, that of Grand Architect, which was conferred on Thomas Sandby, by whom the structure was designed. Both these officers were reappointed at the next Assembly and Feast‑June 3, 1776‑but in the following April, on a representation that Dr. Dodd had been convicted of forgery and confined in Newgate, he was unanimously expelled the Society.
The next Grand Chaplain was the Rev. Sydney Swinney, D.D., who was appointed by the Duke of Manchester in 1781, after which year the office remained vacant until 1785, when the Rev. A. H. Eccles was selected to fill it and retained the appointment down to 1802, being succeeded by the Rev. Lucius Coghlan, D.D., who likewise held it for many years and officiated as Grand Chaplain until after the Union. He was one of the Grand Chaplains, the other being Dr. Edward Barry of the United Grand Lodge of England, invested by the Duke of Sussex in 1814. The last‑named was Chaplain of the Antient Grand Lodge from 1791 to 1813.
Thomas Sandby retained the title of Grand Architect until his death and is so described in the official records and calendars, although not formally reappointed after 1776. At the Grand Feast in 1799, Robert Brettingham was invested as his successor and filled the office until the recurrence of the same festival in i 8oi, when William Tyler, the Architect of the Tavern, having been proposed as a candidate for the office, the Grand Master observed that the office of Grand Architect had been conferred on Brother Sandby only as a mark of personal attachment, he having been the Architect of the Hall, but that it was never intended to be a permanent z.o6 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 office in the Society. The Grand Lodge therefore resolved that the office of Grand Architect should be discontinued, but that, in compliment to Brothers Brettingham and Tyler, both these Brethren should be permitted to attend the Grand Lodge and wear an honorary jewel as a mark of personal respect.
This, in effect, brought them within the provisions of a regulation passed February 14, 1776, permitting past as well as actual Grand Officers to wear distinctive jewels, upon which innovation Preston remarks How far the introduction of this new ornament is reconcilable to the original practices of the Society, I will not presume to determine ; but it is the opinion of many old Masons, that multiplying honorary distinctions, only lessen the value and importance of the real jewels, by which the acting officers of every Lodge are distinguished. (Illustrations, 1792, p. 315.) No further offices were created during the administration of Lord Petre, nor is there much to add with respect to this section of Masonic history.
In 1773‑April z3‑it was Resolved, that no master of a public‑house should in future be a member of any Lodge holden in his house.
Three days later, at the annual Feast, the Grand Secretary informed the Grand Lodge of a proposal for establishing a friendly union and correspondence with the Grand Lodge of Germany, held at Berlin, under the patronage of the Prince of Hesse‑Darmstadt, which met with general approbation.
On November 24, 1775, it was resolved that an Appendix to the Book, of Constitutions and also a Freemasons' Calendar, should be published, the latter in opposition to an almanac of similar name brought out by the Stationers' Company and both matters were referred to the Hall Committee.
An Extraordinary Grand Lodge was held April 7, 1777, consisting of the Grand Officers, the Master, Wardens and assistants of the Stewards' Lodge and the Masters of seventy‑five private Lodges.
The Grand Secretary informed the Brethren that the object of the meeting was to take into consideration a report from the Hall Committee, concerning the proper means of discouraging the irregular assemblies of persons calling them selves Antient Masons ; and for supporting the dignity of the Society, by advancing the fees for initiation and for new Constitutions, or the revival of old ones. The report being read, it was resolved That the Persons who assemble in London and elsewhere in the character of Masons, calling themselves Antient Masons, by virtue of an Authority from a pretended Grand Lodge in England and at present said to be under the patronage of the Duke of Athol, are not to be countenanced or acknowledged as Masons by any regular Lodge or Mason under the Constitution of England; nor shall any regular Mason be present at any of their Conventions, to give a Sanction to their Proceedings, under the Penalty of forfeiting the Privileges of the Society; neither shall any Person initiated at these irregular Meetings be admited into any Lodge without being re‑made and paying the usual Making Fees.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 207 That this Censure shall not extend to any Lodge or Mason made in Scotland or Ireland under the Constitution of either of these Kingdoms ; or to any Lodge or Mason made abroad under the Patronage of any Foreign Grand Lodge in Alliance with the Grand Lodge of England, but that such Lodges and Masons shall be deemed regular and constitutional.
It was also resolved, that after May 1 then ensuing, no person should be made a Mason for a less sum than two guineas. That the fee payable at the constitution of a London Lodge should be six, for a country Lodge four, guineas and that two guineas from each should be appropriated to the Hall Fund. The following resolution, which was duly passed, concluded the business of the evening That all Lodges which have not complied with the Orders and Resolutions of the Grand Lodge in regard to the Regulations for building a Hall, &c., for the Use of the Society, be erazed out of the List, unless they transmit to the Grand Secretary, on or before each Quarterly Communication, an accurate List of all Members made or admitted since October 29, 1768, with the Registering Fee stipulated by the Regulations of that Date; or give some satisfactory Excuse for their Neglect.
The proceedings of this meeting were of a very instructive character. First of all, we, learn that the Original Grand Lodge of England had at last realized the vitality of the Schism, as well as the expediency of adopting more decided measures to check the rebellion against authority; next, that in addition to the functions which it was primarily called upon to discharge, a large portion of the ordinary business of the Society was transacted by the Hall Committee; lastly, that very arbitrary measures were being resorted to in order to coerce the Lodges and Brethren into raising the requisite funds to balance an increasing expenditure, out of all proportion to the ordinary or normal revenue of Grand Lodge.
Lord Petre was succeeded as Grand Master by the Duke of Manchester, who was invested with the ensigns of his office on May i, 1777 ; after which the former nobleman returned thanks for the honours he had received in the Society, assuring the Brethren of his attachment to its interests. Nor were these mere idle words. The amiable character of Lord Petre and his zeal as a Mason, may‑to use the words of a contemporary‑‑be equalled, but cannot be surpassed. He was a Catholic, but held his religious faith without bigotry and, by his liberality and worth, won the esteem of all parties. He was generally regarded as the head of the Catholic body in this country; therefore, his continuing to preside for five years over a branch of the Society against which the thunders of the Vatican had been launched in 1738, again in 1751, affords conclusive proof that in England, towards the close of the eighteenth century, the two Bulls issued by Roman Pontiffs against the Freemasons had been devoid of any practical result.
Lord Petre was present at and presided over, many meetings of the Society after the termination of his tenure of office. His last attendance appears to have occurred November 24, 1791, when, though the Acting Grand Master, Lord 2.08 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 Rawdon, was present, he took the chair as Past Grand Master. He died July 3, 1801 and, after his decease, it was ascertained that he expended annually ú5,000 in charitable benefactions.
During the administration of the Duke of Manchester, the tranquillity of the Society was interrupted by some private dissensions. An unfortunate dispute arose among the members of the Lodge of Antiquity and the contest was introduced into the Grand Lodge, where it occupied the attention of every committee and communication for twelve months. The result was a schism, which subsisted for the space of ten years, when the two bodies‑each claiming to be No. i‑were happily reunited.
The Grand Master, at a Quarterly Communication held February 2, 1780, laid before the Brethren a letter in the Persian language, enclosed in an elegant cover of cloth of gold, addressed to the Grand Master and Grand Lodge of England, from Omdit ul Omrah Bahaudar, eldest son of the Nabob of Arcot. This Prince had been initiated into Masonry in the Lodge at Trichinopoly, near Madras and his letter‑which acknowledged in graceful terms a complimentary address forwarded by the Grand Lodge, on the circumstance becoming known in this country ‑was so appreciated by the Brethren, that a translation of it was ordered to be copied on vellum and, with the original, to be elegantly framed and glazed and hung up in the Hall at every public meeting of the Society.
At the ensuing Grand Feast, Captain George Smith was appointed junior Grand Warden, though the Grand Secretary objected; that, being then Provincial Grand Master for Kent, he was disqualified for serving that office. Ultimately the objection was waived, Captain Smith offering to resign the Provincial GrandMastership, should the union of both offices in the same person prove incompatible. In the following November, a letter was read from Captain Smith, resigning the office of junior Grand Warden, but to prevent a similar difficulty occurring, it was resolved " that it is incompatible with the laws of this Society, for any Brother to hold more than one office in the Grand Lodge at the same time." At this Grand Lodge, the Grand Master was empowered, in consequence of the great increase of business, to appoint a joint Grand Secretary, with equal power and rank in the Society and William White, Master of the Stewards' Lodge, was thereupon appointed to that office.
On February 7, 1781, at the request of the Grand Lodge of Germany, Brother John Leonhardi was appointed their representative at the Grand Lodge of England and it was also resolved, that Brother Leonhardi should wear the clothing of a Grand Officer and rank next to Past Grand Officers, at all public meetings of the Society.
At the Communication in April 1782, the prospect of establishing a fraternal alliance, still nearer home, was discussed at some length. A report was brought up from the Committee of Charity, that the Grand Lodge of Scotland was disposed to enter into a regular correspondence and, after long debate, it was unanimously resolved, that it be recommended to the Grand Master, to use every means which THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 209 in his wisdom he may think proper, for promoting a correspondence and good understanding with the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland, so far as might be consistent with the laws of the Society.
At the same meeting, H.R.H. the Duke of Cumberland and Earl Ferrers were severally proposed for the office of Grand Master and, on the question being put, the former was elected by a very great majority.
A motion was then made by Brother Dagge, that whenever a Prince of the Blood did the Society the honour to accept the office of Grand Master, he should be at liberty to nominate any peer of the realm to be the Acting Grand Master, which passed unanimously in the affirmative.
The Earl of Effingham was appointed to the new office and, as proxy for the Duke of Cumberland, was installed and invested at the ensuing Feast.
At a Communication, held April 9, 1783, among the Minutes of the preceding Committee of Charity, then confirmed, was one, representing that the Grand Secretary, Heseltine, had requested the opinion of the Committee, on an application made to him by Captain George Smith, to procure the sanction of the Grand Lodge for a book he intended to publish, entitled, The Use and Abuse of Free Masonry; and that the Committee, after mature consideration, had resolved, that it be recorrimended to the Grand Lodge not to grant any sanction for such intended publication.
Of the work in question, it has been well said, " that it would not at the present day enhance the reputation of its writer, but at the time when it appeared there was a great dearth. of Masonic literature‑Anderson, Calcott, Hutchinson and Preston, being the only authors of any repute that had as yet written on the subject of Masonry. There was much historical information contained within its pages and some few suggestive thoughts on the symbolism and philosophy of the Order." Captain Smith held an appointment in the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich and was a member of a Lodge at that town, the proceedings of which formed the subject of inquiry at a Grand Lodge held November icy, 1783, when Captain G. Smith and Thomas Brooke were charged with the offence of " making Masons in a clandestine manner in the King's Bench Prison." In a written defence, it was pleaded that " there being several Masons in the Prison, they had assembled as such for the benefit of instruction and had also advanced some of them to the 3rd Degree. But a doubt arising whether it could be done with propriety, the Royal Military Lodge, No. 371, at Woolwich, adjourned with their Constitution for that purpose to the King's Bench Prison (Captain Smith being Master thereof), being one of those itinerant Lodges which move with the Regiment, the Master of which, wherever he is, having the Constitution of the Lodge, was by Captain Smith judged to have a right to hold a Lodge, make Masons, etc. That this happened previous to Thomas Brooke coming to the prison, but that he afterwards attended their meetings, not thinking it any harm." The two Brethren concluded their defence by " begging pardon of the Grand Lodge for any error they had committed " and expressing a hope, " that grace would be granted to them." Whereupon it was resolved " That it is the opinion of this Grand Lodge, that it is inconsistent with the principles F. III‑f 209 210 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 of Masonry, that any Free Mason's Lodge can be regularly held for the purposes of making, passing, or raising Masons in any Prison or Place of confinement." At the next Quarterly Communication‑February i i, 1784‑the Royal Military Lodge, No. 371, was erased from the list and, in the following November, it was ordered that Captain Smith‑whose name disappears from the calendar of that year as a Provincial Grand Master‑should be summoned before the next Committee of Charity to answer for his complicity in a misdemeanour of a still graver character. The charge was proved to the satisfaction of that tribunal and, at a Quarterly Communication, held February 2, 1785 Captain John George Smith, late Provincial Grand Master for the County of Kent, having been charged with uttering an Instrument purporting to be a certificate of the Grand Lodge, recommending two distressed Brethren ; and he not appearing, or in any Manner exculpating himself, though personally summoned to appear for that Purpose, was duly expelled the Society.
A new edition of the Constitutions, which had been sanctioned in 1782, was brought out in 1784, under the direction of the Hall Committee, who secured the services of John Noorthouck (author of the New History of London, 1773 and Historical and Classical Dictionary, 1776) as editor or compiler. The work reflects credit on all who were concerned in its publication; the constant repetition of mere formal business and of the names of stewards and members present at the stated meetings of the Society, are very properly omitted, whilst it possesses a full index, " without which," as rightly observed by the editor, " no publication beyond the size of a pamphlet, can be deemed compleat." At the Grand Feast, in this year, James Hesel_tine, declining a reappointment, William White became sole Grand Secretary. The services of the former were gracefully recognized in 1785 byhis appointment as Senior Grand Warden, a position, however, which he resigned six months later, on being unanimously elected to the office of Grand Treasurer, November 23, 1785, vacant by the death of Rowland Berkeley.
The same evening a new office was created, that of Grand Portrait Painter and conferred on the Rev. William Peters, in acknowledgment of his elegant present of the portrait of Lord Petre, which, it was considered, " opened a Prospect to the Society of having its Hall ornamented with the successive Portraits of the Grand Masters in future." The Grand Portrait Painter ranked after the Grand Architect and before the Grand Sword‑Bearer. The office was regarded as a purely personal one, to be held by Peters, quamdiu se bene gesserit and, though his name is not included in the list of annual appointments declared on the Grand Feast Day, it duly appears among those of the Grand Officers of the Society published in successive editions of the Freemasons' Calendar, from 1787 to 1814. The new Grand Officer proved himself to have been in every way worthy of the mark of distinction conferred by the Grand Lodge;
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 211 and, on November 28, 1787, a resolution was passed, conveying the thanks of that body to the Rev. W. Peters, G.P.P., for " his kind Superintendance and great Liberality, in the beautifying and ornamenting of the Hall." On April 12, 1786, complaint was made of the intolerant spirit of some of the regulations of the Grand Lodge at Berlin and the Grand Master and the Grand Officers were empowered to take such measures as they thought necessary for abrogating or altering the compact between the two Grand Lodges, entered into in 1773. The subject does not appear to have been further discussed at any subsequent communication of Grand Lodge, until November 26, 1788, when it was stated that the Grand Master and Grand Officers had found it expedient to dissolve and annul the compact referred to. At the same meeting a provisional agreement, entered into with the Provincial Grand Lodge of Frankfort, was laid before and ratified by Grand Lodge.
In November 1786 Admiral Sir Peter Parker was appointed to the office of Deputy Grand Master, which had become vacant by the death of Rowland Holt. The new Deputy, who was a distinguished naval commander, had previously served as Grand Steward and Grand Warden and then held the office of Provincial Grand Master for Jamaica. At this Grand Lodge also a motion was passed, that " in future the Grand Secretary be allowed a salary of úloo per annum for himself and clerks, exclusive of the usual fees " ; and it was resolved unanimously that the Rank of a Past Senior Grand Warden (with the Right of taking Place immediately next to the present Senior Grand Warden) be granted to Thomas Dunckerley, Esq., Provincial Grand Master for Dorset, Essex, Gloucester, Somerset and Southampton, with the City and County of Bristol and the Isle of Wight, in grateful Testimony of the high Sense the Grand Lodge entertains of his zealous and indefatigable Exertions, for many years, to promote the Honour and Interest of the Society.
The story of Dunckerley's life is not an easy one to relate. According to one set of biographers, his mother was the daughter of a physician (Freemasons' Magazine, vol. i, 1793, p. 378, vol. iv, 1796, p. 96 ; and, according to another, she was a servant girl in the family of Sir Robert Walpole (Gentleman's Magazine, 1795, pt. ii, P. 1052). By the former he is said to have been a natural son of King George II ; whilst by the latter he is alleged to have availed himself of the remarkable likeness he bore to the Royal Family, to get it represented to George III that the previous king was in truth his father. These accounts of his parentage are irreconcilable and some other difficulties present themselves when the two biographies are collated. Certain facts, however, are free from dispute. Born October 23, 1724, he was apprenticed to a barber and, very shortly afterwards, entered the naval service, from which he retired, with the rank of gunner, about 1764. His mother's apartments at Somerset House‑where her husband, his putative father, had been a porter‑were continued to him, by order (it is said) of the Duke of Devonshire. On May 7, 1767, a pension of Cioo a year was assigned to him by the king, from his 21z THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 176i‑813 privy purse, which was afterwards increased to C8oo, though with regard to the latter amount the evidence is hardly conclusive.
According to the stream of Masonic writers who all derive their information from the same fount‑the Freemasons' Magazine, Vols. I to IV, published in the eighteenth century‑Dunckerley was told of his close relation to George II in 176o, by a Mrs. Pinkney, for many years his mother's neighbour in Somerset House, to whom the secret had been confided by the latter. He was then on leave of absence from H.M.S. Vanguard, which had just arrived from Quebec; it has been asked, with much force, why he made no effort to communicate with any of the Royal Family until after the death of Mrs. Pinkney, the sole witness he had to verify his singular story. (Freemasons' Chronicle, December 7, 1878.) But whatever may be the true explanation of this mystery, he apparently at once rejoined his ship, which forthwith sailed for the Mediterranean. According to his own account, he was appointed gunner of the Vanguard by Admiral Boscawen and to the same position in the Prince by Lord Anson. The dates he gives as to these appointments are a little confusing ; but there can be no doubt that he served in both vessels and on board of each there was a Lodge. As one of these (i.e. the Prince) ultimately became the Somerset House Lodge, of which Dunckerley was undoubtedly a member, it is at least a reasonable supposition that he was in some way connected with the other (now the London Lodge, No. io8). Indeed, we may go still further and assume the strong probability of his having been the originator and founder of the Lodge on Board H.M.S. Canceaux, at Quebec, No. 224, which, together with five other Lodges in Canada, appears for the first time on the roll, in the Engraved List for 1770, immediately below the Merchants' Lodge, Quebec, No. ZZo, constituted in 1762 and next but one to the Somerset House Lodge, formerly on Board the Prince, also dating from 1762.
No other Sea Lodges than these three were constituted either before or since. One we know him to have been a member of. Another was held in the Vanguard, No. 254, constituted January 16, 176o‑in which, at the time, he held the positions of gunner and " teacher of the mathematicks "‑whilst the third was very possibly an offshoot of the other two. The Lodge, No. 224, is described in the official list as being on board a ship of war at Quebec.
It is a little curious that one of the five Lodges‑No. 226‑placed on the roll at the same time as No. 224, is there described as " In the 5 Zd Regt. of Foot, at Quebec." Thus at what has been termed" the Gibraltar of America," we find that in 1762 there was both a Sea and a Field Lodge; and it is almost certain that some others of the latter character had accompanied the expedition under General Wolfe (1759). Dunckerley, whilst on the North American station, indeed throughout the whole period of his service afloat‑after his admission into the Craft‑was doubtless an occasional visitor at Army Lodges. Most of these were under the Grand Lodge of Ireland, which issued no fewer than fifty‑one military warrants between 1732 and 1762 inclusive. The profound knowledge, therefore, of Royal Arch Masonry, which has been traditionally ascribed to Thomas Dunckerley, may have been THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 213 acquired in Irish Lodges, which doubtless worked the Degree in his time‑though it must freely be confessed that the common belief in the profundity of his Masonic learning is destitute of evidence to support it. He was initiated into Masonry on January 10, 1754 and is said to have delivered a lecture " on' Masonic Light, Truth and Charity " (printed by Dr. Oliver in his Masonic Institutes, vol. i, 1847, p. 137), at Plymouth in 1757, which is not so well substantiated. But even if we concede that the lecture in question was really given as alleged, it proves very little‑merely that Dunckerley was capable of stringing together a quantity of platitudes and constructing a sort of Masonic oration rather below than above the ordinary level of such performances.
The rank of Grand Warden may have been conferred out of respect to the Duke of Cumberland, Grand Master, whose uncle he was very generally supposed to be.
Dunckerley, who died in 1795, was a very worthy member of the Craft; but the loose statements of Dr. Oliver that " he was the oracle of the Grand Lodge and the accredited interpreter of its Constitutions " ; also that " his decision was final on all points, both of doctrine and discipline," are simply untrue‑which is the more to be regretted, as they have been copied and re‑copied by the generality of later writers.
At the next Quarterly Communication, held February 7, 1787, it was resolved that the sum of CI 5o be paid annually to the Grand Secretary and his clerks and that all fees should be carried to the account of the Society.
At the same meeting the Grand Master (who presided) stated that the Prince of Wales had been initiated into Masonry at a special Lodge held for that purpose at the Star and Garter, Pall Mall, on the previous evening. Whereupon the following resolution was passed by a unanimous vote That in testimony of the high sense the Grand Lodge entertains of the Great Honour conferred on the Society by the Initiation of the Prince of Wales, His Royal Highness shall be a member of the Grand Lodge, shall take Place next to and on the Right Hand of, the Grand Master.
A resolution of a similar, though not quite identical character, was passed at the next meeting of Grand Lodge, when it being announced that Prince William Henry‑afterwards King William IV‑had been received into Masonry in the Prince George Lodge, No. 86, Plymouth, it was proposed and carried without a dissentient vote, that an Apron lined with blue silk should be presented to H.R.H. and that, in all future Processions, he should rank as a Past Grand Master of the Society.
Precisely the same compliment was paid to other sons of King George III, all of whom, with the exception of the Duke of Cambridge, became members of the Craft‑the Duke of York, in the Britannic Lodge, No. 29, November 21, 1787; Prince Edward, afterwards Duke of Kent, in the Union Lodge, Geneva; 214 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 Prince Ernest, afterwards Duke of Cumberland and King of Hanover, at the house of the Earl of Moira, May i 1, 1796 ; and Prince Augustus, afterwards Duke of Sussex, in the Royal York Lodge of Friendship, Berlin, in 1798. Prince William, afterwards Duke of Gloucester, the King's nephew and son‑in‑law, was also a Freemason, having been initiated in the Britannic Lodge, May iz, 1795. He was accorded the usual privileges voted to Brethren of the Blood Royal, April 13, 1796. On March 25, 1788, the Royal Freemasons' Charity for Female Childrennow called the Royal Masonic Institution for Girls‑was established for maintaining, clothing and educating the female children and orphans of indigent Brethren. This Charity owes its existence mainly to the benevolent exertions of the Chevalier Bartholomew Ruspini. Here it will be sufficient to remark, that at a Grand Lodge, held February i o, 179o, an annual subscription of úz 5 was voted to the Institution ; and, on a motion by the Grand Treasurer, it was resolved unanimously That the charitable Institution, called THE ROYAL CUMBERLAND FREEMASONS' SCHOOL, established for the Support and Education of the Daughters of indigent Free‑Masons, should be announced in the Grand Treasurer's printed Accounts and also in the Free‑Masons' Calendar and that it be recommended to the Attention of the Society at large, as a Charity highly deserving their Support.
On February 6, 1793, a donation of twenty guineas was voted to the School and it was again recommended " as an Institution highly deserving the most effectual Support of the Lodges and Brethren in general " ; also, in almost identical terms, on February 8, 1804.
On May 4, 1789, the annual Feast of the Society was attended by the Duke of Cumberland‑Grand Master‑the Prince of Wales, the Duke of York, Prince William Henry and above five hundred other Brethren.
In the following year, at the recurrence of the same Festival, Lord Rawdon ‑afterwards Earl of Moira and, later, Marquess of Hastings‑was appointed Acting Grand Master in the room of the Earl of Effingham and retained that position under the Prince of Wales, who was elected Grand Master, November z4, 1790.
On April 18, 179z, the Lodges were again ordered to be renumbered and, in the following May, at the Grand Feast, the Prince of Wales was installed Grand Master in the presence of the Duke of York, Lord Rawdon and a numerous company of Brethren.
The first number of the Freemasons' Magazine or General and Complete Library appeared in June 1793 and was continued monthly‑ till the close of 1798, when its title was changed. During a portion of its brief existence, it was published with the sanction of Grand Lodge.
The Prince of Wales again presided at a Grand Feast, held May 13, 1795. The Grand Master was supported by his brother, the Duke of Clarence ; and his cousin, Prince William, afterwards Duke of Gloucester. H.R.H. expressed his warmest wishes for the prosperity of the Society and concluded with a graceful compliment to the Acting Grand Master, the Earl of Moira, whom he styled " the THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 215 man of his heart and the friend he admired," hoping " that he might long live to superintend the government of the Craft and extend the principles of the Art." (Preston, Illustrations of Masonry, 1821, p. 301.) In 1794, when the situation of the British army and that of the allies in Flanders were extremely critical, the Earl of Moira‑who, in the previous year, had succeeded to the title and had been promoted to the rank of major‑general‑was despatched with a reinforcement of ten thousand men and fortunately succeeded in effecting a junction with the Duke of York, then nearly surrounded by hostile forces much superior in number. The French general, Pichegru, who was in the vicinity of Bruges with a force much greater than the British, was completely out‑generalled. This was one of the most extraordinary marches of which military history affords an example. After the Earl of Moira had cleared the French armies and was passing the Austrian corps under Field‑Marshal Clarfayt, the latter said to him, " My Lord, you have done what was impossible." Two works were published in 1797, which, though now seldom read and never cited in Masonic controversies, produced an immense sensation at the time and evoked an elaborate defence of the Society from the Earl of Moira. That illustrious Brother, however, in i 8og, practically admitted the justice of the strictures, which nine years previously he had applied himself to refute, by speaking of " mischievous combinations on the Continent, borrowing and, prostituting the respectable name of Masonry and sowing disaffection and sedition through the communities within which they were protected." The publications to which reference has been made were written by the Abbe Barruel and Professor Robison, both of them Freemasons, in the same year and without mutual consultation.
The former writer was the author of Memoires pour servir d Phistoire du Jacobinisme ‑translated into English by the Hon. Robert Clifford, in 1798‑and the latter of Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, carried on in the Secret Meetings of the Freemasons, Illuminati and Reading Societies.
Both works aimed at proving that a secret association had been formed and for many years carried on, for rooting out all the religious establishments and overturning all the existing governments of Europe ; and that this association had em ployed, as its chief instruments, the Lodges of Freemasons, who were under the direction of unknown superiors, whose emissaries were everywhere busy to complete the scheme (Illustrations, 1821, p. 308). The Abbe had the candour to admit, that the occult Lodges of the Illuminati were unknown in the British Isles and that the English Freemasons were not implicated in the charges he had made‑but the Professor did not think it worth while to except the English Lodges from the reproach of being seditious, until his work reached a second edition, when he admits that " while the Freemasonry of the Continent was perverted to the most profligate and impious purposes, it retained in Britain its original form, simple and unadorned and the Lodges remained the scenes of innocent merriment, or meetings of charity and beneficence." So that, after all, his charges are not against Freemasonry in 2.16 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 its original constitution, but against its corruption in a time of great political excitement. Indeed, to use the well‑chosen words in which the author of the famous Illustrations of Masonry sums up the whole controversy The best of doctrines has been corrupted and the most sacred of all institutions prostituted, to base and unworthy purposes. The genuine Mason, duly considering this, finds a consolation in the midst of reproach and apostasy ; and, while he despises the one, will endeavour by his own example to refute the other. (Edit. 1821, P. 312.) On July 12, 1799, an Act of Parliament was passed, " for the more effectual suppression of societies established for seditious and treasonable purposes and for preventing treasonable and seditious practices." By this Statute‑39 Geo. III, c. 79‑it was enacted that all societies, the members whereof are required to take any oath not authorized by law, shall be deemed unlawful combinations and their members shall be deemed guilty of an unlawful combination and confederacy and shall be liable to a penalty of C2o.
Societies, however, " held under the Denomination of Lodges of Freemasons," were expressly exempted from the operation of the Act, because their meetings " have been in great measure directed to charitable Purposes " ; but it is " Provided always, That this Exemption shall not extend to any such Society unless Two of the Members composing the same shall certify upon Oath . . . that such Society or Lodge has, before the passing of this Act, been usually held under the Denomination of a Lodge of Freemasons and in conformity to the Rules prevailing among the Societies or Lodges of Free Masons in this Kingdom. . . . Provided also, that this Exemption shall not extend to any such Society or Lodge, unless the Name or Denomination thereof and the usual Place or Places and the Time or Times of its Meetings and the Names and Descriptions of all and every the Members thereof, be registered with such Clerk of the Peace as aforesaid, within two months after the passing of this Act and also on or before the Twenty‑fifth Day of March in every succeeding Year." The insertion oÇ these clauses was due to the combined efforts of the Duke of Atholl (Ahiman Re!Zon, 1807, p. 118) and Lord Moira. Indeed, the latter subsequently affirmed (see Lyon, p. 265) that the exemption in favour of Masonic meetings was admitted into the Act in consequence of his assurance to Mr. Pitt " that nothing could be deemed a Lodge which did not sit by precise authorization from the Grand Lodge and under its direct superintendence." But this statement, though emanating from the Bayard of the English Craft, is a little misleading. Doubtless the Freemasons were chiefly beholden to the Earl of Moira for the saving clauses of the Act‑an obligation most amply acknowledged by the Society at large by the Duke of Sussex in a speech delivered January 27, 1813. But, nevertheless, the letter of the Acting Grand Master, as he then was in both kingdoms, was based on wrong premises and suggested to the civil authorities THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 217 a course not in keeping with the principle of the Statute to which it referred (Lyon, p. 267). The Bill was much modified in its passage through Committee; but " the Act was ultimately framed so as to embrace as participants in its immunities ALL Lodges of Freemasons complying with its requirements, irrespective of any Grand Lodge control." On the passing of the Statute, it was assumed that no new Lodges could be constituted and, at a Grand Lodge, held November Zo, 1799, the common threat of erasure from the list for non‑compliance with its arbitrary regulations was invested with a new terror. The necessity of conforming to the laws was once more laid down, followed by this note of warning It behoves every Lodge to be particularly careful not to incur a Forfeiture of its Constitution at the present Period, as, in Consequence of the late Act of Parliament, no new Constitution can be granted.
Immediately after the passing of the Act, the Grand Lodge of Scotland consulted the Lord Advocate as to whether they might interpret the Act as applying to Grand Lodges, therefore enabling new subordinate Lodges to be constituted. He replied It appears to me impossible to maintain . . . that a Lodge of Free Masons, instituted since the i zth of July last, can be entitled to the benefit of the Statute. . . . The interpretation suggested cannot be adopted; and he concluded by advising them to go to Parliament for powers to establish new Lodges. (Lawrie, History of Freemasonry, 1859, p. 161.) Ultimately‑as we are told by Lawrie‑the Grand Lodge agreed, in i 806, upon the recommendation of the Earl of Moira, then Acting Grand Master Elect (of Scotland), to adopt the practice of the Grand Lodge of England, viz., to assign to new Lodges the numbers and charters of Lodges that had become dormant, or had ceased to hold regular meetings.
The practice, however, of the Grand Lodge of England, in this respect, has been slightly misstated. The Grand Master was frequently authorized to assign the warrants of erased Lodges " to other Brethren," but there was always the proviso, " with Numbers subsequent to the last on the List of Lodges." (Cf. Freemasons' Calendar, 1810, p. 34.) By a further Statute, 57 Geo. III, c. ig, passed on March 31, 1817, it was enacted that all Societies, the members whereof are required " to take any Oath not required or authorized by Laws, . . . shall be deemed and taken to be unlawful Combinations and Confederacies " and the members thereof " shall be deemed guilty of an unlawful Combination and Confederacy " and shall be punished as provided by 39 Geo. III, c. 79.
218 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 But by the next clause of the same Act, all societies " holden under the Denomination of Lodges of Free Masons, in conformity to the Rules prevailing in such Societies of Freemasons," are exempted from the operation of the Act, " provided such Lodges shall comply with the Rules and Regulations contained in the said Act of the Thirty‑ninth Year of His present Majesty, relating to such Lodges of Freemasons." It has been judicially determined, that an association, the members of which are bound by oath not to disclose its secrets, is an unlawful combination and confederacy‑unless expressly declared by some statute to be legal‑for whatever purpose or object it may be formed; and the administering an oath not to reveal anything done in such association is an offence within the Stat. 37 Geo. III, c. 123,5 'At a Grand Lodge, held April io, 1799, the Baron de Silverhjelm, Minister from the King of Sweden to the Court of Great Britain, presented to the Grand Master in the chair a letter from the National Grand Lodge of Sweden, soliciting a social union and correspondence, which was unanimously acceded to. (Illustrations, 18z1, pp. 3zo, et seq.) At the same meeting, the Earl of Moira, who presided, " acquainted the Grand Lodge that several Brethren had established a Masonic Benefit Society, by a small quarterly contribution, through which the members would be entitled to a weekly Allowance in Case of Sickness or Disability of Labour, on a Scale of greater Advantage than attends other Benefit‑Societies ; representing that the Plan appeared to merit not only the Countenance of Individuals, but of the Grand Lodge, as it would eventually be the Means of preventing many Applications for Relief to the Fund of Charity, whereupon it was‑ RESOLVED, That the Masonic Benefit Society meets with the Approbation of the Grand Lodge and that notice thereof be inserted in the printed Account of the Grand Lodge.
In the following year‑April 9, 18oo‑a further resolution was passed recommending to the Provincial Grand Masters " to give every Aid and Assistance in their Power, within their respective Provinces, to promote the Object and Intentions of the Masonic Benefit Society." The institution of this Society is included among the " Remarkable Occurrences in Masonry" printed in the Freemasons' Calendar for i 8oi and is continued in subsequent editions down to the year 1814, possibly later ; but the earliest post Union calendar available for present reference is the edition for 1817, in which there is no mention of the Benefit Society. (Illustrations of Masonry, 1821, PP‑ 319, 3zo.) On May 15, 18oo, the King was fired at from the pit of Drury Lane Theatre arid, at a Special Grand Lodge, held June 3, the Earl of Moira informed the Brethren that it had been convened for the purpose of considering a suitable address to be presented to His Majesty.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑A13 2‑1 9 The Acting Grand Master took occasion, in the course of his Speech, to allude to certain modern Publications holding forth to the World the Society of Masons as a League against constituted Authorities : An Imputation the more secure because the known Conditions of our Fellowship make it certain that no Answer can be published. It is not to be disputed, that in countries where impolitic Prohibitions restrict the Communication of Sentiment, the Activity of the human mind may, among other Means of baffling the Control, have resorted to the Artifice of borrowing the Denomination of Free‑Masons, to cover Meetings for seditious Purposes, just as any other Description might be assumed for the same object : But, in the first place, it is the invaluable Distinction of this free country that such a just Intercourse of Opinions exist, without Restraint, as cannot leave to any number of Men the Desire of forming or frequenting those disguised Societies where dangerous Dispositions may be imbibed: and, secondly, profligate Doctrines, which may have been nurtured in any such self‑established Assemblies, could never have been tolerated for a Moment in any Lodge meeting under regular Authority. We aver that not only such Laxity of Opinion has no Sort of Connexion with the Tenets of Masonry, but is diametrically opposed to the Injunction which we regard as the Foundation‑Stone of the Lodge, namely, " Fear God and Honour the King." In Confirmation of this solemn Assertion, what can we advance more irrefragible, than that so many of His Majesty's illustrious Family stand in the highest Order of Masonry, are fully instructed in all its Tendencies and have intimate Knowledge of every Particular in its current Administration under the Grand Lodge of England.
Lord Moira then produced an Address, which was read and unanimously approved and afterwards personally presented to the King by his son, the Prince of Wales, Grand Master of the Society. , Another Address, couched in similar terms of loyalty and affection, was voted by the Fraternity under the Grand Mastership of the Duke of Atholl and signed by order of that Grand Lodge‑June z4, i8oo‑by " Wm. Dickey, Deputy Grand Master." On February io, i8oz, a friendly alliance was resumed with the Lodges in Berlin and at the Grand Feast‑May i z‑on the application of four Lodges in Portugal, it was agreed to exchange representatives with the Grand Lodge there and that the Brethren belonging to each Grand Lodge should be equally entitled to the privileges of the other.
In 18o S the Earl of Moira, who then combined the functions of Acting Grand Master of English Freemasons with those of Commander of the Forces in Scotland, became the happy medium through which his own and the Grand Lodge of the Northern Kingdom were brought into fraternal union. In the same year‑November z7‑and through the same channel, a correspondence on terms of amity and brotherly communication was arranged with the Grand Lodge of Prussia.
Also at this Grand Lodge, the Brethren, to mark their sense of the services rendered to Masonry by the Acting Grand Master, " agreed that the Fraternity should dine together on December 7, it being the birthday of Earl Moira." Zzo THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 This practice continued to be observed by a large number of the metropolitan Lodges until the departure of that nobleman for India ; a survival of it still exists in the Moira Lodge, No. C92, which holds its annual festival on December 7, when the toast of the evening is, " the memory of Earl Moira, the patron of the Lodge." On December 31, i 8og, the foundation‑stone of Covent Garden Theatre was laid by the Prince of Wales, as Grand Master of England and Scotland. Passing over those events which formed any part of the protracted negotiations that preceded the Union, we are brought down to 1812, on February 1 z of which year the Duke of Sussex was appointed Deputy Grand Master, in succession to Sir Robert Parker, Admiral of the Fleet, who died in the previous December. At the ensuing Grand Feast, May 13, the Grand Lodge having resolved that a Grand Organist should be appointed, the Acting Grand Master accordingly nominated Samuel Wesley to that office.
In the course of this year the Earl of Moira was appointed Governor‑General of India and it was considered by the Fraternity as only due to his exalted merit, to entertain him at a farewell banquet before his departure from England and to present him with a valuable Masonic jewel, as a memorial of their gratitude for his eminent services.
January 27, 1813, was the day appointed and more than five hundred Brethren attended, including six royal dukes. The Duke of Sussex, as Deputy Grand Master, took the chair, being supported on the right by the Earl of Moira, on the left by the Duke of York. There were also present the Dukes of Clarence, Kent, Cumber land and Gloucester. The speeches were far above the ordinary level of such per formances. In happy terms, the chairman characterized the exertions of the Earl as having saved the Society from total destruction ; whilst in terms still happier, the guest of the evening acknowledged the compliment.
On Lord Moira's passage to India, the vessel in which he had embarked calling at the Mauritius‑as the head of the Masons of that island, he laid the first stone of the Roman Catholic Cathedral of Port Louis.
The Earl of Moira remained nine years in India and brought two wars to a successful termination. At the termination of his rule, every native state in that vast region was in either acknowledged or essential subjugation to our Government. James Mill, the historian of British India, says The administration of the Marquess of Hastings may be regarded as the completion of the great scheme of which Clive had laid the foundation and Warren Hastings and the Marquess of Wellesley had reared the superstructure. The crown ing pinnacle was the work of Lord Hastings and by him was the supremacy of the British Empire in India finally established.
In 1823, having in the meantime, December 7, 1816, been created Marquess of Hastings, he returned to England, whence, in the following year, he proceeded to Malta as Governor and Commander‑in‑Chief. He died November 28, 18z6, on board H.M.S. Revenge, at Baix Bay, near Naples.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 221 Contemporary records state that his excessive liberality and unbounded generosity had so impoverished him, that his ample fortune absolutely sank under the benevolence of his nature.
Before leaving Calcutta, he was presented with an address by the Freemasons (Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1836, p. S 3) and the late Sir James Burnes has placed on record how his Lordship, impressed with devotion for the Craft and love for all the Brethren, descended from his high estate as Governor‑General and Commanderin‑Chief in India and, within the halls of his own palace, offered the right hand of fellowship, with his parting benediction, to every soldier, individually, who wore an apron; acknowledging, also, his pride, that Masonic principles had influenced him in the exercise of his authority. (Ibid., 1846, p. i zq.) Whilst in the East, Lord Moira was styled " Acting Grand Master in India." The Regency of the United Kingdom was conferred by parliament upon the Prince of Wales, in February 1811, who, however, continued to preside over the Fraternity until 1813, when, declining a re‑election, the Duke of Sussex was unanimously chosen as his successor‑the Prince Regent shortly afterwards accepting the title of Grand Patron of the Society.
The Duke of Sussex was installed at the Grand Feast, held May 12, 1813 and the following Brethren were also invested as Grand officers : Lord Dundas, Deputy ; John Aldridge and Simon M'Gillivray, Wardens; John Bayford, Treasurer; W. H. White, Secretary; Rev. Lucius Coghlan, Chaplain; Chevalier Ruspini, Sword Bearer; and Samuel Wesley, Organist.
It has been truly said, " that the Duke of Sussex's whole heart was bent on accomplishing that great desideratum of Masons, the Union of the Two Fraternities who had been mistermed Ancient and Modern; and his high station in life certainly carried with it an influence which could not have been found in a humbler individual. (Preston, Illustrations, p. 367.) On November 4, 1779, the laws for the contribution of Lodges to the Hall Fund were ordered to be enforced and, at a Grand Lodge Extraordinary, consisting of the actual and past Grand Officers and the Masters of Lodges, held January 8, 1783, a variety of resolutions were passed imposing further regulations of a most onerous character.
" How far," observes Preston, " they are consistent with the original plan of the Masonic institution, must be left to abler judges to determine. In earlier periods of our history, such compulsory regulations were unnecessary." At a special Grand Lodge, held March 2o, 1788, it was resolved to pull down and rebuild Freemason's Tavern and, in order to augment the finances of the Society, it was ordered, that in London and within ten miles thereof, the fee for registry should be half a guinea, instead of five shillings, as stipulated by the regulation of October z8, 1768.
At this meeting also, a very extraordinary resolution was passed, that Lodges Zzz THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑x 8I 3 omitting for twelve months to comply with the preceding regulation should not be permitted to send Representatives, to or have any Vote in, the Grand Lodge.
On February 7, 1798, on the ground that debts had accumulated to the amount of C7,000, on account of the Hall and Tavern and that the sum of Cz 5 o was payable yearly under the Tontine, it was ordered, that every Lodge do pay, at the Grand Lodge in February, yearly to the account of the Hall Fund, two shillings for every subscribing member, over and besides all other payments directed to be made.
This regulation not being generally complied with, a committee was appointed to consider the best means of giving it due effect, on whose recommendation, it was resolved‑November zo, I799‑that it was the duty of Lodges to expel such of their members as neglected to make the prescribed payments, for which the former were accountable to the Grand Lodge and would be erased from the list for withholding, after February i z, then ensuing.
Country Lodges were afterwards given until November 1 Boo to pay their arrears, but the additional fee imposed February 7, 1798, was not abolished until the same date in 18 i o.
According to Preston, " the Lodges readily concurred in the plan of liquidating the debts," but this was not so. The number of Lodges erased from the list was very great. No fewer than nine in the metropolitan district were struck off at one swoop on February i z, i 8oo ; and, in previous years, from 1768, in which nineteen Lodges were removed from the roll, down to the close of the century, the erasures mount up to a total of two hundred and forty‑seven. Some of these, it is true, lapsed in the ordinary way, but the greater number were summarily struck out for not contributing to the Hall Fund. Others were restored ; for instance, on November 17, 1784, five Lodges were reinstated in their rank‑four of which had. been deprived of it in the previous April‑" having satisfied the Grand Lodge with their Intentions of discharging their Arrears." But in the great majority of cases, the erased Lodges ceased to exist, or went over to the Antients and the sentiments of the Sarum Lodge, No. 37, with regard to the arbitrary measures pursued by the Grand Lodge were, without doubt, shared by many other Lodges of that era, whose records have not yet fallen in the way of an equally competent investigator.
Besides the Lodges that have been incidentally referred to, we find from the official calendars, that Warrants of Constitution, under the authority of the Original Grand Lodge of England, found their way into North Carolina, 175 5 ; Quebec, 176z ; Honduras, 1763 ; Maryland, 1765 ; Bordeaux and Normandy, 1766; Grenoble, Canton (China) and Berlin, 1767; Naples, 1768 ; Sweden, 1769; the Austrian Netherlands, 1770 ; Leghorn and St. Petersburg, 1771 ; Strasbourg, Venice, Verona and Turin, 1775 ; Sicily, 1778 ; Malta, 1789 ; and Sumatra, 1796. Sea and Field Lodges, as they are happily termed in Multa Pauris, were.constituted in 176o and 175 5 respectively, the former on board His Majesty's ship the Vanguard, the latter in the 8th or King's Regiment of Foot.
It may be convenient to add, that, at the date of the Union (1813), the number of
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 223 Continental Lodges‑active or dormant‑shown on the roll of the Grand Lodge of England was as follows, viz. : in Germany, 3 5 ; Italy, 11 ; Russia, 8 ; Holland, 5 ; Flanders, 4 ; France and Sweden, 3. At the same period there were 15 Lodges in Military Corps, not stationary.
Numerous Lodges were established for the association of particular classes of Masons. Thus the Grand Stewards were formed into a Lodge in 173 5 and there were Lodges existing in the Army, Navy and Marines, in 1755, 1759 and 1761 respectively. A Sea Captains' Lodge was constituted at Wapping in 1751 and another at Yarmouth in 1759. The former afterwards moved to Fenchurch Street and a Mariners' Lodge was forthwith set up in its place. Lodges composed of Operative Masons were formed‑or received Constitutions‑in 1764 and 1766 No. 335, now extinct; also 364, now the Bedford Lodge, No. 157.
The Country Stewards' Lodge, No. 540, was constituted July 25, 1789 and, on November 25 following, it was resolved in Grand Lodge, " that in consequence of the trouble attending the office of Steward for the Country Feast of the Society, the Brethren who have served that office be permitted to wear a suitable jewel pendant to a green collar." The Country Feast was notified as taking place July 5, in the Freemasons' Calendar for 1785 and the two following years and a still earlier notice of it was discovered by H. Sadler, Grand Tyler, in the Grand Lodge Minutes for May 4, 1772, where it is recorded " that the Deputy Grand Master acquainted the Brethren that the Country Feast was to be held at the long room at Hampstead on the 25th June next." It appears to have been known as the " Deputy Grand Master's," or " Annual Country Feast of the Society." On November 25, 1795, the members of No. 540 were granted permission to line their aprons with green silk, or, in other words, to become a Green Apron Lodge, but the privilege was withdrawn at the next Communication‑February io, 1796 by a majority of five votes, the numbers being 5 3 to 48. The Country Stewards renewed their application to Grand Lodge, November 23, 1796 and the vote passed in their favour by a majority of Zo, the numbers being 73 for to 5 3 against.
The question of the Green Apron was again brought up, February 7,1797: Upon which Debates arose, but it being found difficult to ascertain the Sense of Grand Lodge by the holding up of Hands, a Division was proposed, but from the confusion, tumult and irregularity which took place thereon, the Grand Master in the Chair, found himself under the necessity, at a very late hour, of closing the Grand Lodge and Adjourning the whole of the Business.
At the next Communication, held April 12, on the motion of the Earl of Moira, who presided, the resolution passed in the previous November was annulled by a majority of 95, 54 Brethren voting that it should stand, 149 against, upon which, on a proposal made and seconded by members of the Country Stewards' Lodge, it was resolved, that the grant in November 1789, of a green collar and medal, be Zz4 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 also rescinded. The latter privilege, however, was restored to the Lodge in the February ensuing.
The Lodge, which became No. 449 in 1792, died out about i 8oz and is described in the Freemasons' Calendar for 1803 as the Lodge of Faith and Friendship meeting at Berkeley, Gloucestershire, whither the Constitution had evidently found its way from London, in conformity with a usage of which many illustrations might be given. The names of members of Lodges were then registered in two booksone for London, the other for the country. The last entry‑under the No. 449in the former bears date 1793 and the earliest in the latter, November 4, 18oz, when the name appears of " Wm Fitzharding, Ld Viscount Dursley, Berkley Castle (age 17)." " Ed. Jenner, M.D., Berkly," seems to have joined or been initiated "Dec. 30, 1802." But perhaps the most remarkable of the different kinds of Lodges, established for class purposes, were those formed for the association of foreign Brethren residing in this country. The earliest of these, held at the Soloman's Temple, Hemmings Row, in 1725, has been already referred to. Next in point of date comes the French Lodge at the Swan, Long Acre, No. zo, apparently so styled about 1732. This, which became the French Swan Lodge in 1736, was carried forward in the numeration of 1740 as the French Swan, No. i g and erased March 25, 1745.
Another French Lodge existed about the same time, No. 98, meeting at the Prince Ugen's [Eugene's] Head in 173z and at the Duke of Lorraine in 1734. In 1740 the Lodge met at the Union Coffee House in the Haymarket and was numbered 87. It would seem to have constituted the Lodge Union of Angels at Frankfort, in 1743, as the latter is acknowledged as daughter of the Union Lodge of London in the Warrant. Curiously enough, by that official document, permission is given for " the Masons of one and the other Lodges, to be members respectively of both." No. 87 died out before the change of numbers in 175 6.
In 1759 we meet once more, at the No. 122, with the Swan, the old French Lodge, in Grafton Street, but this title, acquired after 1756, was lost by 1764, in which year the Lodge assembled at the Two Chairmen, Charing Cross. In the Engraved List for 1778, it is described as the Lodge of Unity, a title it still retains as present No. 69.
On January 29, 1765, a French Lodge was constituted at the Horn, in Doctors Commons, as No. 3 31, which became No. 270 in 1770, but was extinct before 1778. In the following year, on June 16, a conference was held at the Crown and Anchor in the Strand, at which it was determined to establish a new Lodge, to be composed of foreign Brethren and to work in the French language. The first Master was J. J. de Vignoles, who, at the next meeting, stated that he had received from the Grand Master a letter complying with their request as to the designation of the Lodge. This, Lord Blayney thought should be changed from L'Immortalite des Freres, to L'Immortalite de L'Ordre (as a more modest title), which suggestion was adopted.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 225 The Lodge of Friendship appears to have cultivated a very intimate acquaintance with this French Lodge, for a particular Minute of the latter records, under April 20, 1768, that " No. 3 have agreed to receive regularly the Brethren of L'ImmortalW de L'Ordre, on payment of the same nightly dues as their own members, namely, five shillings each ; and, finally, the Brethren of the two Lodges were considered as partaking of the advantages of membership of both " (Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1845, p. 33). The Lodge was originally numbered 376, became No. 303 in 1770 and was erased April 28, 1775. The establishment of another French Lodge in 1774, the Loge des Amis Rdunis, No. 475, at the Turk's Head, Gerrard Street, Soho, may have brought about this catastrophe. This, however, did not remain long on the roll, from which it was struck out, February 7, 1777. The next French Lodge, L'Esperance, No. 434, was constituted in 1768 and met at Gerrard Street, Soho, where, on removal to St. James's Street in 1785, its place was taken by a new Lodge formed in that year, L'Egalitd, No. 469. On the Engraved List for 1770, at No. 15 3, we find the Ancient French Lodge, White Swan, Grafton Street, which thus reappears upon the scene, its members having purchased their Ccnstitution between 1759 and 1763, in which latter year they met under it at the Fountain, on Ludgate Hill, the Lodge being then numbered 193.
In 1781 the Lodge became No. iz2‑a namesake having borne, singularly enough, the exact numerical position in 1759‑and in 1792, No. iio. On April 9, 1794, it united with No. 38o, Loge d'Egalitd (constituted 1785), under the title of Loge des Amis Rdunis and, on April 10, 1799, with L'Esperance, No. 238 (constituted 1768 as No. 434), under that of Loge de L'Espdrance. It was placed on the Union Roll as No. 134, but died out before 1832.
The experiment of founding a Lodge, to be composed of Germans, in which the ceremonies should be conducted in their national tongue, proved a more successful one. The Pilgrim Lodge, now No. 238, was established on these lines ; on August 25, 1779 and celebrated its centenary October 1, 1879. Not only are the proceedings carried on in the German language, but the method of working is also German. The Lodge possesses a choice library and is justly renowned for its excellent working and lavish hospitality. (Alasonic News, October 26, igzg, has a detailed history of this Lodge.) It has been shown that an earnest desire for a Masonic Union was expressed by the Masons of Lower Canada in 1794; also that a proposal to that effect was actually made in the Grand Lodge under the Duke of Atholl in 1797. The pro minent position occupied by the Prince of Wales in the older Society doubtless encouraged this feeling, which must have received a still further impetus from the popularity of his locum tenens, the Earl of Moira‑a nobleman in whom, as proved by later events, all parties reposed the fullest confidence. By the Scottish and Irish Masons the Schism in the English Craft was always regarded with pity and indignation; and, though a closer intercourse had been maintained by their Grand Lodges with one moiety of it, than with the other, this arose from the election of Irish and Scottish noblemen as Grand Masters, by the Antients, rather than from F. III‑6 2.26 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 any especial predilection on the part of Masons of those nationalities, for that Society.
The first proposal for a Union, made in either of the two Grand Lodges, took place in 1797 and fell to the ground. The next attempt to heal the Schism came from the other side, but was equally unsuccessful, though the negotiations which then proceeded and lasted for a year or two made it quite clear that the rank and file of the Craft were bent on a thorough reconciliation, which the misdirected efforts of the Masonic authorities had only retarded for a time.
At the Committee of Charity, held April io, 18oi, " a complaint was preferred by Br W. C. Daniel, Master of the Royal Naval Lodge, No. 57, Wapping, against Thomas Harper of Fleet St., jeweller, Robert Gill and William Burwood, for encouraging irregular meetings and infringing on the privileges of the Ancient Grand Lodge of all England, assembling under the authority of H.R.H. The Prince of Wales." The inquiry was adjourned in the first instance until the following November and, again, until February 5, 18oz, when, on the representation of the Grand Treasurer, " that having recently conversed with Br Harper and James Agar, Esq., it has been suggested that Union of the two Societies upon liberal and constitutional grounds might take place," the complaint was dismissed.
In order to pave the way for the intended Union, a committee was appointed and the Earl of Moira, on accepting his nomination as a member, declared that he should consider the day on which a coalition was formed as one of the most fortunate in his life.
It is alleged, that, although pledged to use his influence to effect a union, Harper covertly exerted himself to prevent it, being afraid of losing the power he possessed and the profit he derived from the sale of articles belonging to his trade. It is further said that, on two occasions in i 8o2, when proposals were made in the Antient Grand Lodge with reference to a fusion of the two Societies, he " violently " closed the proceedings of the meeting. The records of the Antients leave these points undecided, but they prove, at least, that a very inflammatory address, eminently calculated to stir up strife and to defeat any attempt to promote a reconciliation, vas read and approved in Grand Lodge‑December 1, 18oi‑and " ordered to be circulated throughout the whole of the Antient Craft" (Ahiman KeZon, 1807, PP‑ IZI‑5)ň At the Committee of Charity, held November ig, 18oz, the Earl of Moira in the chair, it was ordered " that the Grand Secretary do write to Thomas Harper and acquaint him that he is to consider himself as standing under a peculiar engagement towards the Grand Lodge " ; also, that his " non‑attendance at this Committee appears an indecorous neglect. In consequence of which an explanation is required from him before Wednesday next, such as may determine the procedure which the Grand Lodge shall at that meeting adopt." Harper's reply was read in Grand Lodge, November 24, in which, after expressing surprise that " the very frivolous charge brought against him " had been renewed, THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 2.27 he states‑" That I was an Antient Mason has long been known to many, to Mr Heseltine particularly, as also to yourself [W. White], having frequently referred persons to me in that capacity. I stated the fact to Mr Heseltine at the Committee of Charity previous to my taking upon myself the office of Grand Steward and it was then publicly declared by him to be no impediment." Untoward circumstances, he continues, had precluded his attendance on November icy and, in conclusion, he remarks, " that feeling the rectitude of his conduct during a period of thirty‑five years devoted to Masonry, without having in any instance impinged upon its laws, should the Grand Lodge be disposed to revive the charge against him, he would bow with the utmost deference to the decision." The " consideration of what censure should pass against Mr Harper " was deferred until February 9, 1803, when, by a unanimous vote, he was expelled the Society and it was ordered that the laws should be strictly enforced against all who might countenance or attend the Lodges or meetings oú persons calling themselves Antient Masons.
This, for a time, put an end to the proj ect of a union, as in the following monthMarch 3‑a manifesto was drawn up by the Atholl or Antient Grand Lodge, which was ordered " to be forthwith printed (signed by the Secretary) and circulated throughout the whole extent of its Masonic communion and connexion." Negotiations for a union were not resumed until i 8og, when it became apparent to all candid minds that the breach would soon be repaired which had so long separated the two Societies. In the interim, however, the position of the elder Grand Lodge had been strengthened by fraternal alliances entered into with the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland, the former of which was ruled by the same Grand and Acting Grand Master, whilst the latter had pledged itself in 18o8 not to countenance or receive as a Brother any person standing under the interdict of the Grand Lodge of England for Masonic transgression.
On April 12, i 8og, a very remarkable step was taken by the senior of the rival bodies, when, at a Quarterly Communication held that day, it was resolved That this Grand Lodge do agree in Opinion with the Committee of Charity that it is not necessary any longer to continue in Force those Measures which were resorted to, in or about the year 1739, respecting irregular Masons and do therefore enjoin the several Lodges to revert to the Ancient Land Marks of the Society.
This tacit admission of the propriety of the epithets‑Antients and Modernsby which the members of the two Fraternities had so long been distinguished, fully justified the sanguine forecast of the Brethren by whom it was drawn up.
At an (Atholl) Grand Lodge, held September 6, 18og, " Jeremiah Cranfield, P.M., 255 "‑now the Oak Lodge, No. icgo‑brought forward a renewed motion (presented, but afterwards withdrawn, in the previous June) that a Committee should be appointed to consider and adopt prompt and effectual measures for accomplishing a Masonic Union. But, after a long debate, Harper, " according 228 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 with his duty as Deputy Grand Master, peremptorily refused to admit the Motion and afterwards closed and adjourned the Grand Lodge, past 1z o'clock at night." A Committee, however, was appointed to report as to the propriety and practicability of a Union by a vote of the same body, in the following December, whilst on February 7, 18io, the resolution passed in 1803, by the older Grand Lodge, for the expulsion of Thomas Harper, was rescinded.
After two meetings, the Atholl Committee made a report to their Grand Lodge, by which body it was resolved‑March 7, 18 That a Masonic Union on principles equal. and honourable to both Grand Lodges and preserving inviolate the Land Marks of the Ancient Craft, would, in the opinion of this Grand Lodge, be expedient and advantageous to both.
This resolution was enclosed in a letter to the Earl of Moira, who, on April i o, informed the Grand Lodge over which he presided That in conference with the Duke of Atholl, they were both fully of opinion that it would be an event truly desirable, to consolidate under one head the two Societies of Masons that existed in this country. . . . In consequence of the points then discussed and reciprocally admitted, the result was a resolution in the Grand Lodge under the Duke of Atholl.
Which being read, it was thereupon resolved That this Grand Lodge meets with unfeigned cordiality, the desire expressed by the Grand Lodge under his Grace the Duke of Atholl for a Re‑Union. That the Grand officers for the year, with the additions of the R.W. Masters of the Somerset House, Emulation, Shakespeare, Jerusalem and Bank of England Lodges, be a committee for negotiating this most desirable arrangment.
The Masters thus nominated were respectively the Earl of Mount Norris, W. H. White (Master, both of the Emulation and the Shakespeare), James Deans and James Joyce, all of whom are named in a Warrant granted by Lord Moira, October z6, i 8ocg, constituting a " Lodge of Masons, for the purpose of ascertaining and promulgating the Ancient Land Marks of the Craft." The proceedings of the Grand Lodge, held April io, 181 o, were communicated to Harper by the Earl of Moira and, in the following July, a letter, signed by the Deputy Grand Master, was written to the latter from the Grand Lodge of Antient Masons, enclosing sundry resolutions passed by that body on May 1 and requesting " his Lordship to appoint a day and middle Place for the meeting of the two Committees." The resolutions stipulated That the Prince of Wales's Masons were to consent to take the same obligations under which the other three Grand Lodges were bound and to work in the same forms. That Pastmasters should sit in the United Grand Lodge ; and that Masonic Benevolence should be distributed monthly.
THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 229 Also, the following were appointed members of the Atholl Committee, viz. the Present and Past Grand Officers, with Brothers Dewsnap, Cranfield, M'Cann, Heron and Ronalds.
In reply to this communication, Grand Secretary White was directed to invite the Atholl Committee to dine with the Committee of his own Grand Lodge on July 31, at 5 o'clock,." for the purpose of conferring'on the subject of the said Letter and Resolution " and the former body, though it " was not the Answer they expected," nevertheless, " to expedite the business," accepted the invitation to dine, but " earnestly requested that the other Committee would meet them at three o'clock on the same day, previous to dinner, for the purpose of conferring together." The Committees duly met but, owing to the absence of the Earl of Moira, nothing definite could be arranged with regard to the resolutions of May i. Ultimately, however, all difficulties were overcome, though the question of admitting Past Masters into the United Grand Lodge was only settled by a compromise, the privilege being restricted to all who had attained that rank, but to one Past Master only for each Lodge after the Union.
On the important point of ritual the Committee of the Grand Lodge under the Prince Regent gave a distinct assurance that it was desired to put an end to diversity and establish the one true system. They [the older Society] have exerted themselves to act by the ancient forms and had formed a Lodge of Promulgation, whereat they had the assistance of several Antient Masons. But, in short, were ready to concur in any plan for investigating and ascertaining the genuine course and when demonstrated, to walk in it.
The members of the Lodge of Promulgation were, in the first instance, only empowered to meet until December 31, 18 io, but this period was afterwards extended to the end of February 1811. The Minutes begin November zi, 18og, when James Earnshaw, J.G.W., was elected W.M. and appointed James Deans and W. H. White as his Wardens. The Lodge being empowered " to associate with them, from time to time, discreet and intelligent Brethren," then proceeded to elect as members, thirteen Grand Officers, two Past Members of the Grand Steward's Lodge, the Master (Duke of Sussex) and the S.W. (Charles Bonnor) of the Lodge of Antiquity and the Masters of eight other London Lodges (present Nos. 8, 18, 23, z8, 9z, 96 and io8. The Lodge of Sincerity, then No. 66, now extinct, was also represented). According to the Warrant of the Lodge, it was constituted for the purpose of promulgating the Ancient Land Marks of the Society and instructing the Craft in all such matters as might be necessary to be known by them, in consequence of and in obedience to the Resolution passed by Grand Lodge, April 12, 18o9.
The members proceeded, in the first instance, to consider " the principal points of variation between the Antient and the Modern practice in the several degrees of the Order," but their labours ultimately assumed a much wider scope. Thus, on December 29, i 8oq 130 THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 A particular explanation of the Antient practice of a respectable community of the Craft, who have never entertained the Modern practice, was minutely set forth by the Secretary (Bonnor), so far as relates to the ceremonies of constituting a Board of Trial, with the entire series of proceedings in raising a candidate from the Zd to the 3d Degree. Whereupon, certain deviations from the practice so explained were pointed out, agreeable to the proceedings of the Antient Lodges, which deviations were ably descanted upon and discussed. H.R.H. the Duke of Sussex was pleased to contribute to the accumulation of information, by a luminous exposition of the practice adhered to by our Masonic Brethren at Berlin.
The ceremonies were settled with great care and deliberation, after which they were rehearsed in the presence of the Masters of the London Lodges, who were duly summoned to attend. At an early stage it was resolved, " that Deacons (being proved, on due investigation, to be not only Antient, but useful and necessary officers) be recommended." As the word Antient is used throughout in a double sense, both as relating to the practice of the Antients and the immemorial usage of the entire Craft, it is not easy, in all cases, to determine from the Minutes of the Lodge the precise extent to which the Society under the Prince Regent borrowed from that. under the Duke of Atholl. In substance, however, the method of working among the Antients‑to use the hackneyed phrase‑was adopted by the Moderns.
This was virtually a return to the old practice and, with the exception of the opportunities selected under the two systems for the communication of secrets, there appears to have been no real difference between the procedure (or ceremonial) of the rival Fraternities. (See Dalcho, Orations, p. 84 ; Hughan, Origin of the English Rite, PP. 5 6, 5 7.) On October 19, 181 o, it was resolved, " that it appears to this Lodge, that the ceremony of Installation of Masters of Lodges, is one of the two Land Marks of the Craft and ought to be observed." At the next meeting‑November 16‑the Grand Treasurer and four others, " being Installed Masters, retired to an adjoining chamber, formed a Board of Installed Masters according to the Ancient constitution of the Order and forthwith installed Jas. Earnshaw, R.W.M." and the Masters of ten other Lodges.
On December 28, 18 i o, " the Masters of Lodges were informed that they would, at the two next meetings, be summoned for the purpose of being regularly Installed as Rulers of the Craft " ; accordingly one‑half of the Masters of London Lodges were installed on the 18th, the other half on the 25th of January.
In the following month, at a Quarterly Communication held February 6, " the M.W. Acting Grand Master, the Earl of Moira, having signified his directions to the R.W. Master and Officers of the Lodge of Promulgation, was Installed accord ing to ancient custom (such members of the Grand Lodge as were not actual Installed Masters having been ordered to withdraw)." At the same meeting the thanks of Grand Lodge were conveyed to the Lodge of Promulgation and blue aprons were presented to Bros. Deans and Bonnor, " the other leading officers of the Lodge already possessing such aprons as Grand Officers." THE GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND, 1761‑1813 2‑31 A petition was signed by seven, on behalf of twenty‑eight Masters of Lodges, praying that the Earl of Moira would renew the Lodge of Promulgation for another year ; but on March 5, 18 I I, the Grand Secretary reported that his lordship con ceived it would not be advisable to authorize the further continuance of its labours. Before passing from the Minutes of this Lodge, it may be interesting to state, that among them is a report to Lord Moira, suggesting " the propriety of instituting the office or degree of a Masonic Professor of the Art and Mystery of Speculative Masonry, to be conferred by diploma on some skilled Craftsman of distinguished acquirements, with power to avail himself occasionally of the assistance of other skilled Craftsmen and to be empowered to instruct publicly or privately." The assistant professors, it was recommended, should be distinguished by a medal, ribbon, or a sash. The reply of the Acting Grand Master‑if he made one‑is not recorded.
The Duke of Sussex, Grand Master of one Fraternity ; and the Duke of Kent, Grand Master of the other, were installed and invested on May 13 and December 1, 1813, respectively. On the former occasion the Duke of Kent acted as Deputy Grand Master and, on the latter, the Duke of Sussex was made an Antient Mason (in a room adjoining) in order to take part in the proceedings. The Articles of Union (see opp. p. 88) were signed and sealed on November 25, 1813, by the Duke of Sussex; W. R. Wright, Provincial Grand Master in the Ionian Isles ; Arthur Tegart and James Deans, Past Grand Wardens‑on the one part; and by the Duke of Kent; Thomas Harper, Deputy Grand Master; James Perry and James Agar, Past Deputy Grand Masters‑on the other part.
These are in number XXI. Article II, the most important of them all, has been already quoted. Article V enjoins that the two Grand Masters shall appoint each nine Master Masons or Past Masters of their respective Fraternities, with Warrant and instructions to either hold a Lodge, to be entitled the Lodge of Reconciliation, or to visit the several Lodges for the purpose of obligating, instructing and perfecting the members.
On St. John's Day, December 27, 1813, the Brethren of the several Lodges who had been previously re‑obligated and certified by the Lodge of Reconciliation were arranged on the two sides of Freemasons' Hall, in such order that the two Fraternities were completely intermixed. The two Grand Masters seated themselves, in two equal chairs, on each side of the throne. The Act of Union was then read‑accepted, ratified and confirmed, by the Assembly.
One Grand Lodge was then constituted. The Duke of Kent then stated that the great view with which he had taken upon himself the important office of Grand Master of the Antient Fraternity, as declared at the time, was to facilitate the important object of the Union which had been that day so happily consummated. He therefore proposed H.R.H. the Duke of Sussex to be Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of Antient Freemasons of England for the year ensuing. This being put to the vote was carried unanimously and the Duke of Sussex received the homage of the Fraternity.
CHAPTER VI HISTORY OF THE UNITED GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑18I4‑I930 BY the Union of the two English Grand Lodges a great work was accomplished, although the terms on which it was effected may have left many things to be desired. " Neither the English writer nor the English reader," it has been observed with some justice, " can keep clear from the egotistical insular tendency to look upon England as the central point of the whole system of events in this wide world." Animated by this proclivity, native historians have assumed too rashly that the termination of the Great Schism‑which restored peace and concord to the English Craft‑has been criticized as favourably by foreign writers as by themselves. Not indeed that the authors of text‑books are alone in this misapprehension. The fact that Masonry has a general, as well as a national, character, has been too often forgotten by the legislators as well as by the students of the Craft. Foreign commentators, however, have regarded the mutual concessions of 1813 as involving a great sacrifice of principle‑to say nothing of a loss of dignity‑on the part of the older and, as they rightly style it, legitimate Grand Lodge of England. Thus, by Rebold the recognition of the Royal Arch Degree has been termed an act of feebleness on the part of that body, which destroyed, to a great extent, the unity and the basis of true Masonry, as it had been practised by them up to that time with a laudable firmness (General History of Freemasonry, trans. by J. F. Brennan, 1875, p. 105). The admission of Past Masters to a seat in and a life membership of Grand Lodge has been denounced in equally strong terms by Mitchell (History of Masonry, izth ed., 1871, p. 383)‑whilst Krause, writing shortly after the Union, boldly affirmed that the New Grand Lodge of London had not only retained the ancient restrictions and impediments which obstructed the progress of the Fraternity, but had actually imposed even further new regulations, " which will have precisely the contrary effect " [to what might have been hoped and expected]. Between the English Masonic usages and those existing in the United States, there are some remarkable discrepancies. These‑according to writers of the latter country‑arise from the fact that Masonry in America has never been altered by lazy since it was planted there, while Masonry in England has. True, they say, Webb re‑shaped it slightly, Cross still more, whilst later lecturers have done what they could to make their marks upon it, but no Grand Lodge has attempted an innovation of any sort and the Constitutions of the United States to‑day contain all the features, with but few original ones, of the Ancient Charges and Anderson's Constitutions, so‑called, of 1723. Widely divergent (they argue) has been the practice of English Masons. Within fifteen years of the time of publishing 2.32 UNITED GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑1814‑1930 233 their first Constitutions‑the basis of all the American Grand Lodge Constitutionsthey had authorized a second edition, more adverse from the first than any one Grand Lodge Constitution in the United States differs from another. So they went on, each edition at variance with the last, until the year 1813. Then the two opposing Grand Lodges, that had warred for about sixty years, united j under a new Constitution, more diverse, more anomalous, more filled with innovations than all that had preceded it. (See Freemasons' Magazine, 1863, pt. I, p. 466.) In accordance with the Articles of Union (VIII), the Lodge of Antiquity and the Grand Master's Lodge, each No. i on its respective roll, drew lots for priority and the distinction of heading the new list of Lodges fell to the latter. The remaining Lodges, of which there had been 641 under the older and 3 5 9 under the junior sanction respectively, were allotted alternate numbers, the No. z of the latter becoming No. 3 and the No. 2 of the former (anciently the Old Lodge at the Horn) No. 4 and so on throughout the two lists. Many Lodges, however, under both Societies had become extinct, as the total number carried forward on the Union roll was only 647, exclusive of the Grand Stewards' Lodge, which was allowed to retain its old position at the head of the list without a number.
By Article XIII the Grand Master was empowered to nominate and appoint a Deputy, Grand Wardens and Secretary ; to select a Treasurer, Chaplain and Sword‑Bearer from three persons, nominated for each of those offices by the Grand Lodge. At the Order of Proceedings, however, adopted at Kensington Palace, December 9, 1813, by the Dukes of Kent and Sussex, the former with Thomas Harper and James Perry, the latter with Washington Shirley and James Deans, as assessors, the Grand Master, in addition to the foregoing, was authorized (by that Assembly) to nominate a Grand Registrar, Joint Grand Secretary " and such other Officers as may be deemed necessary for the Administration of the United Craft." Accordingly, on December 27, 1813, the following Grand Officers were appointed: Senior and Junior Wardens ; Treasurer; Registrar; Joint Secretaries (W. H. White and Edwards Harper) ; two Chaplains; Deputy Chaplain; Superintendent of Works ; Director of Ceremonies ; Sword‑Bearer; Organist ; Usher; and Tyler.
At the same meeting, the Commissioners for the Union were directed to prepare with all convenient speed a new Code of Regulations for the whole government of the Craft. Also four Committees or Boards " for the administration of Finances, of the Works, of the Schools and of General Purposes," were established, the Senior Grand Officer present at any meeting to take the chair.
Ultimately (1815) a President was appointed annually to preside over each Board, who, with half the members, was nominated by the Grand Master, whilst the remaining half were elected by Grand Lodge from among the actual Masters of Lodges. The Board of General Purposes, as its name imports, was the most important of these Committees and ultimately absorbed all the others, the Boards of Works and Schools ceasing to meet after 1818, that of Finance after 1838.
134 In addition to a President, the several Boards were thus constituted in i 815 General Purposes, twenty; Finance, Works and Schools, twelve members each. Of the Board of General Purposes, but of no other committee, the Grand Master, his Dpeuty and the Grand Wardens were members ex offcio.
Long reports were made by all four Boards on March z, 1814, the first meeting of Grand Lodge, or Quarterly Communication, held subsequently to the Union. Of these it will be sufficient to record, that, on the recommendation of the Board of Finance, the Quarterage of London Lodges, payable per member towards the fund of Benevolence, was fixed at one shilling, that of all other Lodges at sixpence, amounts which, with the exception of Lodges beyond the seas, still continue to be paid, but, at the time of writing, the payments are being revised.
The Board of Schools reported as to the condition of the girls' and boys' schools; at the former there being then sixty‑two children, at the latter fifty‑five, the annual expense of clothing and educating each girl being C23 ios. and of each boy C7 ios. At the recommendation of this Committee it was resolved That the children of Masons properly qualified should in future be received into either Institution without distinction as to which of the Societies they may have formerly belonged.
A Senior and Junior Grand Deacon were present at the next Quarterly Communication‑May z‑ranking immediately below the Grand Sword‑Bearer. Of their original appointment no record has been preserved, but their successors were duly nominated by the Grand Master in the following December, with precedence after the Grand Secretaries.
Meetings of the Committee or Lodge of Benevolence for the distribution and application of the Charitable Fund were held monthly from January 1814. It was composed in the first instance of twelve Masters of Lodges (within the Bills of Mortality) and three Grand Officers, an arrangement which gave place in 1815 to a Lodge consisting of thirty‑six Masters of Lodges (within the London district), three members of the Grand Stewards' Lodge and nine Grand Officers, one of whom was to act as President.
The following Brethren were nominated as members of the Lodge of Reconciliation in pursuance of the fifth Article of Union R. F. Mestayer . . Grand Master's Lodge, Rev. S. Hemming, D.D. (present), Lodge of Har No. i. mony, No. 25 5, R.W.M.
T. Harper, Jun. . . Do. Do. W. Meyrick (do.), Lodge of Antiquity, No. z, J. H. Goldsworthy (present), Lodge of Fidelity, S.W.
NO. 3. W. Shadbolt, G. Stewards' Lodge, J.W.
W.Fox(do.),Royal York Lodge ofPerseverance, S. Jones (present), Lodge of Antiquity, No. z.
No. 7. L. Thompson (do.), Lodge of Felicity, No. 58.
HISTORY OF THE UNITED BY THE DUKE OF KENT BY THE DUKE OF SUSSEX ENGLAND CLOTHING OF THE GRAND OFFICERS OF THE GRAND LODGE THE present Clothing and Regalia of the United Grand Lodge of England were. finally arranged at the union of the rival Grand Lodges of Antients and Moderns in 1813 and the laws which regulate them are more exact and stringent as to their uniformity than those of any other Grand Lodge. Size, shape, and materials are all laid down care fully in the Book of Constitutions. Rule 283 expressly enjoins that " No Masonic jewel, medal, device, or emblem, shall be worn in the Grand Lodge, or any subordinate Lodge, unless it appertains to, or is consistent with, those Degrees which are recognized and acknowledged by the Grand Lodge as part of pure and Antient Masonry." These recognized Degrees are enumerated in Rule I, which states, " By the solemn Act of Union between the two Grand Lodges of Freemasons of England, in December 1813, it was declared and pronounced that pure Antient 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." It, therefore, follows that the only jewels, &c., which may legally be worn in any masonic gathering under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of England; are those that would come under any of the following designations CRAFT OFFICERS' JEWELS.
THE JUBILEE JEWEL, which may be worn by every Mason who was a subscriber to a regular Lodge on June 20, 1887.
FOUNDERS' JEWELS.
PRESENTATION JEWELS OF CRAFT OFFICES. PAST MASTERS' JEWELS.
THE FREEMASONS' HALL MEDAL.
PRIVATE LODGE JEWELS of certain Lodges which have special privileges of this kind, such as the ROYAL MEDAL of Lodge No. 2 and Grand Master's Lodge, &c. CENTENARY JEWELS (see Constitutions, page 173).
CHARITY JEWELS (see Constitutions, page 174).
OFFICIAL JEWELS, as Present or Past Grand or Provincial Grand Officers', or Grand Representatives of Foreign Grand Lodges.
FOREIGN CRAFT JEWELS of recognized Grand Lodges, or their subordinate bodies, of which any Brother may be a member.
THE HALL STONE JEWEL of the Masonic Million Memorial Fund.
And all ROYAL ARCH JEWELS which would come under the same headings by substituting the words " Royal Arch," " Chapter " and " Past Principal," for the words " Craft," " Lodge " and " Past Master," respectively.
The Grand Master's suit consists of apron, collar, jewel, gauntlets and white gloves (which last are common to all Freemasons, whatever their rank). The apron is made of white lambskin, from fourteen to sixteen inches wide, twelve to fourteen inches deep ; lined with garter‑blue silk, with an edging of the same, three and a half inches wide. The strings are also blue and the fall of the apron is entirely covered with silk, no white skin appearing on it, as in the case of other Grand Officers. On the body of the apron, between three gold levels, is embroidered in gold a blazing sun; on the edging and fall of the apron are pomegranates and lotuses, with the seveneared wheat at each corner, all in gold embroidery, with deep fringe of gold bullion (No. I).
The collar is of garter‑blue ribbon four inches broad, with bows on each side, over it a rich chain of gold, the links being composed of irradiated stars within a circle, the Grand Lodge monogram enclosed in a square, the serpent with its tail in its mouth entwined in a double knot, alternately. The number of star‑links used designates the rank, but of the other links no special number is used. The Grand Master's collar has nine stars (No. 2).
The gauntlets are of garter‑blue silk, embroidered in gold with the jewel of office in the centre, edged with gold fringe (No. 3).
GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑1814‑1930 235 BY THE DUKE OF KENT BY THE DUKE OF SUSSEX J. Ronalds (present), Robert Burns Lodge, J. Jones (extinct), Lodge of Sincerity, No. 66.
No. 25. J. H. Sarratt (present), Moira Lodge, No. 9z.
W. Oliver (do.), Royal Jubilee Lodge, No. 72. T. Bell (do.), Caledonian Lodge, No. 134.
M. Corcoran (do.), Middlesex Lodge, No. 143. J. Joyce (do.), Bank of England Lodge, No.
R. Bayley (extinct), Lodge at the Lord Cochrane, z63.
No. zoo. William Henry White, Secretary. J. M'Cann (present), Lodge of Tranquillity, No. 185.
Edwards Harper, Secretary.
By a circular dated January io, 1815, Provincial Grand Masters and Masters of Lodges at a distance from London, were earnestly recommended to take the earliest opportunity of deputing by written authority, some one or more of the most qualified members of their respective Lodges, to attend the Lodge of Reconciliation. The meetings of that body, they were informed, would be held weekly at Freemasons' Hall, where the acknowledged forms to be universally used would be made known to them for the information of their Brothers. In the meantime, ‑ however, the members of the two Fraternities were empowered and directed mutually to give and receive, in open Lodge, the respective obligations of each Society. "This injunction was faithfully carried out at Manchester on August z, 1814, when `Fraternities of Freemasons of the Old and New Systems'‑the former title being bestowed by joint consent on the Atholl representatives‑met at the Talbot Inn in that city `for the purpose of forming a Lodge of Reconciliation.' Two Lodges were formed and the W.M.'s having exchanged the O.B.'s, an O.B. of Reconciliation was repeated by the whole of the Brethren present and accepted as an act of Union " (extracted by J. Gibb Smith and printed in The Freemason, July 5, 1884).
The meetings of the Lodge of Reconciliation were, however, postponed by a circular issued in the following March, it having been deemed advisable to await the presence of delegates from Scotland and Ireland.
The Minutes of the Lodge, which were written on loose papers until December 8, 1814, begin August 4 of that year. On the latter day Dr. Hemming, the Master, presided and there were also present the other members of the Lodge, together with the representatives of twelve Lodges, to the number of twenty‑six. Two Degrees were rehearsed; and, at a meeting held on the following day, attended by seventy‑four Brethren representing thirty Lodges, three Degrees. Among the early visitors to the Lodge were J. G. Godwin, Peter Gilkes (introduced by J. MICann), Peter Broadfoot and Thomas Satterley, all in their day noted Preceptors in the Craft. The regular Minutes come to an end May 9, 1815 ; but a loose sheet records the presence of the Duke of Sussex, who was attended by many Grand Officers, on May 3. There is also amongst the papers a letter, dated February i i in the same year, wherein the Master of the Lodge‑Dr. Hemming‑informs the Grand Master that he has " introduced a trifling variation in the business of the Second Degree." 2.36 HISTORY OF THE UNITED At a Grand Lodge held August z3, 1815, the Duke of Sussex referred to certain points connected with Nos. IV, V, and XV of the Articles of Union. The " Ancient Obligations " of the First and Second Degrees were then repeatedthe former from the throne‑when it was RESOLVED and ORDERED that the same be recognized and taken in all time to come, as the only pure and genuine Obligations of these Degrees, which all Lodges dependent on the Grand Lodge shall practise.
" Forms and ceremonies " were then " exhibited by the Lodge of Reconciliation for the opening and closing of Lodges in the three Degrees," which were " also ordered to be used and practised." In the following year‑May zo, 18i6‑also in Grand Lodge, the officers and members of the Lodge of Reconciliation opened a Lodge in the First, Second and Third Degrees successively and exhibited the ceremonies of initiating, passing and raising a Mason as proposed by them for general adoption and practice in the Craft.
On June 5 ensuing, the Minutes of the previous Grand Lodge when the Ceremonies and Practices, recommended by the Lodge of Reconciliation, were exhibited and explained, were read ; and alterations on two Points, in the Third Degree, having been resolved upon, the several Ceremonies, etc., recommended, were approved and confirmed.
The decision on one of those points was that the Master's Light was never to be extinguished while the Lodge was open, nor by any means to be shaded or obscured and that no Lanthorn or other device was to be admitted as a substitute.
(See letter dated December 7, 1839, from W. H. White, Grand Secretary, to Peter Matthew, published by Brackstone Baker, P.G.D., in The Freemason, March zi, 1885 The rationale of this decision is thus explained by a high authority One of the Lights represents the Master, who is always present while the Lodge is open, if not actually in his own presence, yet by a Brother who represents him (and, without the Master or his representative, the Lodge cannot be open), so his Light cannot be extinguished until the Lodge is closed ; the other two Lights figuratively represent luminaries, which, at periods, are visible‑at other times, not so (ibid.).
The last mention of the Lodge of Reconciliation, in the official records, occurs in the proceedings of September 4, 1816, when the Master, Officers and Brethren were awarded the thanks of Grand Lodge, " for their unremitting Zeal and Exertion in the cause of Free‑Masonry." GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑i8i4‑1930 137 At the Annual Feast in 1815, eighteen Grand Stewards were nominated by the Grand Master, being an excess of six over the number appointed in the older Grand Lodge before the Union. Although under the old practice the twelve Stewards had the right of nominating their successors, for several years prior to the fusion, the privilege was restricted to members of nine Lodges‑Somerset House, Friendship, Corner Stone, Emulation, Globe, Old King's Arms, St. Albans, Regularity and Shakespeare; the Somerset House Lodge furnishing three, the Friendship two and the remaining Lodges one Steward each. Occasionally the persons nominated declined to serve, when the vacancies were filled by the Board of Stewards.
Tickets for the Annual Feast were issued at fifteen shillings each, the Stewards paying the difference between the actual cost of the dinner and the amount realized by the sale of tickets. This was generally a large sum and, on March 16, 1813, it appears that each member of the Board deposited C3 5 in the hands of the Treasurer, to provide for the deficiency. Matters were in a transitional state in 1814, for, in that year, a Board of Stewards was formed with some difficulty, by the Master of the Grand Stewards' Lodge. The tickets for the feast on that occasion were issued at a guinea each and the Stewards incurred no liability, the deficit, which amounted to k105 14s. 6d., being made good by Grand Lodge. The Grand Stewards' Lodge and with it, the Board of Grand Stewards as an institution, was in some danger of lapsing, owing to the Grand Officers being no longer selected from the former body.
From each of the eighteen Grand Stewards, however, appointed in the following year, a deposit of Czo was required, whilst the dinner ticket was again lowered to 15 s. This Board, so their Minutes inform us, " on account of their peculiar situation," were " all admitted to the Grand Stewards' Lodge without ballot." In 1816, the Grand Master‑as prescribed by the new Book of Constitutiolas ‑selected the Stewards from eighteen different Lodges, each of which Lodges was thereafter to possess the right of recommending one of its subscribing members (being a Master Mason) to be presented, by the former Steward of that Lodge, for the approbation and appointment of the Grand Master.
Accordingly we find, in the year named, the right of wearing the Red Apron vested in the following Lodges‑the numbers given being their present onesGrand Master's (i), Antiquity (2), Somerset House (4), Friendship (6), British (8), St. Mary‑la‑bone, now Tuscan (14), Emulation (21), Globe (23), Castle Lodge of Harmony (26), Old King's Arms (28), St. Albans (zq), Corner‑Stone, now St. George and Corner‑Stone (5), Felicity (5 8), Peace and Harmony (6o), Regularity (91), Shakespeare (99), Pilgrim (238) and Prince of Wales (z59). St. George's Lodge, it may be mentioned, was originally constituted August z, 1756, as No. 55 on the Atholl Roll. It became No. 3 by payment of k4 14s. 6d., June 6, 1759 and No. 5 at the Union. It absorbed the Corner‑Stone Lodge, then No. 37‑constituted March 25, 173o‑December 6, 1843. The result was that the amalgamated Lodge retained (and retains) the high place and antiquity of its several moieties.
2.38 HISTORY OF THE UNITED These Lodges continue to return a Grand Steward at the Annual Festivalexcept the Pilgrim and the Old King's Arms Lodges, the former of which voluntarily surrendered its right of nominating a Steward in 1834, owing to the reduction of its numerical strength, a surrender accepted with much regret by the Duke of Sussex, whilst the latter forfeited the privilege by omitting to make the prescribed return to Grand Lodge in 185z. Their places as Red Apron Lodges were assigned by the Grand Master to the Jerusalem (197) and the Old Union (46) Lodges respectively. The Old King's Arms Lodge was restored to the list in 1904.
The Laws and Regulations of the two Societies were ultimately referred to the Board of General Purposes, with directions to form one system for the future government of the United Craft; and the Board having attentively considered all the laws then existing, as avell as those of most of the other Grand Lodges in Europe, prepared a Code of Laws, which was submitted to the consideration of a Special Grand Lodge, held February 1, 1815, whereupon it was ordered that copies should be made and left, at two convenient places, for the perusal of all the members of Grand Lodge, for one month. During this month the Board of General Purposes met weekly, to receive and discuss any alterations or amendments which might be suggested. The Laws thus improved were again read and discussed, at a Special Grand Lodge, on May 31 and were then ordered to lie open for another month, for the perusal of the Brethren. At a further Special Grand Lodge, held August 23, these Laws were a third time read, discussed and unanimously approved and it was resolved that they should be in force for three years, from November 1, 1815, then be subject to revision. (See Constitutions of the Free and Accepted Masons, 1815, pt. ii.) It was originally intended to publish the new Book of Constitutions in two parts and the second part, containing the Laws and Regulations of the Society, was delivered to the subscribers (1815) with an intimation that the first part, comprising the History of Masonry, from the earliest period to the end of the year 1815, would be printed with as little delay as possible. The historical portion, however, was never completed, nor can its loss be regretted, since so far as the proof sheets extend, the part in question is simply a servile copy of Noorthouck's edition of 1784, in which 3 5 o pages were allotted to the History and 5 0 only to the Laws, Regulations, and Ancient Charges of the Society.
It has been justly observed that there was no important yielding of the irregular Grand Lodge, except to throw away their ill‑gotten and garbled Book of Constitutions, having the imposing name of Ahiman Re!Zon and fall back on the highest and only extant code of laws contained in Anderson's Constitutions (Mitchell, p. 383).
In substance, the Ancient Charges, as given in all the Books of Constitutions, published under the authority of the Original Grand Lodge of England‑with the single exception of the edition for 1738‑were reproduced in the Second Part of the Constitutions for 1815.
GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑18I4‑193o 2‑39 Charge I.‑" Concerning God and Religion "‑sustained the greatest variation. Before the Union, the words ran But though in ancient times Masons were charged in every country to be of the Religion of that country or nation, whatever it was, yet .it is now thought more expedient only to oblige them to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves.
In the Constitutions, however, of 1815, the same Article reads Let a man's religion or mode of worship be what it may, he is not excluded from the Order, provided he believe in the Glorious Architect of heaven and earth and practise the sacred duties of morality.
The remaining Charges, as printed before and after the Union, are almost, if not quite, identical, the N.B. appended to the fourth Charge alone calling for observation.
The appointment of Grand Officers was vested by the new General Regulations (1815) in the Grand Master, subject to no qualification whatever, except with regard to the offices of Chaplain, Treasurer and Sword‑Bearer, for each of which three Brethren were required to be nominated by the Grand Lodge in March, from whom the Grand Master was to make his selection. This arrangement, however, giving rise to dissatisfaction, the appointment of Chaplain and Sword‑Bearer was left entirely in the hands of the Grand Master at the revision in 1818, at which date also the absolute election of Treasurer was restored to the Grand Lodge.
By the Laws of 1815 Provincial Grand Masters were given precedence above the Grand Wardens, who had previously ranked before them. According to the Constitutions of the older Grand Lodge, for 1756 and 1784, Provincial Grand Masters, in the former year, ranked after Past Deputy Grand Masters ; in the latter, after the Grand Treasurer. The Laws of 1813 decreed that past rank should not be extended to the holder of any Grand Office below that of Deacon.
The Master, Wardens and one Past Master to be delegated by the Brethren of each Lodge were admitted to Grand Lodge (see Articles of Union vii). No Lodge was allowed to make a Mason for a less consideration than three guineas, exclusive of the registering fee. This law came into operation September 7, 1814 and remained in force until December 5, 1883, when the minimum initiation fee was fixed at five guineas, inclusive of the registration and certificate fees, in England ; and at three guineas, exclusive of registration and certificate fees, abroad. Military Lodges were restrained from initiating into Masonry any persons not members of the military profession. The tenure of office of a Master in the chair was limited to two years and the practice of conferring Degrees at a less interval than one month, or any two in one day, was forbidden.
240 HISTORY OF THE UNITED In the manner of constituting a new Lodge, there occurred a singular innovation. The language employed differs otherwise in no material respect from that used in the earlier Constitutions, but the passage now quoted derives an importance to which it is by no means entitled, by being introduced between inverted commas, as the veritable method of constituting a new Lodge " practised by the Duke of Wharton, when Grand Master, in the year 1722, according to the antient usages of Masons." According to the Constitutions of 1815, a Lodge is to be formed, an ode sung, the petition and other documents read and the inevitable Oration delivered, after which " the Lodge is then consecrated, according to ceremonies proper and usual on those occasions." Now, in the postscript to the Constitutions of 1723‑or in the subsequent editions of that work up to and inclusive of, the one for 1784‑there is no mention of an ode, of documents or even‑strange to say‑of an Oration. But passing these over, as of slight consequence‑if any misquotation in a Code of Laws will admit of colour or excuse‑the positive statement that, according to the practice of the Grand Lodge of England in 1722, the ceremony of Consecration was performed at the inauguration of New Lodges, requires at least to be noticed and refuted. Under both Grand Lodges of England, prior to the Union, Lodges were solemnly constituted by the Grand Master or his representative and, although the Ceremony of Consecration is described by William Preston in his Illustrations of Masonry, it was first officially sanctioned in the Book of Constitutions for 1815.
The Duke of Sussex remained at the head of the Society until his death in 1843. Throughout this long administration, however, there are but few stirring events to record. The Duke governed on the whole both wisely and judiciously and, though his idea of the relation in which he stood towards the Craft may be best summed up in the famous phrase L'ftat‑‑c'est moi ! there is nothing to show that his encroachments upon their constitutional liberties were distasteful to the general body of those over whom he presided.
To the Duke of Sussex is due the singular merit of cementing, as well as promoting, the Union of the two great divisions of English Freemasonry. Patronage, it has been said, implies subjection, which latter, it is again urged, can work no good to the Fraternity. Starting from these premises, it has been laid down by a writer of distinction, that Royal Brethren cannot but make their exalted position felt in the Lodge and thus affect the brotherly equality existing among the members (Findel, op. cit., p. 523). But, however true this may be as an abstract principle, the Freemasons of England owe a deep debt of gratitude to the Royal Family of their country. Their immunity from the Secret Societies Act of 1799 was due, in great measure, to the circumstance of the heir to the throne being at the head of the Older Society‑in which capacity, be it recollected, he had nominated as Acting Grand Master the chivalrous Earl of Moira, by whose tact and address English Freemasonry was saved from extinction, or, at the very least, from temporary obliteration. Later, when under the combined influence of two Princes of the Blood, discrepant ENGLAND JEWELS OF THE GRAND OFFICERS OF THE GRAND LODGE THE Grand Master's jewel is suspended from the centre of the chain ; it consists of the compasses extended to 45░, with the segment of a circle at the points ; and a gold plate included, on which is to be represented an eye within a triangle, both irradiated (No. i ).
The chain of the Deputy Grand Master has seven stars, and his jewel is the compasses and square united, with a five‑pointed star in the centre (No. 2).
The gauntlets of all Grand Officers are the same except that the emblem is varied. Past Deputy Grand Masters wear the same clothing, save that the chain is replaced by a collar and the jewel consists of the compasses and square only (No. 3).
In the Grand Lodge and in their Provincial or District meetings, or when officially present at any Lodge in their respective Provinces or Districts, or when visiting any Provincial or District Grand Lodge, Provincial and District Grand Masters wear chains of gold or metal gilt, but on all other occasions collars of garter‑blue ribbon four inches broad. The jewel of a Provincial or District Grand Master is the compasses and square, with a five‑pointed star in the centre, the whole surrounded by a circle on which the name of the Province or District is to be engraven (No. 21, without the central star).
Past Provincial or District Grand Masters wear an embroidered collar, their jewel is the compasses and square only (No. 2I, without the central star).
The jewel of the Senior Grand Warden is the level (No. q.).
The jewel of the junior Grand Warden is the plumb rule (No. 5).
The jewel of the Grand Chaplains is a book within a triangle, surmounting a glory (No. 6).
The jewel of the Grand Treasurer is a chased key (No. 7).
The jewel of the Grand Registrar and of the Deputy Grand Registrar is a scroll with seal appended (No. 8).
The jewel of the President of the Board of General Purposes is the arms, crest and supporters of the Grand Lodge (No. g).
The jewel of the Grand Secretary is two pens in. saltire, tied by a ribbon (No. io). The jewel of the President of the Board of Benevolence consists of the arms and crest of Grand Lodge.
The jewel of the Grand Director of Ceremonies is two rods in saltire, tied by a ribbon (No. I3).
The jewel of the Grand Deacons is a dove and olive branch (No. i r).
The jewel of the Grand Superintendent of Works is a semicircular protractor (No. I2).
The jewels of the Deputy Grand Director of Ceremonies and of the Assistant Grand Director of Ceremonies are the same as those of the Grand Director oú Ceremonies, the difference in rank being marked by the before‑named additions to the apron.
The jewel of the Grand Sword‑Bearer is two swords in saltire (No. 14). The jewel of the Deputy Grand Sword‑Bearer is the same.
The jewel of the Grand Standard‑Bearers displays two staves in saltire, tied by a ribbon ; flowing from the dexter a standard of the arms of Grand Lodge, from the sinister a standard of the arms of the Grand Master for the time being (No. I5).
The jewel of the Grand Organist is a lyre (No. t6).
The jewel of the Assistant Grand Secretary is similar to that of the Grand Secretary, save that it has no circle around it (No. to).
The jewel of the Grand Pursuivant and of the Assistant Grand Pursuivant is the arms of Grand Lodge, surmounting a sword and rod saltirewise (No. i'7).
The jewels of the Grand Chaplain, Grand Registrar, Deputy Grand Registrar, President of the Board of General Purposes, Grand Secretary, Grand Deacons, Grand Superintendent of Works, Grand Director of Ceremonies, Deputy and Assistant Grand ENGLAND (JEWELS OF THE GRAND OFFICERS) ‑continued.
Directors of Ceremonies, Grand Sword‑Bearer, and Deputy Grand Sword‑Bearer, Grand Standard‑Bearers, Grand Organist, Grand Pursuivant and Assistant Grand Pursuivant, are to be within a wreath composed of a sprig of acacia and an ear of corn. In cases where the word " Deputy " is applicable, it shall be placed above the wreath ; in cases where the word " Assistant " is applicable, it shall be placed beneath.
The jewel of the Grand Stewards is a cornucopia between the legs of a pair of compasses extended upon an irradiated gold plate, within a circle, on which is engraved " United Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of England " (No. 19).
The jewel of the Grand Tyler is a sword, suspended within a circle, on which is engraven the words " Grand Lodge of England Grand Tyler." GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑1814‑1930 241 opinions had been made to blend into harmonious compromise, the odious animosity between the rival Fraternities might, at any time, have been revived, had a suspicion been awakened, that the interests of either of the parties to the alliance had been made subservient to those of the other.
No such feeling was engendered and, though the result might have been the same had the Masonic Throne, after the Union, been occupied by the Duke of Kent or some other member of the Royal Family, there was probably no person of lesser degree‑with the single exception of the Earl of Moira‑who would have enjoyed the entire confidence of the English Craft in the position of Grand Master.
The Duke of Sussex was very loyally supported by the leading figures on the Atholl side. These were Perry, Agar and Harper, Past Deputy Grand Masters, who were very regular in their attendance at Grand Lodge, also at its Boards and Committees. Perry, it will be recollected, succeeded Laurence Dermott in 1787 and, in the same year, Harper and Agar were Senior and Junior Grand Wardens respectively. All three men, therefore, were prominent characters under the Antients, at a period when each Society regarded the other as " a mob of impenitent schismatics." We may assume, then, that the example set by these worthies, of acting up to the spirit as well as to the letter of the Treaty of Union, was not thrown away upon the rank and file of their party. The most captious Antient could hardly allege that the government of the Craft was conducted on Moderns lines, when three former Atholl Deputies were present at nearly every meeting of Grand Lodge, which was as often as not presided over by one of them. Agar, moreover, was the first President of the Board of General Purposes and, among his colleagues, were Perry and Harper. Their services on this and the other Committees of Grand Lodge ceased only with their respective lives.
It is unreasonable to suppose that the three veterans would have laboured so earnestly and unceasingly under any ordinary Grand Master. In the Atholl system the " Deputy " was virtually the chief and it was in the highest degree im probable, that men of advanced years, who had each governed the Society with which he was formerly connected, would have forgone his well‑earned repose and toiled with the energy and perseverance of youth, save in circumstances of a very exceptional nature.
These we meet with in the fortunate results which crowned the happily inspired efforts of the two Royal Brothers‑the Dukes of Kent and Sussex. In the negotiations which preceded the Treaty of Union, the former was assisted by the three Atholl Deputies; and, in the subsequent proceedings, when the younger brother was proposed by the elder for the supreme dignity, they attached themselves to the latter with a fidelity which is unsurpassed in the annals of Masonry. But the Duke of Sussex fully justified the confidence that was reposed in him. It was nearly twenty years before the last of Dermott's prominent contemporaries ceased to participate in his councils. Perry was last present in Grand Lodge, June 3, 1818 ; Harper, March z, 1831 ; and Agar, June G, 183z. The two former must have died F. III‑ 7 242 HISTORY OF THE UNITED before April 1834, as their deaths are not recorded in the Freeirasons' Quarterly Review, which begins on that date. Harper, however, must have been very old in 1831, as he became a Royal Arch Mason in 1770. James Agar (a barrister‑at‑law) died January 25, 1838, aged 8o. By this time the old order of things had been succeeded by the new. The two sets of Freemasons were firmly welded together into one homogeneous whole and the last decade of the Duke of Sussex's administration was unclouded by any revival of the ancient animosities.
Some dissensions, indeed, of a distinct character are recorded during this last period and of these it is not, perhaps, too much to say, that many of the acrimonious discussions which both wasted the time and ruffled the composure of the Masonic Parliament might have been averted altogether if the Grand Master had still had by his side such faithful and judicious counsellors as the Atholl worthies.
In 1816, on the proposal of the Grand Master, the Rev. Hermann Giese was appointed Grand Secretary for German Correspondence ; and a friendly alliance was entered into with the Grand Lodge of Astrea, at St. Petersburg.
On September 3, 1817, it having been announced that the two Grand Chapters of the Order of the Royal Arch, existing prior to the Union of the Craft, had formed a junction, that rank and votes in all their meetings had been given to all the officers of Grand Lodge and that the Laws and Regulations of that body had been as far as possible assimilated to those of the Craft, it. was Resolved Unanimously, That the Grand Lodge will, at all times, be disposed to acknowledge the Proceedings of the Grand Chapter and, so long as their Arrangements do not interfere with the Regulations of the Grand Lodge and are in con formity with the Act of Union, they will be ready to recognize, facilitate and uphold the same.
The general Regulations of the Society were revised in 1818 and the new Code ordered to take effect from November i. The following were the principal alterations and amendments That all Past Members should be members of the Grand Lodge, but the privilege to be forfeited by non‑subscription for more than a year to some Lodge.
That all Present and Past Grand Officers and all Masters of Lodges should be members of the Lodge of Benevolence.
On December 9 the Board of General Purposes recommended that certain regulations, common to the Grand Lodges of Ireland and England, should be established for the government of the Lodges abroad and in military corps ; that deputations from the two Grand Lodges and from that of Scotland should be appointed, if possible, to confer on the subject, which was agreed to.
This year witnessed the death of William Preston. The total amount of the Masonic benefactions appearing in his will was k1,300 Consols, of which ú500 was bequeathed to the Charity Fund of Grand Lodge; C500 in support of the GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑1814‑1930 243 Girls' School ; and the interest of the remaining 1300 " to be paid "‑to use the word of the testator to any well skilled Mason, to deliver, annually, a lecture on the First, Second or Third Degrees of the Order of Masonry, according to the system practised in the Lodge of Antiquity during my Mastership.
In consequence of the rain the female orphans belonging to the Freemasons' Charity in St. George's Fields were not able to follow in procession to St. Paul's but, mustered at the cathedral under the care of the Treasurer, W. l~‑1. Forsteen, Captain Deans, Junior Grand Warden, and others, returned to the house of the deceased, where they partook of wine and cake. Thomas Harper, Deputy Grand Master, was also present to pay the last mark of respect to the friend with whom he had been so long associated in Masonry.
In the following year, at the Grand Lodge held in December, the Grand Master addressed the Brethren on the Subject of the Lectures, when he stated that it was his opinion that so long as the Master of any Lodge observed exactly the Land‑marks of the Craft, he was at liberty to give the Lectures in the language best suited to the character of the Lodge over which he presided.
On December 5, 1821, the conduct of Lodge No. 31 at Liverpool was brought under the notice of Grand Lodge and, for two years, engaged the attention of that body. The facts of the case, however, may be stated in a few words.
In December 1818 it was suggested to the Board of General Purposes by the Provincial Grand Lodge of Lancashire, that some regulation was necessary, relative to the Number of Brethren requisite to remain Members of a Lodge, in order to continue it a Legal Lodge, competent to initiate, etc.
To this a reply was sent, January 5, 18ig, by order of the Board, stating, that the subject is one which has undergone a great deal of discussion and consideration, especially on the late revision of the Laws. But it is a matter of so much delicacy and difficulty, that it was thought advisable not to depart from that silence on the subject which had been observed in all the Books of Constitutions.
Towards the close of the year a Memorial was sent from the Provincial Grand Lodge to the Duke of Sussex. This proved to contain matter relating to the i, Royal Arch and was, therefore, not laid before Grand Lodge, whilst the Grand Master was subsequently informed that the Memorial, being considered by the Provincial Grand Lodge improper, its withdrawal was desired ; he, therefore, did not deem it necessary to intimate to the Grand Lodge or the Board of General Purposes, that such a document had been addressed to him.
Although this withdrawal was perfectly voluntary on the part of the Provincial 2‑44 HISTORY OF THE UNITED Grand Lodge, it was seized upon by the members of No. 31, as the ground for a charge against the Board of General Purposes and cited by them as a case where the Board had detained a communication from the Provincial Grand Lodge for the County of Lancashire, which consists of sixty‑two Lodges on record ; consequently, if the Board acted thus, without the authority of the Grand Lodge, we consider their conduct highly reprehensible ; and if, on the other hand, the Grand Lodge gave them power to act in this manner, then we consider it a dangerous innovation upon the landmarks of our Order.
Notwithstanding that itwas pointed out to these Brethren that they were arguing on false premises, circulars and manifestos continued to be issued ; all efforts to restore subordination having failed, the Grand Lodge was left no alternative but first to suspend, afterwards expel, twenty‑six of the offenders ; also to erase No. 31 from the list of Lodges.
Sixty‑eight Masons, belonging to eleven Lodges, were suspended in the first instance, of whom all but twenty‑six were admitted to grace, on submission duly made and promise of good behaviour. The latter not only remained contumacious, but actually endeavoured to establish a Grand Lodge of their own for Liverpool and adjacent parts. After this no more is heard of them until September 3, 1823, when the Sea Captains' Lodge at Liverpool, No. 140, which had threatened to separate itself from the Grand Lodge unless the proceedings taken against Lodge No. 31 and the twenty‑six expelled Brethren, were cancelled‑was struck off the roll. " This prompt example," observes Dr. Oliver, " was completely efficacious and from hence we hear no more of opposition or intemperate resistance to the decrees of the Grand Lodge" (History of Masonry from i 8zo to 1823). But the observation, though true and strictly founded on the Printed Proceedings of the governing body, is, nevertheless, somewhat misleading, for whilst the Lancashire Schismatics ultimately placed themselves altogether in the wrong, beyond the pale of forgiveness, they took their stand‑however erroneously‑on what they deemed to be a matter of principle and neither the Board of General Purposes‑who declined to advise upon a constitutional point which was submitted to them‑nor the Duke of Sussex, who quietly pigeon‑holed the subsequent Memorial, can be acquitted of having materially conduced to a most deplorable misunderstanding, which agitated the Craft for several years and left behind it very bitter memories.
William Meyrick, the Grand Registrar, was also, at this time (1819‑z3), President of the Board of General Purposes and, on March 7, 18zz, the Province of Lancashire had been placed in his charge. This also was an error of judgment on the part of the Grand Master, for, as the members of No. 31 professed themselves (inter alia) to be aggrieved by the action of the Board, it was hardly to be expected that they would regard its President as properly qualified to pursue the judicial investigation which had been entrusted to him. Nor did they. One of the statements made in the printed papers, circulated from Liverpool, was GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑i814‑I930 245 that the Board of General Purposes had withheld, or been instrumental in withholding, from the Grand Lodge, the Address of the Provincial Grand Master to the M. W. Grand Master, dated September 27, 18 i g and this the Lodge No. 31 continued to reassert and, indeed, set the authority of Grand Lodge altogether at defiance.
Passing from this unhappy dispute, it may be convenient to proceed with the early history of the Board of General Purposes and interweave therewith some slight sketches of a few of its more remarkable members. James Agar was the first President and remained a member from 1814 to 1828, when, for one year (i8zq), he served on the Board of Finance. James Perry, Thomas Harper and James Deans were also members from 1814. Perry remained a member until 1817, during which and the following year he also served on the Board of Schools ; Harper was reappointed annually to the Board of General Purposes or to that of Finance, until 1831 ; while James Deans served uninterruptedly on the former Board until 1833, with the exception of one year (1827), when he was appointed to the latter, on which he again served in 1835. Deans, who died April 3, 1838, was for upwards of forty years Captain and Paymaster in the Royal London Militia. He was initiated in the Lodge of Emulation (2i), of which he passed the chair, as he also did of the Jerusalem (197) and the Grand Stewards' Lodges. His services in the Lodge of Promulgation, of which he was the Senior Warden, were rewarded with the collar of a Grand Officer and he was one of the Commissioners for carrying out the Union of the two Societies.
Among the elected members we meet with the names of the following Masters of Lodges, all of whom were noted in their day as Masonic Preceptors : J. H. Goldsworthy, 1816 ; Thomas Satterley, 1816, 1819, 1824; Lawrence Thompson, 1817, 18zo, 1827‑8 ; Philip Broadfoot, 1817; J. G. Godwin, 181g ; Peter Gilkes, 18zz‑33 (also during this period, with the exception of 1826, a member of the Board of Finance) and Peter Thomson, 1824. Two of the number‑Goldsworthy and Lawrence Thompson‑served on the Lodge of Reconciliation. The firstnamed was initiated in No. 194, Antients‑now the Middlesex, No. 143‑February 6, 18o6 ; served the chair of the Lodge and was elected one of the nine Excellent Masters or Worthies. He joined No. z‑now Fidelity, No. 3‑July iz, 18og, when he was appointed Lecture Master. In 1811 he had the honour of seconding the motion for a Committee, " vested with full powers to carry into effect the measure of a Masonic Union of the two Societies." He was Senior Grand Deacon in 1845 and a nominated member of the Board of General Purposes, 1845‑7 and I849‑5o. He died in February 1858, nearly eighty years of age. .
Lawrence Thompson joined the Lodge of Antiquity about 1811, in which, for many years, he delivered, by order of the Grand Master, the Prestonian Lecture. He died June 9, 185 5, in his eighty‑second year and, at the time of his decease, was a member of the Antiquity, Somerset House, Shakespeare and other Lodges. He served as Grand Steward in 1815, on the Board of General Purposes (for the fourth 2‑46 HISTORY OF THE UNITED time) in 1837, in the following year on that of Finance and as junior Grand Deacon in 1847.
Philip Broadfoot was initiated in No. 3oo Antients, now the Lodge of Stability, No. 217 and was four times its Master. He was recommended by the Grand Chapter as one of the nine Excellent Masters, 1812. He was removed from the Custom House at London to that of Lynn in 1835 and died August 16, 1858, in his seventy‑fourth year, being at the time Secretary to the Philanthropic Lodge, No. 107.
The famous Stability Lodge of Instruction‑under the sanction of the Lodge of Stability, which he, at that time, represented on the Board of General Purposeswas founded by Broadfoot on the first Friday in September 1817, his chief coadjutors being Thomas Satterley and Peter Thomson. Broadfoot was the first Master elected to the chair, Thomson the second, but the latter soon became the more prominent figure of the two and, for a period of nearly thirty‑four years, was hardly ever absent from a meeting of the Lodge. (See A Century of Stability, by F. W. Golby, P.A.G.D.C.) The Emulation Lodge of Improvement for Master Masons was founded by the following Brethren in 1823 : John Smyth, Burlington (96) ; Joseph Dennis and E. Wittington, Unions (256) ; John Wilson, Percy (198) ; Gervase Margerison, Constitutional (5 5) ; and eighteen other Brethren. At first only lectures were delivered, but, subsequently, the ceremonies were introduced, which gave much satisfaction. Peter Gilkes was present at the first meeting and, about twelve months afterwards, he joined the Lodge. (See Henry Sadler's Illustrated History of the Emulation Lodge of Improvement.) The champion Preceptors on either side, however, were the two PetersThomson and Gilkes. The former, a Scotsman, born in 1779, was initiated in the Lodge of Confidence, December 13, 181 o, raised to the Third Degree that day week and joined the Lion and Lamb, now No. 192, in 1811. He served as Senior Grand Deacon in 1844 and died February 2, 1851, aged 72. He was a life governor of all the Charities of the Society and the most brilliant of his pupils‑John Havers ‑spoke of him as the greatest Mason he had ever known.
Peter Gilkes was born May 1, 1765, baptized a Catholic and named after the then Lord Petre. By his industry and perseverance he acquired a small property, the interest of which amounted to about nine shillings a day. Upon this he retired from business and devoted himself wholly to Masonry. He was initiated in the British Lodge (8) in 1786 and the Lodge of Unity (69) was the first to elect him as Master. During the last sixteen years of his life, in order to continue a member of the Lodge of Benevolence and also to qualify for election to the Boards, he annually served as Master of a Lodge, discharging its arduous duties. In the course of his Masonic life he filled the chairs of the Royal York (7), Globe (23), Unity (69), Cadogan (162), Old Concord (172), St. James's Union (i 8o), Unions (256), Hope and Unity (214) and St. Michael's (211) Lodges, several times each, while he may be said to have died in harness as the Master of No. 211.
ENGLAND PROVINCIAL GRAND LODGE CLOTHING THis plate exhibits the clothing and regalia of Provincial and District Grand Lodge officers. The Provincial or District Grand Master is an officer of Grand Lodge, therefore his clothing has been described with the other Grand Officers', but it is appropriately figured on this plate as thus all the regalia seen in a Provincial or District Grand Lodge is grouped together. His apron is shown in No. i, and the name of his Province or District is embroidered on a circle around the central emblem. His collar (No. ?) exhibits seven stars. The gauntlet (No. q) exhibits the emblem of Past Provincial or District Grand Master, the actual incumbent's emblem having a five‑pointed star in the centre, as in the jewel (No. 3).
Provincial and District Grand Officers, present and past, wear aprons lined with garter‑blue and ornamented with gold, with blue strings ; they must have the emblems of their offices in gold or blue in the centre, within a double circle, in which must be inserted the name of the Province or District. The garter‑blue edging to the aprons must not exceed two inches in width (No. 5).
Deputy Provincial and District Grand Masters and other subordinate Provincial and District Grand Officers, present and past, wear collars of garter‑blue ribbon, four inches broad, with narrow edging of gold lace or cord, but not bullion or fringe, nor plain (No. 6). In the Grand Lodge they must wear their collars and jewels of the Lodges and Offices respectively in right of which they attend as members of the Grand Lodge, over their Provincial or District Grand Lodge collars.
No. 7 shows the gauntlet of a Provincial or District Grand Officer, the specimen under notice having the emblem of a Provincial or District Grand Senior Warden. The jewels of all Past Officers of Grand Lodge are to be worn on a blue enamelled oval medal, similar to that shown on No. 8, but without any lettering on the oval. Many Grand Officers provide themselves with what are known as " undress suits," consisting of an apron and collar (no gauntlets) similar to Nos. g and io, but with wider edging and no circle around the emblem. These are used on any less important occasions, to save the costly and elaborate full‑dress suits and their use is sanctioned by the Book of Constitutions.
Nos. g and io show the undress apron and collar of a Provincial or District Grand Officer, which are now sanctioned; no gauntlets are worn with these.
The jewels of Provincial and District Grand Officers are similar to those of the Grand Officers of the same title, except that of the Deputy Provincial Grand Master, whose jewel is a square only, as shown in No. 2o. The jewels of the Provincial or District Grand Master and other Provincial or District Grand Officers are to be placed within a circle, on which the name of the Province or District is engraved.
All Past Provincial or District Grand Officers must wear the jewel of their respective offices on a blue enamelled oval medal, as No. 8.
Provincial or District Grand Stewards wear aprons lined with crimson and edged with the same coloured ribbon, two inches broad, with silver tassels. If Masters or Past Masters of Lodges, they wear three silver levels on their aprons, but if not, three crimson rosettes, as No. I I. During their periods of office they wear collars of crimson ribbon two and a half inches broad, as No. 12 ; afterwards, as long as they continue to subscribe to some Lodge, they wear crimson collars of the same dimensions, with a silver cord in the centre. The jewel of a Provincial or District Grand Steward is similar to that of a Grand Steward, but has the name of the Province or District engraved on a circle around it. The jewel of a Past Provincial or District Grand Steward is oval in form, similar to No. 8, but on crimson enamel instead of blue.
GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑i84‑I930 247 It was his custom to teach gratuitously such Brethren as were disposed to attend at his house, every day from one o'clock until it was time for him to attend some Lodge or other, where his evenings were generally spent. His fame as Preceptor of the Emulation Lodge of Improvement was very widely diffused, but though many times offered the collar of a Grand Officer, he invariably declined, on the plea that his circumstances in life were not equal to the appointment. His death occurred December 11, 1833 J. G. Godwin was a member of the Peace and Harmony (6o) and the Bank of England (263) Lodges, the former of which he represented as Grand Steward in 1816. In early days he disputed the palm with Peter Gilkes. But, although an earnest as well as an able Mason and, notwithstanding he took great pains with his pupils, he did not make the impression that his competitor did, chiefly from an infirmity of temper. He died December 31, 1836, aged 72.
To the labours of these worthies the Craft is in a great measure indebted for its existing prosperity. The most eloquent of Masonic statesmen‑whose voice, alas, is now hushed in the tomb, in a noble address delivered at the Stability Festival in 1851, observed with great force I claim for the memory of Peter Thomson and the active teachers of his time, a large share of merit in our present position. When all was disarranged‑when all was unsettled‑when every difficulty beset the young aspirant after Masonic knowledge‑then Godwin and Gilkes, Broadfoot and Thomson, then White and Goldsworthy, Lawrence Thompson and Satterley, were the Masons who manfully and zealously attempted (and succeeded in the attempt) to procure uniformity in Masonry and to disseminate the genuine principles of our Order; and we cannot fail to perceive that in exact proportion to the advancement of Masonic knowledge was the advancement of Masonic charity, the very end, aim and object of our Institution. Doubtless a part of this was due to the Union of the two Grand Lodges, but not much, for we find that there were nearly as many Lodges then as now, that from time immemorial (as it is the fashion to call it) up to the year 1813, the two together mustered but some ú2,500 per annum, that since then our income and our funded property, consequently our usefulness, has increased in a fourfold degree.
Yet among the early Preceptors of those days, there existed a certain degree of rivalry and jealousy. Their mode of working, though identical in all essential points, differed somewhat in the verbal arrangements of a small portion of the ceremonies. To so high a degree at one time did these jealousies extend, that even the great teachers of that period gave vent to mutual recriminations and the West‑End Preceptors laid a complaint before the Board of General Purposes, that the Preceptors in the city were not practising pure Masonry. Happily, however, the complaint was allowed to drop.
The Lodge of Reconciliation‑ was formed with the object of bringing the various forms of working into one harmonious whole. Dr. Hemming, the Master, is said to have drawn up a system and form, but, falling ill and being unable to complete his work thoroughly, it was given to Williams (Provincial Grand Alaster 248 HISTORY OF THE UNITED for Dorset, 1812‑39 ; President of the Board of General Purposes, 1818 ; for many years Treasurer of the Girls' School), who added to, and completed it. (See " Notes on our English Ritual," by Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, in The Freemason, May I5, 188o.) Hemming's form, however, was used, notably in Yorkshire, at one time to a great extent and is still represented by the Stability Lodge of Instruction.
The perfected form of Williams is that now in use in the Emulation Lodge of Improvement, which seems destined to become the more general form of working in the Craft. The Prestonian form indeed lingers and is to be found in Lodges alike in London and the provinces. There are also remains of an old York Working, of the form in vogue under the Ancients.
So far Woodford, by whom the subject has been made a special study, whose conclusions are borne out by the testimony of many Brethren now deceased, participators in the occurrences he relates, notably the late W. H. White and Stephen Barton Wilson.
An Especial Grand Lodge was held at the Thatched House Tavern, St. James's Street, on February zz, 1828, for the purpose of installing the Duke of Clarence, the Lord High Admiral, as Master of the Prince of Wales's Lodge, the Grand Master assigning as a reason for this step his belief that it was " of the first Importance to obtain the Sanction and Protection of the Royal Family to the Proceedings of the Craft." In the following year‑September z‑the Duke of Sussex announced that " he had approved the Design for a Medal to be worn by Brethren who had served the office of Steward to both the Masonic Charities," a privilege since extended to Brethren serving as Stewards to any two of the three Institutions.
King George IV died in 183o and, on the petition of Grand Lodge, his successor on the throne‑William IV‑took his place as Patron of the Craft.
In 1832 the numbers of the Lodges were ordered to be closed up ; and, in 1834, a notice of a benevolent project for erecting and endowing an asylum for aged and decayed Freemasons of good character, was promulgated in the July number of the Freemasons' Quarterly Review, a publication edited by Dr. R. T. Crucefix ‑‑which made its first appearance in the April of that year.
In 1834 the office of Pro Grand Master was established, or rather revived, in the person of Lord Dundas, afterwards first Earl of Zetland. The like office had been known previously as Acting Grand Master.
In 1835 four Past Masters were, in each case, added to the Boards of General Purposes and of Finance ; in the same year it was ordered that the jewels worn by the Grand Stewards of the year should in future be gilt, upon the ground " that the Grand Stewards, during their year of service, are Officers of the Grand Lodge." Previously to this enactment, all Grand Stewards, both present and past, wore jewels of silver, suspended by red collars. A Sub‑Committee of Charity, entitled the Weekly Lodge of Benevolence, was established on June 7, 1837, but lasted for GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑i84‑I930 249 a short time only; and, at a Quarterly Communication, held in the ensuing December, it was resolved (on the motion of Dr. Crucefix) that this Grand Lodge recommend the contemplated Asylum for the worthy, aged, and decayed Freemasons to the favourable consideration of the Craft.
In the following year, a testimonial, of the value of one thousand guineas, was presented by the Lodges and Brethren to the Duke of Sussex, to commemorate his having been Grand Master for twenty‑five years ; the Boards of General Pur poses and of Finance were amalgamated; and, Edwards Harper retiring on a pension, W. H. White became sole Grand Secretary to the Society.
At the meetings of Grand Lodge, held in June, September and October 1840, the conduct of Dr. Crucefix became the subject of investigation, which a short digression will place more clearly before my readers.
Robert Thomas Crucefix‑initiated in 1829, a Past Master of the Burlington (113), Bank of England (263) and other Lodges ; Grand Steward 1832 ; Junior Grand Deacon 1836‑set on foot in 1834 a movement in favour of a Charity for aged Freemasons, the expediency of which was affirmed by a vote of Grand Lodge in 1837. The Grand Master objected, in the first instance, to the creation of a third Charity, but ultimately based his dissent from the views of its promoters upon the ground that a system of annuities, rather than the erection of an asylum, would be the more judicious course to adopt. But the Committee were then pledged to the latter scheme, which, as they justly argued, had been unanimously recommended to the favourable consideration of the Craft. They, therefore, proceeded with it and, at a Special General Meeting of the Charity, held November 13, 1839 (see G. B. Abbott's History of the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution, 1844), under the presidency of Dr. Crucefix, some remarks were made by two of the speakers (Alderman Wood and J. L. Stevens), for which‑and Crucefix for not checking them‑a complaint was preferred against all three at the Board of General Purposes, by Peter Thomson, Lawrence Thompson and two others. Crucefix and Wood were suspended from their Masonic functions for six, Stevens for three, months. Against these sentences they appealed and, at a Grand Lodge held in June 1840, the suspension of Alderman Wood was removed, that of the others confirmed.
Crucefix then addressed a very intemperate letter to the Grand Master, which the latter forbore to notice until it was printed in the Freemasons'.Quarterly Reviewtogether with many editorial observations of an improper character‑when the original letter was laid before the Board of General Purposes, by which body, after inquiry, he was summoned to show cause at a Special Grand Lodge why he should not be expelled from the Craft. On the same day‑June 11, 184o‑he had sent a letter to the Grand Secretary, containing his resignation as a Grand Officer, stating that he was no longer a member of any English Lodge, afterwards disclaiming, on this ground, the jurisdiction of the Board of General Purposes. Here, however, Zso HISTORY OF THE UNITED he was foiled but, in the following year, by publicly notifying that he had ceased to edit the Freemasons' ,Quarterly Review‑of which, nevertheless; he continued to be the master‑spirit‑he succeeded in keeping out of the clutches of the Board, who would, otherwise, have rightly visited upon him the numerous sins of that journal.
Accordingly, on October 3o, he attended and made a very humble apology. The motion for his expulsion was then put, to which an amendment was moved that his apology be accepted, which, on a division, was agreed to.
Among the leading opponents of the "Asylum Scheme" was Isaac Walton, Past Master of the Moira Lodge, No. 9z. A writer in the Freemasons' Quarterly Review (1846, p. zzi) says Finding, however, that opposition but aided the Asylum, be adopted the plan of competition and hoisted the standard of a Masonic Benevolent Annuity Fund. The Duke of Sussex for a long time denied his patronage, but Walton sought an interview with him and, meeting with a repulse on his favourite theme, he fairly told the Grand Master, on taking leave, that there remained no other means of preventing the Asylum from being built and endowed. This decided the matter ; the Grand Master relaxed, adopted Walton's scheme and thus proved the fallacy of all opposition to the Asylum principle; which, so far from being uncalled for and unnecessary, became the parent of a second Masonic Charity.
An Annuity Fund for males was sanctioned by Grand Lodge, March z, 184z and extended to the widows of Freemasons in 1849, which continued as a separate organization until 18 5 0, when it amalgamated with the Asylum.
During the administration of the Duke of Sussex, which was only brought to a close by his lamented death in 1843, several new offices were created in Grand Lodge, some of which have already been mentioned. After 18i g the right of nominating all the Grand Officers, except the Treasurer, was vested in the Grand Master. But the patronage of the Duke of Sussex was not confined within these limits. He altered at pleasure the status of any Grand Officer, created new offices and freely appointed Brethren to rank in the Grand Lodge. An Assistant Director of the Ceremonies was appointed by the Duke, proprio vigore, in 1836 ; but the office of Pursuivant‑established in 1840‑was created by a resolution of Grand Lodge, which, at the same time, regulated the status of the new Grand Officer.
The Earl of Zetland (born 1795 ; initiated 1830; appointed junior Grand Warden, 183z; Deputy Grand Master, 1839; Pro Grand Master, 1840; was Grand Master, 1843‑71), who, as Pro Grand Master, virtually acceded to the supreme authority on the death of the Duke of Sussex, was nominated for the substantive office by Peter Thomson in December 1843 and unanimously elected Grand Master in the following March.
We have now reached a point where the accuracy of the historian becomes subject to the criticism of actors in the events he recounts. To use the quaint words of Thomas Fuller GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑i814‑1930 251 I hear the Cock's crow proclaiming the dawning day, being now come within the ken of many alive and, when men's memories do arise, it is time for History to haste to bed.
On December 3, 1845, the Grand Master announced that certain English Masons, who professed the Jewish Faith, had been refused admittance as visitors into a Lodge at Berlin holding under the Grand Lodge, Royal York of Friendship, on the ground that the Laws of that Grand Lodge excluded, even as visitors, Brethren who were not Christians.
In the following June the subject was again referred to by Lord Zetland, who stated that the Grand Lodge Royal York at Berlin, declining to receive and acknowledge all certificates from the Grand Lodge of England without regard to the religion of those presenting them, the two bodies would no longer continue to exchange representatives. This estrangement lasted until 1847, when the principle stipulated for was gracefully conceded; and, in 1872, the Grand Lodge Royal York " resolved to initiate Jews and men of all religions." The other Prussian Grand Lodges, the Grand National Mother Lodge of the Three Globes and the Grand Countries Lodge of Germany, did not display the same liberality of sentiment. The subject was again brought forward in 1877, on the refusal of the former to receive as candidates for admission or joining any persons who were not Christians, when it was decided by the Grand Lodge of England, to refrain from any interference with a system of Freemasonry adopted by the Three Globes Lodge in 1740.
A more intimate connexion and correspondence was established in 1846 between the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Lodges of the Netherlands ; of Unity, at Darmstadt ; and of Switzerland (Alpina), at Zurich.
In the following year the words " Free Man " were substituted for " Free Born " in the declaration subscribed by candidates for initiation ; and, at the suggestion of Fox Maule‑afterwards successively Lord Panmure and Earl of Dalhousie ‑the employment of an authorized reporter to take down the proceedings of Grand Lodge was sanctioned by the Grand Master.
On December 7, 1853, the Earl of Zetland communicated to the Grand Lodge, that he had been under the painful necessity of removing from his office, the Right Worshipful Brother William Tucker, Provincial Grand Master for Dorsetshire, in consequence of his having thought proper to appear in his Provincial Grand Lodge in the costume and with jewels appertaining to what were termed Higher Degrees, not sanctioned or acknowledged by the Grand Lodge and which militate against the universality of Freemasonry.
Tucker, it appears, had taken his seat in the gorgeous regalia of a " Sovereign Grand Inspector General," being the 3 3rd and last grade of the Ancient and Accepted 152‑ HISTORY OF THE UNITED Rite‑a series of Degrees unrecognized by the Grand Lodge of England. Although one of the youngest of the Masonic Rites, it is at this day one of the most popular and most extensively diffused. Supreme Councils or governing bodies of the Rite are to be found in almost every civilized country of the world and in many of them it is the only Masonic obedience. The original members of the Supreme Council of England and Wales were Dr. Crucefix, Dr. George Oliver and Henry Udall, who received a Warrant, dated October 26, 1845, from the Supreme Council of the Northern Jurisdiction of the United States of America.
In the latter part of the year 185 5, certain persons, belonging to Lodges under the Grand Lodges of England, Scotland and Ireland, formed themselves into what they then termed The Independent Grand Lodge of Canada. They were, how ever, denounced by a large majority of the Lodges in that country, then holding under the Grand Lodge of England, as illegal and intercourse with the persons and Lodges belonging to this self‑constituted Grand Lodge was strictly forbidden. In June 18 5 7, the largest proportion of the Lodges in Canada, holding Warrants from the Grand Lodge of England, withdrew from their allegiance and formed themselves into a Grand Lodge, which they designated the Ancient Grand Lodge of Canada. In the course of time these two bodies formed a junction and became the present Grand Lodge of Canada, which was recognized by the Grand Lodge of England December 1, 1858.
Although the entire story of the secession would occupy much space, the pith of it is given in a speech by the late John Havers, a portion of which is reproduced Owing to the shortcomings on the part of the Grand Lodge of England, Canada had thrown off her allegiance and the majority of the Lodges in that country had joined the Grand Lodge of Canada. When the excitement caused by this movement had subsided and when harmony was restored in Canada, the Grand Lodge of England had recognized their independence. (See Proceedings of Grand Lodge, March z, 18 5 9.) These difficulties led, in 1856, to the formation of a Colonial Board, consisting of ten members, to whom all matters and correspondence relative to Lodges in the Colonies were to be referred for adjudication and direction.
William Gray Clarke was appointed Grand Secretary in 1857, in succession to William Henry White, who retired on his full salary.
On December 3, 1862, the numbers of the Lodges were ordered to be closed up ; and, on the same day, a Building Committee of seven members was elected, the proceedings of which range over a period of nine years. The foundation stone of the new structure was laid by the Grand Master, April 27, 1864, and the existing Freemasons' Hall completed in February 1866‑the Tavern, now for the first time disjoined from the Hall, being ready for occupation in 1867. The new building was inaugurated April 14, 1869 and, in the following September, it was ordered by Grand Lodge, that a Sculptured Tablet should be erected, with an appropriate inscription, to be surmounted by a Marble Bust of the Chairman‑John Havers‑ ENGLAND PRIVATE LODGE JEWELS AND CLOTHING Tars plate contains representations of the clothing and jewels worn in English private Lodges.
The apron of the Initiate, or Entered Apprentice, is a plain white lambskin, from fourteen to sixteen inches wide, twelve to fourteen inches deep, the flap pointed, square at bottom, without ornament. The strings white (No. i).
The Fellow Craft's apron is a plain white lambskin similar to that of the Entered Apprentice, with the addition only of two sky‑blue rosettes at the bottom (No. 2). The Master Mason's apron is a skin of the same size, with sky‑blue lining and edging of same colour not more than two inches wide, an additional rosette on the fall or flap, silver tassels and with sky‑blue strings (No. 3). It would have been hard to devise anything more simple, yet more perfectly beautiful and tasteful than this combination of sky‑blue, white and silver ; to the artistic eye it is hardly surpassed even by the splendid clothing of a Grand Master. No other ornament is allowed except to Officers and Past Officers of Lodges, who may have the emblems of their offices in silver or white in the centre of the apron ; and no other colour may be added or substituted, except in the case of the Prince of Wales' Lodge, No. 259, whose members are allowed to wear the internal half of the edging of garter‑blue, three‑fourths of an inch wide and of the Grand Stewards' Lodge, of which the members are all present or past Grand Stewards and, therefore, of course, wear their proper official crimson. This last‑named Lodge is specially constituted as a Master Mason's Lodge and has no power of making, passing or raising Masons. It has no number, and takes precedence of all other Lodges.
Masters and Past Masters of Lodges wear in the place of the three rosettes on the Master Mason's apron, perpendicular lines upon horizontal lines, thereby forming three several sets of two right angles, the length of the horizontal lines to be two inches and a half each and of the perpendicular lines one inch each ; these emblems to be of silver, or of ribbon of the same colour as the lining and edging on the apron, half an inch broad (No. 4).
The collars of the officers of private Lodges are of light‑blue ribbon, four inches broad (No. 6), and a silver chain may be worn over the collar if desired. The collars of the officers of private Lodges are to be worn only in their own Lodges, except when representing their Lodges as Masters or Wardens in the Grand Lodge, or in their Provincial or District Grand Lodge. The Officers and Past Masters of the Grand Stewards' Lodge wear collars of crimson ribbon, four inches broad.
Past Masters of private Lodges, so long as they continue to subscribe to some Lodge, shall be entitled to wear, on all occasions when Craft clothing may be worn, collars of light‑blue ribbon, four inches broad, with silver braid a quarter of an inch wide in the centre (No. 5).
The jewels of the officers of private Lodges are as follow The Master, a square (No. 7).
Past Masters, the square and the diagram of the forty‑seventh Proposition of the first Book of Euclid, engraven on a silver plate, pendent within it (No. 5).
The Senior Warden, the level (No. 8).
The Junior Warden, the plumb rule (No. 9).
The Chaplain, a book within a triangle surmounting a glory (No. io). The Treasurer, a key (No. i i).
The Secretary, two pens in saltire, tied by a ribbon (No. 12).
The Director of Ceremonies, two rods in saltire, tied by a ribbon (No. I4). The Deacons, a dove and olive‑branch (No. I3) The Organist, a lyre (No. I5).
The Inner Guard, two swords in saltire (No. z6).
The Stewards, a cornucopia between the legs of a pair of compasses extended (No. I7) The Tyler, a sword (No. 18).
GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑1814‑193o 253 and surrounded by Marble Medallion Portraits of the Members of the Building Committee‑J. L. Evans, John Hervey, John Savage, J. R. Stebbing, George Plucknett and Henry Grissell.
In 1865 the titles of Provincial Grand Master and Provincial Grand Lodge were ordered to be used solely in England and, in order to distinguish such Officers and Bodies in the Colonies and Foreign Parts, the latter were to be styled District Grand Masters and District Grand Lodges, respectively.
In 1868, the office becoming vacant by the death of William Gray Clarke, John Hervey, Past Grand Deacon, was appointed Grand Secretary.
On June 2, 1869, Lord Zetland informed the Grand Lodge, that H.R.H. the Prince of Wales (afterwards Edward VII) had joined the Fraternity, having been initiated by the King of Sweden. The rank of Past Grand Master was conferred upon H.R.H. at the Quarterly Communication held in September and, at that taking place in December, the Prince of Wales was present and received the homage of the Society.
An Assistant Grand Secretary was appointed by Lord Zetland (with the concurrence of Grand Lodge) in 1854; the office of Assistant Grand Pursuivant, created by resolution of Grand Lodge, in 1859. In 1861 the power of conferring honorary rank was vested in the Grand Master. The number of Grand Deacons was increased to four by Grand Lodge in i 862 and, in the same year (and manner), the President of the Board of General Purposes became a Grand Officer, by virtue of his office.
The Board of General Purposes, under the administration of Lord Zetland, increased, both in authority and reputation. Membership of and service upon this committee, gradually became recognized as a channel to grand office. Among the prominent members of the Board, was Stephen Barton Wilson, of whom it has been said that " the mantle of Peter Gilkes fell direct upon his shoulders." That worthy, who was initiated by Gilkes in the St. Michael's Lodge, No. zi i, at his death in 1866, had held the office of Senior Member of the Committee of the Emulation Lodge of Improvement for a period of thirty years.
Two noted Brethren joined the Board of General Purposes in 1841,‑John Llewellyn Evans and John Havers, Masters of the Old Union and Jordan Lodges, now Nos. 46 and zoi respectively. The former, who, in the following year, became Grand Sword‑Bearer and, in 1862, Senior Grand Deacon, served on the Board as a nominated member from 1842 to 1851, again from 1853 to 1874 and, from 1862 to 1871, as its President. John Havers was initiated in the Jordan Lodge, March 8, 1838 and subsequently joined the St. George and Corner‑stone, No. 5, which sent him up as Grand Steward in 1846. He was Senior Grand Deacon in 1848 and junior Grand Warden in 1862. His services on the Board of General Purposes ranged from 1841 to 1845, as a nominated member from 1857 to 186o and, again, in 1875‑76. He was also elected annually on the Committee of Management of the Masonic Benevolent Annuity Fund during the years 1842‑47 and was nominated a member by the Grand Master, 1849‑5z.
Havers rendered himself particularly obnoxious to the conductors of the 254 HISTORY OF THE UNITED Freemasons' Quarterly Review by denouncing boldly the very reprehensible manner in which they garbled the reports of Grand Lodge meetings, holding up everyone who differed from them to the ridicule of the public. In 1848, on his being appointed a Grand Officer, their indignation assumed a poetical form and, in the Review for that year (p. i z4), may be found the following lines Be silent, Brother B[igg] 1 Be more discreet 1 Behold 1 GRAND DEACON HAVERS takes his seat 1 Submission to the purple badge is due You must be wrong if only clothed in blue 1 No silver'd collar virtue can enfold None can be good, unless begirt with gold 1 Literary portraits of Havers and John Bigg are given in the Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1849, PP. 1z3, z37.
In 18 5 5‑5 6 Havers was summoned to the councils of the Grand Master, the entire English Craft being then in a state of insubordination and discontent. The Grand Secretary‑W. H. White‑had been in office nearly fifty years. The President of the Board of General Purposes‑Alexander Dobie‑was also Provincial Grand Master for Surrey, Grand Registrar, Solicitor to the Grand Lodge, Third Grand Principal (Royal Arch) and Treasurer, both of the Grand Officers' Mess‑at that time a very influential office‑and of the Royal Alpha Lodge, No. 16, practically the Privy Council of the Grand Master. These two Brothers, together with B. B. Cabbell and W. F. Beadon, Past Grand Wardens, virtually ruled the Craft. No country Mason and, but rarely, a London one, outside the charmed circle of three or four Lodges, was ever promoted to Grand Office. Out of twenty Grand Wardens, no fewer than thirteen were selected from a single Lodge‑Friendship, No. G.
Though viewed, in the first instance, to use his own words, as " an incendiary and red republican," within three years from the time when the general direction of affairs passed into his hands, those who had originally assailed his policy enter tained him at a public dinner at the Thatched House Tavern (the Grand Master being present and John Rankin Stebbing‑at one period his chief opponent‑in one of the vice‑chairs). The great Canadian question was definitely settled by Havers and, on retiring from the office of President of the Board of General Purposes, to which he was appointed in 1858 and held until 1861, the thanks of Grand Lodge were unanimously voted (on the motion of Stebbing) " for his indefatigable devotion to the business and successful efforts in facilitating the labours of the Board, especially for his long and valuable services to Freemasonry." The proposal of the Grand Master, that the sum of five hundred guineas should be applied from the Fund of General Purposes, to purchase for him a life nomination to each of the Masonic Schools‑he declined in a graceful letter‑read March 5, 186z‑wherein the crowning labour of his Masonic life is shadowed forth by the expression of a belief " that the honour and dignity of Masonry demands a fitting temple devoted to its use." GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑1814‑1930 2‑55 His interest in the Society continued unabated until his decease, which occurred August 2o, 1884.
In the period covered by the Grand Mastership of the Earl of Zetland, every now and then there appears to have been a mild form of agitation on behalf of a library for the Craft. The scheme had its origin so far back as about the year 1837, when it was launched with every prospect of success by the late John Henderson, at that time Grand Registrar, also President of the Board of General Purposes. The sum of úloo was freely voted by Grand Lodge and curators were appointed to carry out the design. But the scheme languished under Alexander DobiePresident, Board of General Purposes, 1842‑48, though its merits were warmly advocated by J. R. Scarborough in Grand Lodge and by Crucefix in the Freemasons' Quarterly Review. The former proposed in 1846, again in 1847, that the sum of ú2o should be laid aside annually for the formation of a Library and Museum; and, in a characteristic speech delivered in the latter year, is reported to have shown the desirability of possessing the means of cultivating intellectuality more than gastronomy ; that the other bottle did not do half so much good as the other volume, that it was laughable to tell a poor but inquiring Brother to make a daily advance in Masonic knowledge‑and the arts and sciences his particular study, if we withheld from him the means of doing so and did not even give him a hint where Masonic knowledge could be gathered.
The motion for a pecuniary grant was seconded by Dr. Crucefix and, after a long discussion, in which even the Grand Master himself " admitted the value of having such a Library," was referred to the Board of General Purposes.
In the following year, September 6, 1848, the Board made their report, from which it appeared that the Library then contained 279 printed books and that, of the Cioo already voted by the Grand Lodge, ú56 9s. 6d. had been expended. To the report were appended ten recommendations, all of which were adopted, the most important being that the Grand Tyler should receive Ci 5 annually for acting as a kind of sub‑librarian and that an announcement should be made in the quarterly accounts, inviting Brethren to make contributions of books. Unfortunately this method of appealing directly to the Craft for their co‑operation in the work of forming a Library and Museum, worthy of the oldest and richest Grand Lodge in the ,vorld, was never fairly tried.
The Building Committee of 1862‑69 endeavoured to form a Subscription Library, but which, as might have been expected, proved a dismal failure. Thus matters rested until 188o, when an annual grant of ú25 was voted by Grand Lodge and, in the same year, a Library Committee added to the subdivisions of the Board of General Purposes.
Lord Zetland was succeeded by the Earl de Grey and Ripon (afterwards the first Marquess of Ripon) and the installation of the latter‑May 14, 187o‑was deemed a suitable occasion for the presentation of an address to the former on his voluntary retirement from the Grand Mastership. The address was supplemented zs6 HISTORY OF THE UNITED by a testimonial consisting of the sum of ú2,730, together with a silver inkstand ; the latter passing into the possession of the Earl, the former constituting the Zetland Fund for the relief of distinguished Brethren who might become distressed‑‑of which the disposal was to rest with Lord Zetland and, after him, the Grand Master for the time being.
During the administration of the Earl of Zetland, both the present Boys' and Girls' Schools were built; the pupils increased in number in the former from 70 to 115, in the latter from 70 to 100.
In 1844 the number of Lodges was 723, in 1869 it was 1,299. The certificates issued in 1844 were 1,584, in 1869 they were 7,000. Within the same period the income of Grand Lodge more than trebled itself, being CI2,153 in the former year, 38,025 in the latter. " Last but not least "‑to use the eloquent words in which the retiring Grand Master was addressed on the occasion by John Havers The noble hall and buildings in which they were assembled had been built in his Lordship's term of office, while the Grand Lodge of England had been freed from the just reproach of having held their meetings for a hundred years at a tavern.
The Colonial Brethren had been relieved of a large amount of taxation, the selection of Grand Lodge Officers had not been confined to London Lodges and London Masons, but far and wide good services had been sought for and, when found, rewarded.
The chief event in the administration of Earl de Grey and Ripon was the fraternal reception accorded to him whilst engaged in a mission of peace across the Atlantic by the Freemasons of the United States of America. Subsequently, this nobleman, then Marquess of Ripon, embraced the Roman Catholic faith and, on September 2, 1874, his resignation of the Grand Mastership was read in Grand Lodge.
According to the laws of the Society the office then devolved upon the Prince of Wales, as Past Grand Master, if willing to accept it; and a deputation, consisting of Lord Carnarvon, Deputy Grand Master; John Havers, Junior Grand Warden; Aeneas J. McIntyre, Grand Registrar, was, therefore, appointed to communicate with H.R.H. and request him to undertake the duties of Grand Master until the next usual period of installation.
At the ensuing Grand Lodge in December, the Prince of Wales's acceptance of the Grand Mastership was formally notified ; also that he had appointed the Earl of Carnarvon and Lord Skelmersdale, Pro Grand Master and Deputy Grand Master respectively ; and, on April 28, 1875, H.R.H. was duly installed at the Royal Albert Hall, South Kensington, in the presence of the largest Masonic Assembly ever held in Great Britain up to that date.
Two years later, their Royal Highnesses the Dukes of Connaught and Albany were appointed Senior and Junior Grand Wardens respectively, both Princes having been initiated in 1874, the former in the Prince of Wales, the latter in the Apollo University Lodge. Prince Leopold (Duke of Albany), youngest son of GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑18I4‑I930 2‑57 Queen Victoria, passed the chair of the Apollo, Westminster and Keystone and Antiquity Lodges and became Provincial Grand Master for Oxfordshire, 1875" Of a delicate constitution from his youth, his beautiful and promising career was cut short, by death in 1884 " (G. W. Speth, Royal Freemasons, p. ii).
The progress of the Society under the Prince of Wales was marked but uneventful. A committee, consisting of Lords Carnarvon, Skelmersdale, Leigh, Tenterden and Donoughmore ; the Rev. C. J. Martin; Aeneas J. McIntyre, J. B. Monckton, H. C. Levander and R. F. Gould, was appointed, December 5, 1877, to consider the action of the Grand Orient of France in removing from its constitution those paragraphs which asserted a belief in the existence of God; and, in the ensuing March, they recommended (inter alia) the following resolution, which was adopted unanimously That the Grand Lodge, whilst always anxious to receive in the most fraternal spirit the Brethren of any Foreign Grand Lodge whose proceedings are conducted according to the Ancient Landmarks of the Order, of which a belief in T. G. A. O. T. U. is the first and most important, cannot recognize as true and genuine Brethren any who have been initiated in Lodges which either deny or ignore that belief.
In January 188o Colonel Shadwell H. Clerke (Senior Grand Deacon in 1878) was appointed to the office of Grand Secretary, which had become vacant by the resignation of John Hervey, who passed away in the same year. Two Standard Bearers and a Deputy Director of Ceremonies were added to the number of Grand Officers in 188z ; and, on March zi, 1885, Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence, eldest son of the Prince of Wales, was initiated in the Royal Alpha Lodge, London, by the Grand Master in person.
In 1883 the Book of Constitutions underwent a thorough revision and the new edition, which has served as the basis for all editions published afterwards, was issued in 1884. May 3, 1883 is also a notable date in the annals of English Masonry for, immediately after the holding of the Quarterly Convocation of the Supreme Grand Chapter on that day, a fire broke out in Freemasons' Hall, almost destroying entirely the Grand Temple, though, happily, the Articles of the Union of 1813 and other important documents were not touched, they being in safe keeping in another part of the building. The massive statue of the Duke of Sussex was damaged greatly and nearly all the oil portraits of the Past Grand Masters were destroyed. The Board of General Purposes at once decided upon the reconstruction and enlargement of the Grand Temple. A scheme was propounded for the removal of the Masonic headquarters to the Adelphi precisely similar to that put forward thirty‑five years later, in connexion with the Masonic Peace Memorial‑but rejected (in each instance) by a large majority. The Temple was enlarged but not to the extent proposed by the Building Committee.
In 1886 the Duke of Connaught was appointed Provincial Grand Master for F. 111‑8 258 HISTORY OF THE UNITED Sussex, this being the earliest instance of a Prince of the Blood Royal holding such office. Two years later he became District Grand Master for Bombay, again the first and, here, the only instance of a Prince holding that office in an Overseas Jurisdiction. To‑day three Princes hold office as Provincial Grand Mastersthe Prince of Wales for Surrey; the Duke of York for Middlesex; and Prince Arthur of Connaught, only son of the Grand Master, for Berkshire.
Masonic Benevolence made tremendous strides under the rule of the Prince of Wales (Edward VII). In 1887 some 7,ooo Brethren assembled at the Royal Albert Hall to vote an address to Queen Victoria, on the occasion of the jubilee of her accession, when upwards of ú6,ooo was voted to the Masonic Institutions. Ten years later, on the occasion of the Diamond Jubilee, the Prince presided at a further assembly in the same Hall, when over ú7,000 was distributed between the Masonic Institutions and the Prince of Wales's Hospital Fund. In 1888 the Prince of Wales presided at the Centenary Festival of the Royal Masonic Institution for Girls, when the record sum of k51,5oo was collected, part of which was devoted to the erection of a Hall in the Institution at Clapham Junction, which was opened in 18g1 by the Heir‑Apparent and his Consort. In 1898 the Grand Master issued an appeal for funds for the erection of a new Boys' School at Bushey to replace the existing establishment at Wood Green which was no longer suitable nor sufficient for the ever‑increasing number of boys admitted. At the Centenary Festival held that year, under the presidency of the Grand Master, C141,000 was raised. Two years later the foundation stone of the new building at Bushey was laid by the Duke of Connaught.
Sir Alfred Robbins, in his work, English‑Speaking Freemasonry, testifies to the interest taken in the Craft by the Prince of Wales, in the following words His personal devotion to the Craft was shown in the fact that he never ceased to wear a special Masonic ring, which, at his own wish, was ultimately buried with him. That ring appears on his State portrait, painted by Fildes during his King ship, the original of which is in Buckingham Palace, with the artist's replicas in every British Embassy throughout the world. But only that which, by special permission of King George V, hangs in Freemasons' Hall, shows with precision the ring's Masonic significance, the details being painted in much later by Fildes, who, not being a Mason, had not originally realized its full significance. It was with this ring on his finger that the Prince of Wales was constrained in igoi to leave the Masonic for the Imperial Throne ; and it was still there when, nine years later, he ceased to be.
A new era of success for the Craft in England opened with the twentieth century, for, on his accession to the throne on January 22, 1goi, the Prince of Wales, acting in accordance with precedent, resigned the office of Grand Master and became Protector. He was succeeded as Grand Master by his brother, the Duke of Connaught. In his address to Grand Lodge, the Duke recalled (Robbins, op. cit., p. 148) GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑18i4‑1930 259 that, under the auspices of his immediate predecessor, not only had 1,311 Lodges been added to the roll, but the Craft had attracted into its ranks a large number of those holding the highest positions in Church and State, in the navy and army, on the bench and at the bar and in both Houses of the Legislature. He specially noted that, in addition to the large sums given to other charitable funds, little short of two million pounds during his illustrious brother's Grand Mastership had been subscribed to the Grand Lodge Fund of Benevolence and the three central Masonic Institutions, with úzo,ooo voted by Grand Lodge for the relief of other than Masonic distress‑a record of charitable endeavour, which seemed enormous then, but to be far transcended in the next twenty‑five years.
From i9oi to 1904 there was a continuous steady progression in Masonic matters in England and its sub‑Jurisdictions. For more than half that period this was due, in no small degree, to the interest and activity of Lord Ampthill, who in 19o8, had been appointed Pro Grand Master and who then, for seventeen years, bad been Provincial Grand Master for Bedfordshire.
During the war of 19 I4‑18, when the Pro Grand Master was on active military service, the government of the Craft fell practically into the hands of the Deputy Grand Master, the Right Hon. T. F. Halsey, afterwards Sir Frederick Halsey, Bart., whose great services to Freemasonry, particularly during those years, may, probably, never be appraised at their full worth. The times were trying and one false step might have brought irretrievable damage upon the Craft and it was only through the skill and tact of the Deputy Grand Master, aided by the President of the Board of General Purposes, Sir Alfred Robbins, that many difficult passes were negotiated in a satisfactory manner.
Although the period was such a difficult one, it was during that time that a much‑needed reform was introduced into the Constitutions of Grand Lodge, by means of which the ‑ Provinces were represented on the Board of General purposes by a number of delegates equal to the number of London Brethren. It was also during the war period‑in 1917, on June z4‑that nearly 8,ooo Freemasons assembled in the Royal Albert Hall to celebrate the Bi‑centenary of the foundation of the Grand Lodge of England, under the presidency of the Grand Master. Two days later a special Masonic Service of Thanksgiving was held in the same building. On June 27, i 9 i 9, in the same building, was held the Masonic Peace Celebration, the date chosen being an exceedingly happy one, since it proved to be the day immediately preceding the signing of the Peace Treaty. The Grand Master was unable, through illness, to attend and his place was taken by the Pro Grand Master, Lord Ampthill, who presided over an assembly of nearly 8,3 S o Brethren, including nearly S 00 from jurisdictions and Districts overseas and Deputations from the Grand Lodges of Ireland and Scotland. It was on this occasion that the Grand Master's desire for a Masonic Peace Memorial was expressed, a scheme that, at the present time, is rapidly approaching completion. The period also witnessed the establishment of the Freemasons' Hospital and Nursing Home, mooted first in 1913, then diverted to the Freemasons' War Hospital (under which three 260 GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑1814‑1930 Hospitals for wounded soldiers were maintained) and, finally, at the conclusion of hostilities, reverting to the original scheme. This has proved so successful that the original building in the Fulham Road (formerly the Chelsea Hospital for Women) has become much too small for the demands made upon it and, at the time of writing, a much larger building is being erected at Ravenscourt Park.
In 1926, one year before his death, Sir Frederick Halsey resigned the office of Deputy Grand Master and was succeeded by Colonel F. S. W. (now Lord) Cornwallis.
In 1929 the Board of General Purposes drew up the following basic principles for recognition of foreign jurisdictions, which were adopted in toto by the United Grand Lodge 1. Regularity of origin, i.e. each Grand Lodge shall have been established lawfully by a duly recognized Grand Lodge or by three or more regularly constituted Lodges.
2. That a belief in the Great Architect of the Universe and His revealed will shall be an essential qualification for membership.
3. That all Initiates shall take their Obligation on or in full view of the Volume of the Sacred Law, by which is meant the revelation from above which is binding on the conscience of the particular individual who is being initiated.
4. That the membership of the Grand Lodge and individual Lodges shall be composed exclusively of men; that each Grand Lodge have no Masonic intercourse of any kind with mixed Lodges or bodies which admit women to membership.
5. That the Grand Lodge shall have sovereign jurisdiction over the Lodges under its control; i.e. that it shall be a responsible, independent, self‑governing organization, with sole and undisputed authority over the Craft or Symbolic Degrees (Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason) within its jurisdiction‑, and shall not, in any way, be subject to or divide such authority with a Supreme Council or other Power claiming any control or supervision over those Degrees.
6. That the three Great Lights of Freemasonry (namely, the Volume of the Sacred Law, the Square and the Compasses) shall always be exhibited when the Grand Lodge or its subordinate Lodges are at work, the chief of these being the Volume of the Sacred Law.
7. That the discussion of religion and politics within the Lodge shall be strictly prohibited.
8. That the principles of the Ancient Landmarks, customs and usages of the Craft shall strictly be observed.
The adoption of definite Standards of Recognition by this Grand Lodge was a definite part of a movement looking toward as much of uniformity in the basal principles of recognition of Masonic organizations as is possible on an inde pendent and voluntary basis. About the same time that saw the adoption of the English standards, or a little earlier, the same movement achieved momentum GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND‑i 8 r 4‑r 93 o 2.61 in the Grand Lodges of North America. In a general way, the most of the Grand Lodges work along almost the same lines; the differences of standards are not important. It is interesting that nothing is said about any requirement that a Grand Lodge must, to be recognized by the Grand Lodge of England, trace its descent directly to one of the British Grand Lodges. As a matter of fact, the United Grand Lodge of England recognizes several Grand Lodges as regular and is in fraternal relations with them, which do not and cannot trace their descent to either the United Grand Lodge of England, the Grand Lodge of Scotland or the Grand Lodge of Ireland.
In America, the most popular wording of the Standards of Recognition, and the one which in a general way has been adopted by the majority of the Grand Lodges which have any definite standards, reads either substantially or exactly as follows‑‑sometimes adopted in abbreviated form and sometimes verbatim Fraternal recognition may be extended to a Grand Lodge when it appears to the satisfaction of this Grand Lodge, a Committee having first considered and reported thereon i. Such Grand Body has been formed lawfully by at least three just and duly constituted lodges, or that it has been legalized by a valid act issuing from this Grand Lodge, or from a Grand Body in fraternal relations with this Grand Lodge.
z. That it is an independent, self‑governing, responsible organization with entire, undisputed and exclusive dogmatic and administrative authority over the Symbolic Lodges within its jurisdiction, and not in any sense whatever subject to, or dividing such authority with, a Supreme Council, or other Body claiming ritualistic or other supervision or control.
3. That it makes Masons of men only.
4. That it requires conformity to the following, which this Grand Lodge considers necessary in a Masonic Body a. Acknowledgment of a belief in God the Father of all men. b. Secrecy.
c. The Symbolism of Operative Masonry.
d. The division of Symbolic Masonry into the three degrees practiced in this jurisdiction.
e. The legend of the Third Degree.
f. That its dominant purposes are charitable, benevolent, educational and for the worship of God; and that it excludes controversial politics and sectarian religion from all activities under its auspices.
g. The Sacred Book of the Divine Law, chief among the Three Great Lights of Masonry, indispensably present in the Lodges while at work.
S. That it occupies exclusively its territorial jurisdiction or else shares the same with another by mutual consent; and that it does not presume to extend its authority into, or presume to establish lodges in a territory occupied by a lawful Grand Lodge, without the expressed assent of such supreme governing Masonic body.
CHAPTER VII FREEMASONRY IN IRELAND WHEN was Freemasonry introduced into Ireland ? Certainly long before the date which, until recently, was given as the year in which the Grand Lodge of Ireland was founded, viz. 1731. This was really the date of the creation of a United Grand Lodge, formed by the absorption of the Grand Lodge of Munster into a Grand Lodge of Ireland, both of which were in existence in 1725. This date was accepted as a base when arranging the recent Bi‑Centenary Celebration of the Grand Lodge of Ireland. The authority is a notice that made its appearance in the Dublin Weekly Journal of Saturday, June 16, 1725, which reads as follows Thursday last, being St. John's Day, Patron of the Most Antient and Rt. Worshipful Society of FREE‑MASONS; they met about Eleven o' the Clock, at the Yellow Lion in Warbrough's street, where there appear'd above a loo Gentle men. After some time spent, in putting on their Aprons, White Gloves and other parts of the Distinguishing Dress of that Worshipful Order, they proceeded over Essex‑Bridge to the Strand and from thence to the King's Inns, in the following Order. The Officers of the Order in Hackney‑Coaches (it being a very Rainey Day) the i 2 Stewards in 3 Coaches, each having a Mystical White Wand in his hand, the Grand Master in a fine Chariot. The Grand Wardens ; the Masters and Wardens of the Six Lodges of Gentlemen FREEMASONS, who are under the jurisdiction of the Grand Master, the Private Brothers, all in Coaches ; they made a very fine Appearance, most of them having new Cloaths proper for the solemn Occasion ; When they came to the Inns, they marched up to the Great Hall, mersheled in the following Order. The Officers of the Order, two and two; the twelve Stewards, two and two, all uncovered; R‑, Esq. ; who officiated as Mason King at Arms ; the Grand Master alone, cover'd ; the Grand Wardens, the Masters and Wardens of the several Lodges, each Master walking alone, and followed by his two Wardens ; the Private Brothers two and two, all uncovered: After marching round the Walls of the Great Hall, with many important Ceremonies, the Grand Lodge, composed of the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master (who was absent) Grand Wardens and the Masters and Wardens of all the Lodges, retired to the Room prepared for them, where after performing the Mystical Ceremonies of the Grand Lodge which are held so sacred, that they must not be discover'd to a Private Brother ; they proceeded to the Election of a new Grand Master, &c. As soon a, it was known that the Grand Lodge was ready to appear, the Officers of the Orders, the Stewards and Mason King at Arms, dress'd in a proper Manner, carrying upon a Velvet Cushion, a little Gold Trowel with a Black Ribbon, attended at the Door and marched in Order before the Grand Wardens, &c. to the upper End of x.62 IRELAND 2.63 the Great Hall, where stood the Mystical Table, made of a Form to represent two Masons Squares joined and the Proxy of the Senior Grand Warden acquainted the Society, that the Grand Lodge had chosen the Rt. Hon. Earl of ROSS, Grand Master for the Year ensuing, and Sir Thomas Pendergrass, and Mark Morgan, Esq., Grand Wardens, and that the Grand Master had appointed the Hon. Humphrey Butler, Esq., Deputy Grand Master. At the naming of each of these, the Society gave their Approbation, by three Huzzas, then the Officers of the Order, &c. went to the Grand Lodge Room, and conducted this new Grand Master in great State to the Head of the Mistical Table and Mason King at Arms hung the Gold Trowel by the Black Ribon about his Neck.
Imediately the Grand Master made them an Elegant Speech, " Expressing how sensible he was of the Great Honour done him and promising to discharge the great and important Trusts reposed in him, with becoming Fidelity, &c. And concluded, With an Appollgy for the shortness of his Speech because Dinner was ready, and believed they were Hungary ! " There were three large Tables at the lower End of the Hall, of common Form, for the Private Brothers ; for the Grand Lodge only sat at the Mystical Table. They had i 2o Dishes of Meat and were attended by 25 Drawer, admitted Free Mason for this solemn Occasion. After the Entertainment they all went to the Play, with their Aprons, &c., the private Brothers sat in the Pit, but the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master and Grand Wardens, in the Governments Box, at the Conclusion of the Play, Mr. Griffith the Player, who is a Brother sung the Free Mason's Apprentices Song, the Grand Master and the whole Brotherhood joyning in the Chorus. The Brothers of one Lodge wore fine Badges painted full of Crosses and Squares, with this motto, Spes mea in Deo est. Which was no doubt very significant, for the Master of it wore a Yallow Jacket and Blue Britches.
From the fact that there was already a Grand Lodge with apparently a complete organization in existence and that the representatives of six Lodges took part in the procession, it is clear that Freemasonry was well established in Ireland in 1725. The initiation of the Hon. Elizabeth St. Leger, the youngest child and only daughter of the first Viscount Doneraile, is now regarded as resting upon something more than mere tradition, if not actually accepted as fact. John Heron Lepper and Philip Crossle, in vol. i of the History of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, state that the event must have taken place before the marriage of that lady to Richard Aldworth in 1713 ; and the Hon. Vicary Gibbs, in the Complete Peerage, gives the approximate date of her initiation as 1710, when she was seventeen years of age. The full story is told by Crawley and Conder in vol. viii of Ars.Quatuor Coronatorum ; by John Day of Cork, in a pamphlet published in 1914; and by Dudley Wright, in Woman and Freemasonry. The incident may be accepted as evidence that at that date the nobility of Ireland were holding Masonic Lodges in their private houses at least seven years before the establishment of the Grand Lodge of England. We know, moreover, that Francis Sorrel‑Senior Grand Warden of England, 1723‑was " appointed Agent to the Commissioners of the Revenue in Ireland, in the room of Mr. French, deceased," in 1725 and, in the same year, among a list of books, described as having been " lately publish'd and sold opposite the Watch 264 IRELAND House, the North Side of College Green," Dublin, we meet with " The Constitutions of the Freemasons, zs. zd.," from which it may be inferred there were many Lodges in Ireland requiring copies of such a work.
After the entry in the Dublin Weekly Journal for June z6, 1725, there is a blank until 1731, when Freemasonry is once more indebted to the general press for the new link in the chain of Masonic history. In the same journal of March 13, 1730‑1, appeared the following report Dublin. On Saturday, the 6th inst, a Lodge of Free‑Masons was held at the Yellow Lyon in Warborough's‑street. The Rt. Hon. the Earl of Ross Grand Master of Ireland, the Hon. William Ponsonby Esq ; Master, Wm. Cooper Esq ; Rowly Hill Esq ; Wardens, the Right Hon. the Lord Kingston, late Grand Master of England, the Rt. Hon. the Earl of Drogheda, the Rt. Hon. the Lord Southwell, John White Esq ; Abraham Creyton Esq ; Henery Plunket, Esq ; Lawrence Toole Esq ; Wm. Moseley Esq ; Mr. Wm. Dobbs, Mr. John Haley, Mr. Tho.
Griffith, Secretary to the Grand Lodge, Present. Whereupon proper Application, the Rt. Hon. the Lord Tyrone, the Rt. Hon. the Lord Nettervil, the Hon. Tho. Bligh, Esq ; and the Hon. Henery Southwell, Esq ; were in due Form, admitted Members of that Ancient and Rt. Worshipful Society.
An explanation of the long silence between 1725 and 1731 is given by Lepper and Crossle, op. cit., p. 76, in the following words The years 1725 to 1729 had been black years for Ireland. The letters of Archbishop Boulter and the newspapers of the time give us the most ghastly series of pictures of description. Famine, fever, and emigration took a toll of every province except Munster. The distress was so great in the metropolis that the Dublin gilds discontinued their annual processions. In these circumstances there would have been little wonder, had the Grand Lodge of Ireland wholly succumbed.
In 1730, Sorrell published an edition of the Constitutions especially adapted for Irish Freemasons, on which work he had been engaged for at least two years. This book was advertised in Faulkner's Dublin journal in February 1728‑g.
The Earl of Rosse, it will be noted, was still Grand Master in 1731. He has been described as the wildest and most dissolute among the wild and dissolute gallants of the Irish metropolis, and, notwithstanding his high intellectual and social gifts, as " the most finished libertine within the four seas." It must be remembered that he had practically no home training, for his father, who was a dissipated man, famous for his profligacy and wit, died while the son, who was undoubtedly a great wit and an artistic genius, was a minor. Rosse, when in his minority, sought to marry the wealthiest widow in Europe‑Elizabeth, Dowager Duchess of Albemarle, co‑heiress of the second Duke of Newcastle‑a woman old enough to be his mother. She, however, preferred Ralph, Lord Montagu, who became the first Duke of IRELAND 265 Montagu (who died 1709), who won the lady's hand by posing as the Emperor of China. That incited Lord Rosse to indite a lampoon beginning Insulting rival, never boast Thy conquest lately won No wonder if her heart was lost, Her senses first were gone. From one that's under Bedlam's laws What glory can be had ? For love of thee was not the cause, It proves that she was mad.
The incident suggested to Colley Cibber the comedy, The Double Gallant, or the Sick Lady's Cure. Although the lady was well known as " the mad Duchess," she lived to the age of eighty when, for some reason, she was given the honour of interment in Westminster Abbey. It is of interest to note that this comedy was performed at Drury Lane on May 1, 1733, " for the entertainment of the Grand Master and the Ancient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons," according to an advertisement in the Daily Advertiser of April 30, 1733. Three rows of the pit were reserved for Freemasons who were requested to come " cloath'd." Richard Parsons (Lord Rosse) was the son of Richard, 1st Viscount Rosse, and his wife Elizabeth, daughter of Sir George Hamilton (Count Hamilton in France) and niece of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, who was Viscount Rosse's third wife. Richard, the son and heir, became the znd Viscount and was raised to the dignity of an Earl in June 1718. He married, first, in June 1714, Mary, eldest daughter of Lord William Paulet. She died on October 15, 1718. In the following year he married Frances, daughter of Thomas Claxton. Lord Rosse died on June z6, 1741, In many respects his career bears a striking resemblance to that of the wayward Philip, Duke of Wharton, Grand Master of England in 1722. The twain are said to have been on terms of intimacy and both were founders of Hell Fire Clubs. Rosse founded his club in conjunction with his associate, James Worsdale, the humorous painter, in 1735, at the Eagle Tavern, Cork Hill, Dublin, which was also the meeting‑place of a Masonic Lodge. It is interesting to note that the Dublin town‑house of Lord Rosse occupied the site on which Freemasons' Hall now stands.
The Hon. Humphrey Butler, M.P., who was appointed Deputy Grand Master, was the eldest son of Brinsley, znd Baron Butler, of Newtown Butler and was born about 1700. He succeeded his father as M.P. for Belturbet, which constituency he represented from 1725 to 1735. He was sheriff of Co. Cavan in 1727 and of Co. Westmeath in 1728. He was Captain of the Battle Axe Guards, but resigned his commission to his brother, Robert, when he succeeded his father in the Irish House of Peers on March 23, 173 5. He was sworn a member of the Privy Council on November 15, 1749 and, in June 1756, he was appointed Governor of Co. Cavan by Privy Seal. In the following month he was created 266 IRELAND Earl of Lanesborough and as such took his seat in Parliament on October 11, 175 On March 14, 176o, he was elected Speaker of the House of Peers during the Chancellor's illness. On May 14, 1726, he had married by licence Mary, the daughter and heiress of Richard Bury of Wardenstow, Co. Westmeath, who passed away on December 1g, 1761, Lord Lanesborough surviving her until April 11, 1768. He was the father of the Hon. Brinsley Butler, who was Grand Warden of Ireland in 1751 and Deputy Grand Master from 175 3 to 1757.
The Senior Grand Warden was the Right Hon. Sir Thomas Prendergast, M.P., who was not present on the occasion of the installation of Lord Rosse as Grand Master, possibly being detained by other duties in England. He was appointed junior Grand Warden of England in the same year and he was a member of the Horn Lodge at Westminster, to which so many distinguished Freemasons of that period belonged.
The Junior Grand Warden, Mark Anthony Morgan, had seats at Cottlestown, Sligo ; Corke Abbey, Dublin; and Ballyvalley, Meath, along with a residence in St. Stephen's Green, Dublin. He had graduated from Trinity College, Dublin, in 1721, at the age of eighteen years, so that at the time of his appointment to office in the Grand Lodge he was but twenty‑two years of age. In the following year he became High Sheriff of Co. Meath and, in 1717, M.P. for the Borough of Athy, which constituency he represented until 175z The first Grand Secretary, Thomas Griffith, was an interesting character, though the particulars concerning his career are somewhat meagre, the principal authority being W. R. Chetwood's General History of the Stage. He was the descendant of an ancient Welsh family, but his parents settled in Dublin, where he was born in 168o. He was apprenticed to a mathematical instrument maker, was attracted to the theatre, and, falling in love with an actress, married her and left his employment before the completion of his indentures. His talent, says Chetwood, led him to comedy and the merry cast, in which he gave great pleasure to the audience. Griffith won many friends and, in 171 o, Lord Southwell secured for him a position in the revenue which, it is said, he maintained throughout life, alongside his Masonic and theatrical engagements. He was also a great friend of Robert Wilks, who once took him to London and secured a theatrical engagement for him there. He was a good actor and a pleasing poet, but his smallness of stature was the centre of many jokes and, on one occasion, a bill was printed on which appeared the announcement: " The part of Alexander the Great is to be performed by little Griffith." He was also, on another occasion, the butt of Betterton's satire for daring to take the part of Pizarro, a Spanish brigand, in The Indian Emperor, in which he had to carry a truncheon as long as himself. He ceased to be Grand Secretary in 1731 and he passed away on January 24, 1743‑4, two nights before his benefit, the proceeds of which were handed over to his second wife, a daughter of a clergyman, named Foxcroft, of Portarlington, Queen's County, a gentlewoman of merit and virtue.
It is to Faulkner's Dublin journal that Freemasonry is indebted for two other IRELAND REGALIA OF THE GRAND OFFICERS OF THE GRAND LODGE In Ireland, although the Grand Lodge was formed in 1729, there is not‑and, apparently, there never has been‑any definition of the colour or pattern of its clothing laid down in its Constitutions. The only references are in Rules 9 to i i, which state " All Brethren attending Grand Lodge shall wear the appropriate full‑dress apron and the collar and jewel (if any) of the respective stations they represent ; but no member of the Grand Lodge or visitor thereto shall be permitted to wear any jewel, medal or device belonging to any Order or Degree beyond that of Master Mason, in which, however, the jewel of a Past Master is considered to be included. The Representatives of Foreign Grand Lodges may wear the insignia of those Masonic bodies they respectively represent. The jewels of office worn by the Masters and Wardens representing subordinate Lodges shall be of silver ; the Grand Officers, Past Grand Officers, Provincial and Past Provincial Grand Officers and Officers of the Grand Master's Lodge being entitled to wear them of gold. All Brethren entitled to seats on the dais‑that is to say, Grand Officers, Past Grand Officers, Actual and Past Provincial Grand Officers and Representatives from Foreign Grand Lodges‑attending any regular meeting of Grand Lodge are expected to appear in evening dress." These are the only mention and the first and only authoritative statement appears in a small volume entitled Clothing and Insignia, with coloured plates, published by order of the Grand Lodge in i86o. F. C. Crossle mentions an old Irish apron which has stamped on it the arms of the Grand Lodge of Ireland and also observes " that up till very recent times, the Master of the Craft Lodges, in this part of Ireland [Co. Down] at least, in order to be properly clothed, was always attired in a red cloak and a chimney‑pot hat. Not only has the oral tradition of my elder Brethren assured me of this fact, but I have seen him so attired myself, and in all the old Lodge chests which I have discovered there has invariably .been found the remains of this important item of the insignia of the Lodge." This plate exhibits the clothing of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of Ireland. No. 2 is the apron of the Grand Master, which is of lambskin, fourteen to sixteen inches wide and twelve to fourteen inches deep, with an edging of light‑blue watered ribbon two inches wide, on and outside which are three bars of gold lace, each not less than one inch in breadth, whilst the outer edge of the apron and fall is fringed with gold bullion about one inch and a half in depth. The point of the flap is squared off and, curiously enough, the customary tassels and rosettes which appear on the Master Mason's apron are entirely unrepresented on the aprons of Grand and Provincial Grand Officers. This apron is extremely simple in comparison with those of the Grand Masters of the Grand Lodges of England and Scotland, but yet in its very simplicity there is a richness and effectiveness peculiar to itself, from which it by no means suffers under the contrast.
The collar of the Grand Master (No. i) is of gold, or metal gilded and consists of alternated links, composed of the square and compasses within an oval on which is enamelled a wreath of shamrock and of the monogram G.L.I., respectively.
His jewel‑ is the square and compasses, the latter extended to 45░, with a segment of a circle at the points and, in the centre, a jewelled sun.
The gauntlets are of sky‑blue silk, embroidered and edged with gold (No. 3). The apron, &c. of Past Grand Masters are of the same patterns.
The apron of the Deputy Grand Master (No. 4) is similar to that of the Grand Master, but the three bars of gold lace are only half an inch in breadth and the outer edging is of gold fringe, not exceeding two inches in breadth. His collar is the same as that of the Grand Master.
Provincial Grand Masters and Provincial Grand Officers, past and present, are entitled to wear aprons similar to those of the officers of Grand Lodge, of and under the rank of Grand Warden.
Grand Officers, past and present, of and under the rank of Grand Warden, are 267 IRELAND 2.67 important announcements regarding the history of the Craft in Ireland. In the issue for April io, 1731, appeared the following announcement On Tuesday, April 6th, the Masters and Wardens of the Lodges of Freemasons of the City of Dublin, assembled at the Bull's Head in Fishamble Street, to consider of some Regulations for the Good of that ancient and right Worshipful Society when they unanimously Elected the Right Honourable James Lord Kingston for the ensuing year for the kingdom of Ireland.
The sequel appeared in the issue of the same newspaper for July io, 1731 On Wednesday the 7th Instant, at a Meeting of several Gentlemen of the Most Ancient and Right Worshipful Society of Free Masons, at the Phoenix Tavern in Fishamble Street, Dublin; the Right Hon. James Lord Kingston was Installed Grand Master for the Kingdom of Ireland.
Mention must now be made of what are known as the Munster Records, the earliest official records of Freemasonry in Ireland, where we meet with the proceedings of a Grand Lodge as well as of a Private Lodge, both dating from the year 1726. The Minutes of both units were kept in the same book, which fell into the hands of the Rev. James Pratt, who presented it to Robert Millikin, a member of Harmony Lodge, No. S S S, Fermoy, who tells the story of his acquisition of the volume in his Historico Masonic Tracts, published in Cork in 1848, in the following words Sometime about the year eighteen hundred and twenty‑four, the Transaction Book above‑named came into my possession in the following manner: Our late respected Brother, the Rev. James Pratt, rector of Ovens Parish, made me the present of the Book as a Masonic relic. He, at an auction, bought an old book‑case full of books and amongst them found it. I kept the book until the next meeting of the Provincial Grand Lodge and presented it to Brother Justin McCarthy, then Deputy to the Earl of Shannon, Provincial, Grand Master of Munster, it contains Transactions of the Provincial Grand Lodge and of No. I, the first Lodge of Ireland.
In the original the two sets of records are mixed and interwoven. The entries are in strict chronological order and the scribe was apparently the Secretary of both Fraternities. For the sake of clearness, however, the. transactions of each body will be presented separately, commencing with those of the Grand Lodge.
MINUTES OF THE GRAND LODGE OF MUNSTER, 17z6‑3 3 At an assembly and meeting of the Grand Lodge for the Province of Munster, at the house of Mr Herbert Phaire, in Cork, on St John's Day, being the 27 day of December Ano Dxn. 17z6. The Honb'e James O'Brien, Esgre., by unanimous 268 IRELAND Consent elected Grand Master for the ensueing yeare ; Springett Penn, Esgre., appointed by the Grand Master as his Deputy.
Walter Goold, Gene., ~ Thomas Riggs, Gene., appointed Grand Wardens.
The Hon. James O'Brien, who was Grand Master of Munster from 1726 to 1730, was the third son of William, third Earl of Inchiquin. He graduated from Trinity College, Dublin, in. 1716, when twenty‑one years of age. He was M.P. for the Borough of Charleville from 1715 to 1727, and for Youghal from 1727 to 1760. He served from 1719 to 1722 in Col. Henry Hawley's Regiment of 33rd Foot and was afterwards Collector of the Port of Drogheda and of Cork City. He died December 17, 1771.
Springett Penn was the grandson of William Penn, the noted Quaker and was himself the proprietor of an extensive territory in Pennsylvania, the colony founded by his grandfather. He, however, lived chiefly on an estate he possessed at Shan garry, Co. Cork, large portions of which he sublet to well‑known Munster Freemasons.
S : Jons day, Decembr 27th, 1727.
At a meeting of the Rt. Worshipful the Grand Lodge of Freemasons for the Province of Munster at the house of Herbert Phair, in the City of Corke, on the above day, the Grand Master and the Deputy Grand Master not being present, Will‑ Lane, Master of the Lodge of Corke, being the oldest Master present, acted as Grand Master pro tempore.
It appearing to the Grand Lodge that severall Lodges within this Province have neglected to pay their attendance wch is highly resented, in order to prevent the like for the future and punish such as shall not conform themselves to their duty : It is agreed unanimously that for the future no excuse shall be taken from the Masters and Wardens of any Lodge for their non‑attendance unless a suffic, number appear, or that they send, at the time of such excuse, the sum of twentythree shill. stg., to be disposed of as the Grand Lodge shall direct ; the number deem'd sufhc' to be not less than three. It is further resolv'd that the Master and Wardens who have absented themselves on this day doe and are hereby obliged to pay the like sum of 235., to be dispos'd of as aforsd, except such as have, justly excus'd ymselves : And it is recommended to the Grand Master for the time being, that when he shall appoint any Master of a Lodge, that such Master shall oblige and promise for himself and Wardens that they comply with the aforemention'd rule and, moreover, that every Master and his Wardens shall require as many of his Lodge as he possibly can asure himself can have no just reason for absenting themselves to attend at yo Grand Lodge. And further, it is resolvd that this Rule be read or recited to all Mastrs and Wardens at their election or nomination.
Ordered that these regulations be recomended to the several Lodges within our precincts.
Ordered that the Deputy Grand Warden of this RI Worshipfull Lodge, in their names, doe return thanks to Thos. Rigs, Esq., for his exelent speech in ye opening this Grand Lodge and for all other his former service.
IRELAND 269 Ordered that Mr Thos. Wallis, seed deputy Grand Warden, doe attend and open our next Grand Lodge.
Ordered that this Grand Lodge be adjourned to ye next S' John's day, at this House of Brother Herbert Phair.
Wm. Lane, p. tempe, G.M. Thos. Riggs, G.W. Thos. Wallis, Ja. Crooke, Treasurer and Secretary. [And six others without Titles.] S. John's Day, June 24, 1728.
At a meeting of the Rt. Worshipfull ye Grand Lodge of Freemasons for the Province of Munster, at ye House of Bro : Herbert Phair, in ye City of Corke, on yo above day, The Hon ble James O'Bryan was unanimously elected Grand Mastr.
Rob'. Longfield, Esq., appointed by the Grand Mast" as his Deputy. Samuel Knowles, Esq., and Mr Thos. Wallis appointed Grand Wardens.
Ordd. that Mr John Wallis and Mr S' George Van Lain be suspended this Lodge for their Contempt offers this R'. Worshipfull Grand Lodge this day in refusing attendance though regularly summoned and appearing afterward before ye windows at ye time of their sitting ; and that they, before they be recd again, doe make a proper publick acknowledgm' of their behaviour and do pay, each of them, two British Crowns to y░ Treasurer of Gd. Lodge for ye benefit of ye poore Brethren. Thos. Wallis Ja. O'Bryen, G.M.
Sam' Nolers,}G'W' Rob'. Longfield, D.G.M.
S' John's Day, June 24'', 1730.
At ye Grand Lodge held at Bror. Phaire's this day, Col. Wm. Maynard was by a unanimous Consent of yo Brethern then present Elected Grand Master for ye ensuing year, & M" Thos. Riggs elected Deputy Grand Master, Wm. Gallway and Jon. Gamble, Esq‑., Grand Wardens ; Mr. Sam". Atkins, Secretary to sd Lodge. Thos. Wallis, G.M. pro temp.
Adam Newman, JG.W.
James Crooke,) pro temp., G.W.
Ordered that this Grand Lodge be adjourned to Bror. Phaire's on St John ye Baptist's Day, wh. will be in yo year 1731.
Thos. Riggs, D.G.M. Wm. Galwey, G.W. John Gamble, G.W.
The same signatures are appended to the two following entries.
S' John's Day, June 24'b, 1730.
Humble supplication being made from some Brethren at Waterford to have Warrant from our Grand Lodge for assembling & holding Regular Lodges there, according to ancient Costome of Masonry; it is agreed ye Petition shall be received 170 IRELAND from sd Brethren to be approved and granted as they shall shew themselves Qualified at our next Grand Lodge.
The like application from some Brethren at Clonmell, yo like order for their approbation.
This is the only mention of any application made to the Grand Lodge of Munster for a Warrant and there is no mention of any Lodge being constituted under its authority, though from the General Regulations drawn up in 1728, which are reproduced below, it is evident that jurisdiction over some Lodges was claimed.
1731.‑At a Grand Lodge held the 241` Day of June at Mr Herbert Phaire's, Sd Grand Lodge was adjourned to Monday, the 91 Day of Aug' 173 Wm. Galwey, Mast.
At a Grand Lodge held at M░ Herbert Phaire's, Monday, the 91 Day of August 1731, by unanimous Consent the Rt. Hon b'e James Lord Baron of Kingston was elected Grand Master.
Wm. Galwey, Mast.
August the 9", 173 I.‑Mr Adam Newman appointed Depty Grand Mr., Jonas Morris and Wm. Newenham, Esgrs., Grand Wardens, by the Rt. Worshipful the Grand Master, the Rt. Hon b'e James Lord Baron of Kingston, w' b the unanimous approbation of the Brethren then attending his Lordship at the Grand Lodge.
Kingston, G.M.
St John's Day, June 24th, 1732.‑A Grand Lodge was held on said day at Broth. Phairs, when said Lodge was adjourn'd to the 25th of July next and it is unanimously agreed y` all such members as are duly served and wont attend, yt they shall pay ye fine of five shillings and five pence, or to be admonished or expold for sd. misdemeanor.
Adam Newman, D.G.M.
Wm. Galwey, Mast of ye Lodge.
June 23, 1733. At a consultation held for adjourning the Grand Lodge, St John's Day happning on Sunday, the Grand Lodge was accordinly adjourn'd to Monday, the 25th inst.
Adm. Newman, D.G.M.
The Grand Lodge was again adjourned to July 26, when it was further adjourned to October 3, the order being signed as before. There are no further Minutes, but the following Regulations are then given, though of anterior date by some five years GENERAL REGULATIONS MADE AT A GRAND LODGE HELD IN CORKE ON ST JOHN Y$ EVANGELIST'S DAY, 1728.
The Honble James O'Bryen, Esgr., Grand Mastr.
In due Honour, Respect and obedience to yo right Worshipfull the Grand Master, that his Worship may be properly attended for the more Solemn and proper IRELAND holding our Grand Lodge on St John the Baptist's day, annually, for ever and for ye propagating, exerting and exercising Brotherly Love and affection as becometh true Masons and that our ancient Regularity, Unanimity and Universality may in Lawdable and usual manner be preserv'd according to immemorial usage of our most ancient and Rt. Worshipful Society, the following Regulations are agreed to.
(I) That every Brother who shall be Mastr. or Warden of a Lodge, shall appear and attend and shall allso prevail with and oblige as many of ye Brethren of his Lodge as can, to attend yo Grand Lodge.
(z) Every constituted Lodge, if the Master and Wardens thereof cannot attend, shall send at least five of y░ Brethren to attend the Grand Lodge.
(3) That every Master of a Lodge shall give timely Notice in writing to ye Master of the Lodge where yo Grand Lodge is to be held, eight days before yo Grand Lodge, what number of Brethren will appear from his Lodge at the Grand Lodge.
(4) That if it shou'd happ'n that ye Master and Wardens or Five of ye Brethren of any Lodge shou'd not be able to attend at ye Grand Lodge, then such Lodge so failing shall send ye sum of twenty & three shill : to be paid to the Grand Mastr or his Deputy.
(5) That all & singular ye Brethren of such Lodges where the Grand Lodge shall be held, shall attend such Grand Lodge, or the person absenting to pay a British Crown.
(6) That these Regulations be duly entered in ye Books of each Lodge and sign'd by the Master, Wardens and all ye Brethren of such Lodge and that at ye making of any new Brother, care be taken that he sign such Regulations.
(7) That an exact Duplicate of these Regulations sign'd by the Master and Wardens and all the Brethren be delivered with convenient speed to the Rt. Worshipful Grand Master, of each Lodge.
(8) That every new Brother who has not sign'd such Duplicate before it be deliver'd to the Grand Master, shall be oblig'd to attend at the next Grand Lodge which shall be held after his admission, there to sign such Duplicate.
(9) That no person pretending to be a Mason shall be considered within y░ precincts of our Grand Lodge, or deem'd duly matriculated into y░ Society of Freemasons, untill he hath subscribed in some Lodge to thes regulates. and oblig'd himself to sign ye before mention'd Duplicate, at wch time he sall be furnish'd with proper means to convince yo authentick Brethren yt he has duly complyed.
(io) That the Master and Wardens of each Lodge take care that their Lodge be furnish'd with the Constitution, printed in London in ye year of Masonry 5723, Anno Dom. 1723, Intitled the Constitution of Free Masons, containing the History, Charges, Regulations, &c., of THAT MOST ANCIENT & RT. WORSHIPFULL FRATERNITY.
To due and full observance of the foregoing Regulations we, the subscribers, do Solemnly, Strictly, & Religiously, on our obligations as Masons, hereby oblige ourselves this Twenty‑seventh day of December, in the year of Masonry 5 7z8, and Anno Dm. 1728.
The foregoing Regulations and form of obligation were read and approved by ye Grand Master and Grand Lodge afore mentioned & ord'd to be observ'd as ye original Warrant under ye Grand Master's hand and attested by all the Brethern 272 IRELAND then present, which Warrant is deposited with yo other records of this Lodge of Cork.
Thos. Wallis, G.W. Frans. Healy, Mastr. Thomas Gordon, James Crooke, Hignett Keeling, Wardens. Thos. Riggs, Pat Cronyn. Wm. Busteed.
St. George Van Lawen. Septimus Peacocke. John Gamble.
Wm. Galwey. Thomas Rely. Abram Dickson. Adam Newman. Richard Farmar.
The numbers to the Rules do not appear in the original.
No Minute is preserved of the proceedings of the Grand Lodge held December 27, 1728, when these Rules were agreed to. There must, however, have been earlier Records than those of 1726, also that more Minutes of meetings from that period were kept than have come down to us.
The meetings were held at the tavern kept by Herbert Phaire, the same house being also selected for the purposes of the Lodge. The first Lodge Minute is dated " December ye 81", 1726," but the figure has been altered and probably means 81h ? This Lodge is now known as the Premier Lodge of Ireland, No. i, Cork and Lepper and Crossle state that there seems little doubt that this old Lodge had existed in Cork prior to the formation of the Grand Lodge of Munster and that there is not the slightest doubt that this Grand Lodge was formed by the energy and progressive spirit of the members.
MINUTES OF THE LODGE December ye 8th, 1726.
In a meeting of this Lodge this day at Mr. Herbert Phaires, it was unanimously agreed that Mr Thos. Holld., a poor Brother, be every Lodge night a constant attend' of this Lodge and that every night he so attends a brittish crown be allow'd him for ye relief of his distress'd Family.
Mastr., Springett Penn.
Wardens, The above named Thomas Holland missbehaveing himself at Thomas Gordon. the Grand Lodge held on S' John's Day, the 27~' Of Thomas Riggs. Decembr 1726, Order'd the above order continue no longer in force.
D. G. Master, Springett Penn.
IRELAND JEWELS OF THE GRAND OFFICERS OF THE GRAND LODGE THE jewels of the Grand Officers are as follows The Grand Master, the square and compasses, the latter extended to 45░, with a segment of a circle at the points. In the centre a jewelled sun (No. i).
Past Grand Master, the same, without the sun in centre (No. 3) The Deputy Grand Master, the compasses extended to 45░, with the segment of a circle at the points, a sun in the centre (No. 2).
Past Deputy Grand Masters, a square and compasses only (No. q.). The Senior Grand Warden, the level (No. 5).
The Junior Grand Warden, the plumb (No. 6). The Grand Treasurer, chased keys (No. 7). Grand Secretary, cross pens (No. 8).
Grand Chaplain, a book, of silver, within a radiant triangle of gold, or metal gilded (No. g).
Grand Deacons, a dove and olive branch, two wands crossed saltirewise (No. io). Grand Organist, an ancient Irish harp (No. i i).
Deputy Grand Secretary, a chased key and pen (No. r2).
Assistant to the Deputy Grand Secretary, a wreath of palm leaves, with an open book, of silver, on which are two crossed pens (No. r3).
Grand Pursuivant, two swords crossed (No. r4). Grand Tyler, a sword (No. r5).
The members of the Board of General Purposes are entitled to wear, during their continuance in office, a badge consisting of a blue enamelled plate, on which rests an open book (in silver) inscribed AHIMAN REZON and, on this book, the square, compasses and letter G in gold. Around the plate is a wreath of palm branches, with an all‑seeing eye at the top, and a shamrock at the bottom, with a ribbon inscribed BOARD OF GENERAL PURPOSES (No. r6).
Provincial Grand Officers wear the same jewels as Grand Officers, but enclosed within a broad circle gilded, on which is inscribed the name of the Province.
The jewels of all Grand Officers, Past Grand Officers and Provincial Grand Officers are to be of gold, or metal gilded (except those parts described to be of silver), to be suspended from a star of brilliants, with an emerald Shamrock for a centre. All Past Grand Officers of and under the rank of Grand Warden and all Past Provincial Grand Officers, shall wear the jewels of their respective offices on a light‑blue enamelled medal. The medal of a Past Provincial Grand Officer is to be surrounded with a circle bearing the name of the province.
The jewels of all Actual Grand Officers and Provincial Grand Officers are to be worn suspended from the official collars. The jewels of all Past Grand Officers are to be worn suspended from collars similar to those worn by the Grand Wardens.
The medals of Past Grand Officers and Provincial Grand Officers are to be worn from plain sky‑blue ribbons.
The gauntlets of Grand Officers and of Provincial Grand Officers are to be of the same pattern as the collars of the Grand Wardens. The use of gauntlets, though permitted, is, not to be considered imperative.
IRELAND 273 At a monthly meeting of ye worshipful Society of Freemasons at the House of Mr Herbert Phaire, Thursday ye 2d of Febr. 1726 [1726‑7], Mr. Herbert Phaire was appointed to act w' Mr Wm Lane as Warden of this Lodge and Mr Septemius Peacock and Mr Adam Newman to act as Deacons in ye sd Lodge.
Springett Penn, D.G.M.
Novembr 201h, 1727 By an ordr in writing from the Honb'e James O'Bryan, Esq., our present Grand Mastr, to us, directed for the convening a Lodge to choose Mastr and Wardens for the Worshipf" Lodge of Freemasons in Corke, wee having accordingly conven'd a sufficient Lodge at the House of Brother Herbert Pair on this day, proceeded to the election and then and there Wm Lane, Esq., was duly chosn Mastr of sd Lodge and the Honb'░ Sr John Dickson Hamman, Knt. Barnt. and Mr Thos Wallis were duly chosn Wardens.
Thos. Gordon. Franc. Cook.
At the sametime Mr James Crooke, Junr., was chosen Treasury and Secretary to said Lodge.
W. Lane, Master, Jas. Dickson Hama n, Wardens. Thos. Wallis, The following is signed by thirty‑three Brethren We who have hereunto subscribed do resolve & oblige ourselves as Masons to meet on the first Monday of every month at the House of Bror Phaire (or such convenient place as shall be appointed) for the holding of a Lodge in a Brotherly or Friendly manner. Each member of the Lodge being absent to pay thirteen pence. Dated 22nd August 1728.
December the second, 1728.
The yeare of the Master & Wardens being expired the twentieth of last month, it was this day agreed to in a proper Lodge of the Worshipfull ffraternity of ffreemasons in the City of Corke assembled at the house of Brother Herbert Phaire, that ffrancis Healy, of the said City, Merchant, be elected to serve as Master and James Crooke, Junr. and Joseph Collins, Merchants, be Wardens of the said ffraternity for the ensuing yeare, in the Room and place of the late Master and Wardens, which was consented & agreed to Nemine Contradicente.
Fras Healy, Mastr. Wm Lane, late Mr.
J░ Collins, Wardens. Thos Wallis, G.W.
James Crooke, Junr., John Flower.
Passing over the Minutes of March 13, 1728 and January 1729, the following are the next in order 2‑74 IRELAND Cork, Monday the is' Day of March I73i.
At a Lodge held by adjournment this day for the election of Master and Wardens for the Lodge of Cork, by unanimous Consent Wm Gallway, Esq., was chosen Master, Mr Abraham Dickson and Mr Septs. Peacock, Wardens, for the year ensuing. Wm Galwey, Mastr. Thos Wallis, late Mr. Abram Dickson, ~Wardens. Thos Riggs, D.G.M. John Gamble, G.W.
Cork, i 2th Augt. 173 i.
Att a Lodge held at Bro. Phairs, Wm Newenham, Esq., appeared & acted as Mastr, ye Mastr being absent and only one Warden, at which time Thomas Evans, Rowland Bateman, William Armstrong and George Bateman, Esgrs., were admitted Enter'd Prentices.
(This Minute is not signed.) The only other Minute preserved, which begins on the reverse of the leaf containing the first part of the Regulations of 17z8 and concludes on the next page after the Grand Lodge record of June 24, 17z8‑is to the following effect Cork, June the zi, I749, At a Lodge held at Brother Hignett Keelings on the day above written, the Master and Wardens being present, Mr Will‑ Bridges was Recd Enter prentice and did then and there perform the Requisite Due.
Frans Cooke, Mastr. Herbert Phaire, l Higt Keeling,) Wardens. Thos Rely.
St George Van Lawen. John Hart, M.D.
In the Minute‑books of the Corporation of Cork under December 2, 1725, it is recorded‑" that a Charter be issued out for the Master, Wardens and Society of Freemasons, according to their petition." The next entry of a similar character occurs under January 31, 1726‑" The Charter of Freemasons being this day read in Council, it is ordered that the further consideration of said Charter be referred to next Council and that Alderman Phillips, Mr. Crover, Foulks Austin and Commissioner Spealeer do inspect same." Beyond these two entries, however, no allusions to the Craft are to be found in the Corporation Records.
Although not capable of demonstration, it may reasonably be inferred that the Charter referred to was applied for by the Grand Lodge of Munster, in order that its authority might be strengthened as the Governing Masonic body of that Province, in which, at the time, there were many private Lodges.
In those days Warrants or Charters were unknown and were first issued by the Grand Lodge of Ireland about 1731, in order to ensure the allegiance of Lodges, F. III‑9 IRELAND 2‑75 which were invited by advertisement to make application for such Warrants and for enrolment on the Grand Lodge register. This advertisement, which appeared in Faulkner's Dublin Journal of December 14, 1731, was as follows Whereas there are several Lodges of FREE MASONS congregated in several Cities and Towns within this Kingdom, without a Warrant under the Hand and Seal of the Right Honourable the Lord Kingston, or the Right Honourable the Lord Nettervill, Deputy Grand Master, or the Grand Wardens. It is therefore order'd, that all such Lodges do immediately write to the Secretary, Mr. THOMAS GRIFFITH, in DUBLIN and take out true and perfect Warrant and pay the Fees for the same, or they will not be deemb'd true Lodges, Sign'd by Order, THO. GRIFFITH, Secretary.
It is clear from the wording of this advertisement that the practice of issuing Warrants was already in vogue, but no such documents appear ever to have been issued by the Grand Lodge of Munster, though many of the Munster Lodges hastened to secure these symbols of authority from the Grand Lodge of Ireland immediately the notification appeared. That the response was not wholly unanimous is proved by the following announcement which appeared in Faulkner's Dublin Journal of July 1, 1740 Such Lodges as have not already taken out Warrants, are ordered to apply for them to John Baldwin, Esq., Secretary to the Grand Lodge, or they will be proceeded against as Rebel Masons.
Lepper and Crossle (op. cit., p. 223) state that by the end of 1789 the total number of 707 Warrants had been issued.
The first known Warrant granted to a Lodge was issued by the Grand Lodge of Ireland on November 7, 173 2, to a Lodge formed in connexion with the First Battalion Royal ; it was printed on parchment or vellum and ante‑dates by twenty three years the first known issue of a similar document by the Grand Lodge of England (see Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, vol. viii, pp. 193‑216, where the question is thoroughly discussed).
An explanation of the sudden disappearance of the Grand Lodge of Munster may possibly be found in the dual appointment, in 1731, the year in which the Munster body apparently ceased operations, of James King, fourth Lord Kingston, as Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, also of the Grand Lodge of Munster. There had only been one intervening supreme ruler of Munster between the Hon. James O'Brien (or O'Bryen, which was the correct spelling) and Lord Kingston, i.e. Colonel William Maynard, who reigned from June 24, 1730, to August 9, 1731. It may well be assumed that Lord Kingston played some part in the amalgamation or absorption, for there is evidence that he regarded his duties in a serious light. This was the first appearance of Lord Kingston's name 276 IRELAND in the annals of Irish Masonry. He had been initiated in London on June 8, 1 726 and a little over two years later was nominated for the Grand Mastership of England, in which position he was duly installed. After 173o he devoted his attention solely to Irish Masonry and occupied the Grand Master's chair again in 1735, 1745 and 1746. Spratt wrote of him in the Dedication to his Book of Constitutions 1751) It was he, My Lord, who laid the first foundation of a Collection, that was to be made for the support of our poor and indigent Brethren; and your Lordship, like another Sun, rose with beneficent Rays in his room and, according to your usual Humanity and well judg'd Benevolence, assisted in raising such a Superstructure, as will, in all human probability, afford not only a relief to them, but reflect honour on its Supporters and Incouragers.
Lepper and Crossle, however, contend that the credit for the organization of the first Irish Masonic Charitable Fund must be given to William, third Viscount Mountjoy, Grand Master of Ireland, 1738 and 1739.
During the brief history of the Grand Lodge of Munster there were, as already noted, but three Grand Masters, who were aided by four Deputy Grand Masters, Springett Penn, to whom reference has already been made, Robert Longfield, Thomas Riggs and Adam Newman. Robert Longfield was on intimate terms with Springett Penn and his son, Richard Longfield, was created Baron Longueville in 1795 and Viscount Longueville in i 8oo. Little is known of Thomas Riggs, but Adam Newman was an important citizen of Cork, becoming successively Alderman, Sheriff and Mayor, succeeding, in 1733, to the Newbury Estate in Cork and, later, to the Dromore Estate in the same county. James Crooke, the first Grand Secretary and Treasurer, was a member of a very ancient Cork family, whose sister married Alderman Francis Healy, Master of the ancient Cork Lodge, who signed the General Regulations for Munster. His successor in the secretarial office was Samuel Atkins, whom Lepper and Crossle think was probably a son of Alexander Atkins, a Quaker merchant in Cork, who, in 166o and 1683, was persecuted for his faith. This connexion of members of the Society of Friends with Freemasonry is of special interest, as, in England, members of that belief for many years held aloof from the Craft, because of their objection to pledge themselves by oath or obligation.
In the absence of the Grand Officers, the Master of the old Lodge at Corkdoubtless as representing the Senior Lodge‑seems invariably to have presided over the deliberations of the Grand Lodge. Colonel Maynard does not appear to have attended the Grand Lodge after his election as Grand Master, but the Brethren present on June 24,1730, elected the Deputy Grand Master, Grand Wardens and Secretary. Lord Kingston only attended on the day of his installation, August 9, 1731, hence the numerous postponements of the Grand Lodge after that date. The records come to an end, July 26, 173 3 and, in all probability, the Grand Lodge of the Province of Munster ceased to meet, owing to the Grand IRELAND 277 Master declining to preside any longer over its proceedings. It is quite possible that Lord Kingston regarded the existence of two Grand Lodges as undesirable and, though at the head of both, he may only have joined the Munster Society, in order to facilitate its absorption by the more highly favoured confederacy of Lodges at the capital. But, however this may be, the nobleman in question was elected to preside over the Munster Grand Lodge a year after he had been chosen to fill a similar position at Dublin and acted as Grand Master of both associations in 1731. Clearly, therefore, the two Grand Lodges, though rivals, must have been on terms of amity, notwithstanding the invasion of Munster territory by their common chief ‑who, during his dual government, granted a Dublin Warrant to a Lodge at Mitchelstown, in the county of Cork, only a few miles from the city of Cork.
The old Lodge at Cork, the " first Lodge of Ireland," now meets under a Dublin Charter, which, strange to say, is the identical document issued February 1, 1731, by the authority of Lord Kingston, for Mitchelstown. On the reverse of this Warrant are two endorsements. The first is of an uncertain character, This Wart. so long missing, thank God, is recovered and I found the same on record. This we derive under March Zd, 1744 [Or " 1742."‑The signature is illegible].
The second clearly indicates that at whatever date the Lodge at Cork procured the Warrant of 1731, the Provincial Grand Master for Munster (as representing the Grand Master at Dublin) did not officially sanction its removal from Mitchelstown until some forty‑five years after its original issue. It runs This is to certify that this Warrant, No. i, granted to be held in the Town of Mitchelstown and many years dormant, has been received [revived?] by the Grand Lodge of Ireland and is hereby transferred to be held in future in the City of Cork by the present Master and Wardens and their successors for ever. Given under my hand in Provincial Grand Lodge, in the City of Cork, this i5t day of August 1776 and of Masonry 5776.
ROBERT DAVIES, P.G.M., M[unster].
The only further documentary evidence which throws any light on the subject is so highly valued by the members of the Lodge, that it is kept framed in their Masonic Hall. It reads Tuesday, June 16th, 1761 and of Masonry 5761.
At a Grand Committee held at the House of Brother John Hodnett, at the Globe Tavern, in the City of Corke, under the sanction of Nos. 1, 27, 28, 67, 95, 167, 224, 267 and 347, the first matter debated was the validity of No. i, which was disputed by the Grand Secretary, John Calder, as appeared by his Letters and Notes addressed to no Master or Body ; after a most mature and deliberate scrutiny the Warrant No. i was declared valid and the Grand Committee was pleased to come to 278 IRELAND a Resolution to support it in its Dignity and Privileges in full Force and Execution in this City. The next matter debated [was] the validity of Warrant No. 95, formerly held in the City of Cashell, in the County of Tipperary and rescued from thence by order of the Right Worshipfull David FitzGerald, Esgr., Deputy Grand Master of Munster, for Mal Practices ; this matter appeared so glearingly oppressive and over bearing, that in a short time their Worships confirm'd the Warrant and Order'd the Execution [decision] to continue in full force by their authority. And it is resolv'd that the Transactions of this General Committee shou'd be inserted in every Lodge Book of this City.
This was signed " by order, Jn░ Roe, P.D.G.M." The signatures are also appended of the Masters and Wardens of the Lodges represented.
This proves that, though the year 1776 witnessed the official sanction of No. 1 Warrant at Cork, the Charter had been in the hands of the Lodge for many years previously‑probably from 1742‑and that the Grand Committee held in 1761 determined to support its claims to certain dignities and privileges as the first Lodge of Ireland.
It would be interesting to know something more of the old Lodge at Cork between 1749 and 1761, but there is unfortunately a gap in the Records between the latter year and 1769.
In the Pocket Companion, Dublin, 1735, is a list of the Warranted Lodges in the kingdoms of Ireland, Great Britain, etc. (Reprinted by Hughan, Mas. Mag., January 1877), those for Ireland numbering 37. Nos. one to six are allotted to Dublin; but in a list of 1744 (with Dr. Dassigny's work) of " the Regular Lodges in Dublin," 16 in all, Number one was then vacant and was doubtless filled later on by the first Lodge of Ireland at Cork.
The regularity of its Charter was demurred to in 1770 and the Minutes inform us that on May 28, 1771, " it was unanimously agreed that the Warrant shou'd be sent to Brother Hull (now in Dublin) to be established and it was delivered to Brother Wm. Cuthbert for that purpose " and, on November 7, 1771, it was " unanimously agreed, in consequence of a letter from our Bro. J. St J. Jefferies to send him up the Warrant of Lodge No. i to Dublin, in order to have it finally adjusted by the Grand Lodge." These Minutes, together with the record of August 1, 1776, clearly establish that the members of Lodge No. i were not regarded as the proper custodians of the Charter until 1776, though its transfer from Mitchelstown to Cork may never theless have been sanctioned many years before by the local authorities and, as already seen, " after a most mature and deliberate scrutiny, the Warrant No. 1 was declared valid " by a (Munster) Grand Committee in 1761.
Freemasonry under Lord Kingston appears to have attracted to its ranks some of the most important and reliable members of Society and to have attained to a position of stability. It is unfortunate that so little is known of the earlier history of the Grand Lodge and that the principal writer of that period, Edward Spratt, is notoriously inaccurate, notwithstanding the fact that he held the position of IRELAND 2.79 Grand Secretary from 1743 to 1756. For instance, he says that "many Freemasons " took part in the ceremony of levelling the " Foot‑stone " of the Parliament House in Dublin on February 3, 1728 [1728‑9] when Lord Carteret (the Lord‑Lieutenant) and other distinguished noblemen were present, and " the Masons drank To the King and the Craft." As Lepper and Crossle point out (op. cit., p. 73), the whole story is a fiction.
Lord Carteret was in London at the time‑in his absence the ceremony was performed in the presence of the Lords Justices. The only connexion of masons of any description with the ceremony was some money given to the workmen to celebrate the occasion. Pennell, who was preparing his Constitutions at the time the foundation‑stone was laid and who probably witnessed the event, described in his book, at page 37, exactly what happened. In 1738 Dr. James Anderson, on bringing out his second edition of the English Constitutions, got hold of Pennell's story and, being always ready to adorn a tale, proceeded to make it more picturesque and absolutely misleading. Spratt, who knew little about the history of his own Grand Lodge, copied Anderson blindly; and other writers since then have quoted both of them, in faith nothing doubting. It is coinage as bad as one of Wood's halfpence.
We may, however, accept Spratt's eulogium of Lord Kingston, since it is not at variance with historical fact. When, in 1745, Lord Allen, Grand Master, died somewhat suddenly, Lord Kingston was asked to accept the office for a second time and consented. The comment made by Spratt in his Constitutions (1751, p. 131) runs Then Masonry in Ireland might be said to be in a Twilight, for Want of its proper Lustre, till Application was made to the truly Noble and ever to be esteemed among Masons, the Lord Kingston. He, like an affectionate and tender Brother, always ready to espouse the Cause of Truth, Charity and Virtue, most humanely and readily condescended to illuminate the Cause he has often been a shining Ornament in.
Viscount Mountjoy, Grand Master, 1738 and 1739, was an outstanding character. He was a kinsman to the Hon. Elizabeth St. Leger (Aldworth), the " only Lady Freemason " and to the Hon. James O'Brien, the first Grand Master of Munster. He was created Earl of Blesinton in 1745 and, as such, ruled over the Atholl or Antient Grand Lodge of England from 1756 to 1759. In January 1740, in consequence of the distress caused by the war with Spain, he organized a house‑to‑house collection in Dublin to raise the money necessary to provide food and coal for the poor and, in this collection, he took an active personal part. Later on in the same year he sold oatmeal to those in need of it at a penny a pound. It was under his rule that the Irish Committee of Charity was formed.
A singular incident, resulting in a schism on a small scale, occurred in 1740. According to the account furnished by Spratt, Lord Mountjoy, Grand Master, directed his Deputy Grand Master, Cornelius Callaghan, to put a Grand Master into nomination as his successor and then withdrew from the meeting. The Deputy then proposed three Brethren for the office, viz. Lords Anglesea, Tullamore and Doneraile and, says Spratt, " the Grand Lodge unanimously elected the Right Honourable Lord Viscount Doneraile Grand Master of Masons in Ireland for the ensuing year." An advertisement to this effect also appeared in Pue's Occurrences for May 17 of the same year. It is clear, however, that the choice was by no means unanimous, for Faulkner's Dublin Journal of July 1, 1740, contained the two following advertisements Dublin, Tuesday, July ist, 1740. The Grand Lodge in ample Form, on the 24th June, 1740, with the Masters and Wardens of 29 Regular Lodges, at their ancient Hall in Smock Alley, the Right Hon. Arthur Mohun, Lord Viscount Doneraile, was installed Grand Master of all Free and Accepted Masons in Ireland, for the year ensuing, who appointed Cornelius Callaghan, Junior, Esq., his Deputy, Edward Martin and John Morris, Esqrs. Grand Wardens.
N.B. Such Lodges as have not already taken out Warrants, are ordered to apply for them to John Baldwin, Esq., Secretary to the Grand Lodge, or they will be proceeded against as Rebel Masons.
Signed by Order, JOHN BALDWIN, Secretary.
The second advertisement read as follows Dublin, Tuesday, July 1st, 1740. At a Grand Lodge of the Free and Accepted Masons in and about Dublin, held at the Rose Tavern in Castle Street, on Tuesday the 24th of June, the Right Hon. Richard Earl of Anglesey being nominated by the Right Hon. Lord Viscount Mountjoy, late Grand Master and duly elected in his Presence, was installed Grand Master of all Free and Accepted Masons of all the Kingdom of Ireland for the ensuing year in the Presence of three late Grand Masters, who appointed Michael Chamberlaine, Esq. Deputy Grand Master; and Keane Fitzgerald and Henry Cudmore, Esqs. his Grand Wardens.
N.B. All Free and Accepted Masons who are desirous of holding regular Lodges are ordered to apply to Mr. James Hewlet, Secretary, for proper Warrants, ,vho is directed not to take any Fee or Reward.
DUBLIN, June 24, 1740.
The schism was of short duration, for, in 1741, Lord Tullamore, the third candidate, also unsuccessful in the ballot, was installed as Grand Master, when Viscount Mountjoy was among the Past Grand Masters present and Cornelius Callaghan was continued in office as Deputy Grand Master. Keane Fitzgerald also was appointed junior Grand Warden in 1743.
The next item of importance occurred on January 3, 1749, when the Deputy Grand Master, John Putland, announced that the late Grand Master, Sir Marmaduke Wyvill, together with Lord Kingsborough, the Grand Master, the Deputy Grand Master and the Grand Wardens (Boyle Lennox and the Hon. Roderick MacKenzie), IRELAND 2811 along with many other distinguished Brethren, had " formed themselves into a regular Lodge to consult the Good of the Craft and, as far as in their Power lies, promote the welfare of the Fraternity in general." After a complimentary resolution it was at once ordered " That a Registry be opened in the Front of the Grand Register Book for the said Lodge and that the same shall henceforth be distinguished and known by the Denomination of the GRAND MASTER'S LODGE and that all or any of the members thereof, who does at any Time think proper to visit the Grand Lodge, shall take place of every other Lodge on the Registry or Roll Books of this Kingdom; and that each and every of them shall be as fully entitulled to all and every of the Privileges and Freedoms thereof, as any other member or members that this Grand Lodge is composed of." According to the Regulations of 118116, membership of the Grand Lodge was restricted‑in the case of Brethren of the Grand Master's Lodge‑to Master Masons. By the Laws, however, of 11839, 1185o and 11858, such membership was restricted to the Brethren of that Lodge who had been raised prior to June 9, 11837, whilst in the 11875 code the clause was omitted and the representation of the Lodge merely based on the same plan as those of the other Lodges. It continues, however, to enjoy precedence over the rest and is shown at the head of the list without a number. The Lodge is governed by the Grand Master or the Deputy Grand Master; and, in their absence, by the acting Master, who is annually elected by the members. Candidates for admission must be approved by the Grand (or Deputy Grand) Master; and the members " are permitted to wear aprons fringed and bound with gold, similar to those worn by the Grand Officers, but distinguished by the letters G.M.L. embroidered in gold thereon." The centenary of this highly favoured Lodge was celebrated on January 3, 11849, the circumstance being notified to the Grand Lodge of England on April z5 following, when Godfrey Brereton, Representative of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, presented to the Earl of Zetland, Grand Master, a medal struck in commemoration of that event, which the Duke of Leinster, Grand Master, " requested the Grand Lodge of England to accept as a testimony of respect and fraternal regard." In the Constitutions of 1185 8, the following official notice of the centenary celebration appeared.
1949, January 3.‑The celebration of the centenary of the Grand Master's Lodge, at which his Grace the Duke of Leinster, G.M., presided, attended by the Grand Officers, the representatives of the Grand Lodges of England and Scotland and the Grand Stewards' Lodge of England, etc., with a numerous assemblage of the Brethren. Commemorative medals were struck for the occasion and worn by the members of the Lodge and were also presented to the various Grand Lodges through their representatives.
The loss of the early records of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, though variously explained, has never been satisfactorily accounted for. One statement is, that the Minutes of date prior to June z4, 1178o, were placed in the hands of some person for transcription, whose charge for his labours proving excessive, payment was refused, whereupon both writings‑original and copy‑disappeared. According to another account, these records were abstracted by Alexander Seton‑a prominent figure in the schism which culminated in the formation of the Grand Lodge of Ulster. But, without going so far as to ascribe the theft to any particular individual, it is probable, on the whole, that the early Minutes of the Grand Lodge of Ireland passed out of the archives of that body and were destroyed during the pendency of the secession.
William Robert Fitzgerald, Marquess of Kildare, afterwards second Duke of Leinster, was Grand Master in 1770, 1771 and 1777. He was initiated into Freemasonry, passed and raised in Naples, when only eighteen years of age and his parchment certificate is now in the Library of the Grand Lodge of Ireland. He was only twenty‑one years of age when he was nominated for the Grand Mastership, but he proved to be an earnest Masonic worker, an efficient ruler and he never wavered in his interest in the Craft to the end of his life. In 1781 he was asked to become Grand Master of the Atholl Grand Lodge of England, but declined " as he was not likely to be in London for some time." He had the honour and distinction of being the first Knight of St. Patrick to be nominated when the Order was founded and he was installed on St. Patrick's Day, 1783. He died October zo, 1804 and his son, Augustus Frederick, third Duke of Leinster, was Grand Master of Ireland for sixty‑one years, from 1813 to 1874.
Randal William MacDonnell, afterwards Earl and Marquess of Antrim, was Grand Master in 1772, 1773 and, from 1778 to 1781 and of the Atholl Grand Lodge of England from 1783 to 1791. He was born in 1749 and succeeded his father as Earl of Antrim in 1775. He was created Marquess of Antrim in 1789.
Garret Wesley, or Wellesley, was Grand Master in 1776. He was initiated on August 31, 1775, in Lodge No. 494, at Trim, the Warrant for which was issued on May 7, 1772. When he became Grand Master he presented the Lodge at Trim with an apron of a very peculiar make, which was worn by all future Masters of the Lodge until 18 5 6, when it was lost. He was born on July 19, 173 5, graduated at Trinity College, Dublin, in 1754. For a time he entered Parliament, but he was chiefly renowned for his musical talents. Dublin gave him the Mus.Doc. degree (the only peer to receive that degree) and made him Professor of Music. It is asserted that his musical talents gained him the friendship of George III, who, in 176o, created him Viscount Wellesley and Earl of Mornington.
Garret's son, Richard, was also an initiate (August 4, 1781) and, in due course, Master of Lodge 494, Trim; he was elected Grand Master of Ireland in 1782, the year following his initiation, again from 1821 to 1828. He was the eldest of a remarkable group of six brothers and one sister, most of whom became famous in history. He was born at Dangan on June 20, 176o, sent first to Harrow, whence he was expelled in consequence of a rebellion in the school, in which he took part ; then travelled westward to Eton, where he remained until he proceeded to Christ Church, Oxford, where he matriculated December 24, 1778. He was before IRELAND 283 the public eye from 1781, when he succeeded to the Earldom of Mornington, until his death on September 26, 1842. Full details of his interesting career are set out in Pearce's Memoirs and Correspondence of Marquis Wellesley (he was created Marquess in 1799), one quotation from which may, perhaps, be given To him belongs the merit of having crushed the secret societies which convulsed Ireland and of having first grappled with that great Orange federation, which, bound together by secret oaths unknown to the laws, perpetuated religious feuds and the tests of rival races in Ireland ; excluded the mass of the population from the pale of the Constitution; deprived the King's Roman Catholic subjects of every right and privilege that makes life valuable to free men and rendered a real union between the two countries impossible. Originally organized for the purposes of self‑defence and maintaining the power of England in Ireland, the Orange Society considered themselves an English garrison in a foreign and hostile land, that was to be retained by the force of arms and ruled by military terror and coercion. It is unquestionably true that they were unwavering in their allegiance and that they preserved with heroic constancy a steady fidelity to the Crown and people of England, to whom they were attached by the ties of religion and blood; but, as the reward of their fealty, they considered that every office of trust and emolument rightly belonged to them and they jealously and religiously excluded the most upright and the most honourable citizens of the Roman Catholic persuasion from a participation of power. Exclusion was one of their systematic rules of action ; intolerance was avowedly a guiding principle.
Richard, Marquess of Wellesley, was, of course, brother to the Duke of Wellington and the question, so often asked, Was the Duke of Wellington a Freemason ? may be answered definitely in the affirmative. He was initiated in Lodge 494 at Trim on December 7, 1791, after he had attained the age of twenty‑one years and he signed the register as " A. Wesley," exactly as he signed the parliamentary register. He did not use the surname Wellesley until after he became of age, when his eldest brother, the Earl of Mornington, adopted that spelling of his name. The book cannot now be produced, as unfortunately it was lost, along with other Lodge furniture, in 1856, but his name appeared as a subscriber to a special fund organized by the Lodge on February i6, 1795. Dr. Chetwode Crawley, in his " Notes on Irish Freemasonry " in Ars Quatuor Coronatorum, vol. xv, has shown that the Duke continued as a subscribing member until his Indian campaign, when he seems to have severed his connexion with Freemasonry and with Trim. He is entered in the Treasurer's book as having paid his dues right to the end of 1795, most frequently in advance. He left Trim on foreign service in September 1795. Furnell, also, in his Recorded History of Irish Masonry, gives the date of his initiation as above and his book was published in July 1842, four years before the removal of the Lodge to Dublin, when the Minute Book was in existence. It is also known that, at the time of the removal of the Lodge to Dublin, Edward Carleton, who was then Secretary of the Lodge, applied to the Duke for permission to adopt the name of Wellington for it. The reply was not unsympathetic. The Duke said 2.84 IRELAND that he perfectly recollected being admitted to the lowest grade of Freemasonry in a Lodge which was fixed at Trim in the county of Meath, but had never since attended a Lodge. His consent to give the Lodge his name would be a ridiculous assumption of being attached to Freemasonry. He, therefore, hoped he might be excused if he declined to comply with the suggestion. Thirteen years later, on October 13, 1851, the Duke wrote to another correspondent F.M. the Duke of Wellington presents his compliments to Mr. Walsh. He has received his letter of the 7th ult. The Duke has no recollection of having been admitted a Freemason. He has no knowledge of that association.
There may, of course, have been a genuine lapsus memorise, although that theory seems almost though not altogether impossible, seeing that the Duke was then eighty‑two years of age and, apparently, in full possession of all his faculties. Or he may, which seems more probable, have had his own personal reasons for desiring to disclaim any connexion with the Masonic Order. Viscount Combermere, Provincial Grand Master for Cheshire, in a speech delivered after the death of the Duke (reported in the Freemason's Quarterly Magazine, December 1852) said that often when in Spain, where Freemasonry was prohibited, in conversation with the Duke, he regretted repeatedly how sorry he was that his military duties had prevented him taking the active part which his feelings had dictated, for it was his opinion that Masonry was a great and royal art, beneficial to the individual and to the community.
Under the rule of Robert Tilson Deane, first Lord Muskerry, Grand Master 1783 and 1784, there was, write Lepper and Crossle, op. cit., p. 217, much stricter discipline in the Craft and he took a very keen interest in the organization of the Lodges and the Provinces. He had a worthy successor in Arthur Hill, Viscount Kilwarlin, afterwards second Marquess of Downshire, who was Grand Master in 1785 and 1786. He was cousin to the Marquess of Kildare, Grand Master 1770, 1771 and 1777. Francis Charles Annesley, second Viscount Glerawley, was Grand Master in 1787 and 1788 and then, in 1789, came the installation of Richard, second Lord, afterwards first Earl of, Donoughmore, who held the office from 1789 to 1813, a period of twenty‑four years. He was received with acclamation and he entered upon his duties with zest. At that time the Grand Lodge met monthly and he presided at five out of the first six meetings held after his installation. Several notices appeared in Faulkner's Dublin journal, one of which read The amiable Lord Donoughmore is doing everything in his power to promote this ancient Society and make it truly respectable. From the neglect of a former Grand Master, the Society has suffered much and improper persons have been admitted into Lodges, but that cannot in future happen ; a little time will wear away the disagreeable prejudices this has occasioned‑for Phcenix like, a noble Society will hand down to latest posterity the revered Donoughmore as a model, not only for Grand Masters to Copy after, but for Nobility in General.
IRELAND 2‑85 Lord Donoughmore had by no means a reign free from turmoil. The beginning of his Grand Mastership synchronised with the outbreak of the French Revolution and an endeavour, not unsuccessful, was made by some members to use the Lodges for the purposes of political propaganda. The evil Was so great that Grand Lodge in January 1793, ordered that a circular letter should be drafted " and sent to the different Lodges in the Kingdom informing them that their interference in religious or political matters is contrary to the Constitutions of Masonry." At the same time, the following Manifesto, which is reproduced from Lepper and Crossle's work (p. 298), was drawn up Thursday, January 3, 1793. Grand Lodge in due Form. John Boardman, Esq. Grand Treasurer on the Throne.
The GRAND LODGE Of IRELAND as the Constituted Authority and Guardians of the CRAFT, deem it incumbent on them to remind the respective Lodges of this Kingdom, that it is utterly inconsistent with the Fundamental Principles‑the ANCIENT CHARGES‑arid the Uniform Practices of FREE MASONS, to permit any Discussions or Publications on Religious or Political Subjects among them‑because these, of all others, are known to arouse the worst Passions of Men and excite among the kindest Brethren the most rancorous and lasting Animosities.‑TRUE MASONRY prefers no Sect and acknowledges no Party.‑A MASON'S RELIGION is the faithful worship of GOD,‑his POLITICS a strict Obedience to the LAWS of the Country in which he resides,‑and a most cordial and unremitting Attachment to his Sovereign.
FREE MASONS have sufficient opportunities of expressing their Religious and Political Opinions in other Societies and in other Capacities and should not, under any pretence whatsoever, suffer such Topics to invade the sacred retirement of a LODGE, which is peculiarly inappropriated to improve Moral Duties,‑correct Human Frailties,‑and inculcate Social Happiness.
THE GRAND LODGE, therefore, in discharge of their Duty and actuated by the most anxious Solicitude for the Prosperity, Honour and Unanimity of the whole MASONIC BODY Of IRELAND, earnestly exhort and require all the LODGES of this Kingdom to refrain from Religious and Political Discussions and all Publications on such Subjects.
Signed by Order NICHOLAS LOFTUS, Grand Sec.
The greatest trouble of all which Lord Donoughmore had to face was what is known as the Seton Secession. Alexander Seton, a Barrister‑at‑law, was appointed Deputy Grand Secretary in i 8oi by the Grand Secretary, G. Darcy Irvine. He was a very energetic and a very unscrupulous man and there is ample evidence that he misappropriated the funds of Grand Lodge to a considerable extent during the time he held the office, from i 8oi to 1805. He had a stalwart opponent in the Grand Treasurer, John Boardman, also a Barrister‑at‑law, who held that office from 1791 to A14 and who had been opposed to the appointment of Seton. Quarrel suc‑ 286 IRELAND ceeded quarrel until i 8o6, when a rival Grand Lodge was formed, which lasted until i 8o8, so that there were two bodies, each claiming the right to issue Warrants and generally to discharge the functions of a Grand Jurisdiction. The situation was rendered the more grievous because of the serious illness of Lord Donough more. An appeal was made to the Atholl Grand Lodge of England which, on September 2, 1807, issued a General Manifesto in which it said For some Time past, a riotous and turbulent Faction has existed amongst the Fraternity in Ireland, but which more particularly manifested itself on the 5th of June, i 8o6, when a Number of Persons at that Time unknown to the Grand Lodge, though claiming to be Freemasons from the North of that Kingdom, did assemble and obtrude themselves into the Grand Lodge and there attempted, by force of Numbers alone, to pass certain Resolutions subversive of the true Principles and Usages of Masonry ; and the said Persons, after the Grand Lodge had been duly closed by the Deputy Grand Master and Grand Wardens, at a late Hour and after the Grand Officers and most of the Representatives of the Dublin Lodges had retired, did affect to reopen the Grand Lodge, to rescind several of its solemn and deliberate Acts, to remove from their Situations two of the most respectable and zealous Officers of the Grand Lodge and to substitute other Persons in their Places, contrary to the established Laws and Usages of the Craft.
And that Alexander Seton, late Deputy Grand Secretary, appears to have been at the Head of and acting, aiding and assisting in said illegal Faction; and, when called upon to deliver up the Muniments and Property in his Hands belonging to the Grand Lodge, refused to comply therewith: whereupon the Grand Lodge of Ireland, upon the 2d of April last, expelled the said Alexander Seton from all his Masonic Rights and Privileges.
In the same month‑on September 17, 1807‑a communication was sent to the Grand Master, Lord Donoughmore, from the Grand Lodge of Ireland urging his interposition, pointing out that the rival Grand Lodge was reviving cancelled Warrants and granting provisional ones, asserting that the Grand Master's signature was not necessary; that the pretended Grand Lodge had received over úboo in fees and accounted only for a trifle over one‑third. Lord Donoughmore called a meeting for April 7, 18o8, when, so far as outward appearances were concerned, peace was declared, though it proved ultimately to be an illusion, Seton refusing to give way in any particular.
A meeting of the Grand Lodge was held on May 5, 18o8, presided over by the Deputy Grand Master, the Hon. A. A. Hely‑Hutchinson, when Lord Donoughmore was re‑elected Grand Master, Lord Hutchinson and the Earl of Belmore Wardens. The factionists then came out in open revolt, seceded from Grand Lodge, formed the Grand East of Ulster and elected Colonel William Irvine as Grand Master. Without asking their consent, they also elected the Hon. John B. O'Neill and the Earl of Gosford as Grand Wardens. The Grand Lodges of England (Moderns) and Scotland both refused to accord recognition to this self‑ IRELAND 287 constituted jurisdiction and this notwithstanding the fact that the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Lodge of Ireland had not been in fraternal communication for more than sixty years. In 18og Lord Blayney, an English Freemason was elected Senior Grand Warden of the Grand East and accepted the office on the misrepresentation that the Grand East had been formed for the convenience of the Ulster Freemasons. When he found that such was not the case he withdrew, though he was re‑elected in 18i o and I 81 z, despite his protests. In i 81 o, Sir G. F. Hill, Bart., was elected junior Grand Warden without his consent, whereupon he wrote declaring that he had never given any authority for the use of his name in that connexion. An unsuccessful attempt was made to found an Orphan School and money was actually collected for that purpose. After various exposures, the Grand East of Ulster had ceased to exist in 1813 and Alexander Seton was seen no more. The full story of the secession was told by Francis C. Crossle in the Christmas number of The Freemason for 1892, under the title of " The Grand East of Ulster " and the paper has since been reproduced in pamphlet form by the Lodge of Research, No. zoo, Dublin. The end of the secession left Lord Donoughmore free to carry out his expressed wish of some years previously, and retire from the Grand Mastership. He was asked to reconsider his decision, but refused.
Reference has already been made to the first (Irish) Book of Constitutions, published by John Pennell in 173o. This was little more than Anderson's publication (1723) brought down to date, the new matter being about counterbalanced by the omission of some of the old; for instance, the introductory portion, the Old Charges, even the Regulations are much curtailed.
The next edition of the Constitutions seems to have appeared in 1744 and was published with Dr. Dassigny's Impartial Enquiry of the same year (Hughan's Masonic Memorials, 1874, p. 6), the title being " The General Regulations of the Free and Accepted Masons in the Kingdom of Ireland, Pursuant to the English Constitutions, approved of and agreed upon by the Grand Lodge in Dublin, on the 24th June 1741, Tullamore, Grand Master." The volume was dedicated to Lord Allen, the Grand Master, by Grand Secretary Spratt. Some 4oo names are included in the list of subscribers and, among them, we meet with those of the Hon. Eliz. Aldworth (the Lady Freemason) and Laurence McDermott, the latter being, in all probability, intended for that of the famous journeyman painter, then a member of No. z6, Dublin, who refers to the work in his Ahiman Re!Zon of 1756.
Spratt's Book of Constitutions (1751) presents, in parallel columns, the English Laws of 1738 and those agreed to in 1739 during " the second year of the Grand Mastership of the Lord Viscount Mountjoy." The" Regulations of the Committee of Charity," which follow, were approved of in 1738. The work contains a short history of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, which is brought down to the year 1750. The list of about zoo subscribers contains the names of several Officers of the Grand Lodge and of Brethren at Cork‑among the latter, that of David Fitzgerald, having the letters " P.D.G.M.M." (Provincial Deputy Grand Master Munster) appended.
288 IRELAND The compiler refers to the period covered by the years 1747‑9 in the following terms It may justly be said, that within these three last years Freemasonry has arrived to the highest Perfection it ever was in Ireland, as is observed by many old Brothers, who had neglected the Lodges and lain rusty some years past, now re‑entering among their harmonious Brethren and joining in Concord to strengthen their Cement.
Another revision of the Book of Constitutions took place in 1768 and was approved by the Grand Lodge on November 3 of that year. This Code remained in force, or, at least, was continually reprinted, down to the year 1807, when the second edition of the .Ahiman ReZon, by Charles Downes, P.M., 141, " Printer to the Grand Lodge," was issued, the first having been published in 1804, in which the " Rules, Orders, and Regulations " added between 1768 and 1803 were printed after the original XXIX clauses. From very early times the officers of Lodges were required to pass through instructions and give account. of their proficiency. Thus, in 1768, it was provided by Article (or Regulation) IX that " every Master and Warden, at his first entrance, shall stand such examination as the Grand Master, or the Right Worshipful in the chair, shall appoint; and, if found incapable of his office, shall not be received as a member of the Grand Lodge." For more than a century and a half the Grand Lodge of Ireland has enjoined the strictest caution in the admission of new members ; and the Constitutions lay down rules for preliminary inquiry into the character of candidates for initiation, which it is only to be regretted do not extend throughout all Masonic Jurisdictions. Every Lodge is required to have a seal, with the impression of a hand and trowel encompassed round with the name of the town or city where it is held. This rule has been in force from 1768.
The members of Army Lodges were relieved from the payment of annual contributions, except whilst on Dublin duty, in 1768 ; but on November 6, 1788, a registry fee of 1s. 1d. per member was imposed; the dues, however, payable by all Lodges were thoroughly revised on December 27, 1845.
In 1779 it was ordered " That any Brethren meeting on Sunday as a Lodge be excluded from the Grand Lodge," the prohibition being inserted even so late as the edition of 1875. In England, the practice of Sunday meetings of Lodges of Instruction was a very favourite one. It has not been countenanced for many years and, where it prevails, the name Club or School of Instruction is adopted instead of that of Lodge of Instruction.
The following regulation was passed in October 1789: " That no Masonic transaction be inserted in a newspaper by a Brother without permission from the Grand Lodge." This interdict, which remains in full force, has had a very prejudicial effect by instilling the idea that secrecy, even in routine matters, is enjoined by the Grand Lodge and, as a natural result, the materials from IRELAND PRIVATE LODGE JEWELS AND CLOTHING THE aprons of the Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft are similar to those of England. That of a Master Mason has sky‑blue lining and sky‑blue edging one inch and a half deep ; the fall is triangular, with a rosette on the centre and two other rosettes are on the bottom of the apron. The tassels are of silver. No other colour or ornament shall be allowed, except the number of the Lodge, which may be embroidered thereon. It is also allowed to wear a stripe of silver, not above half an inch wide, upon the blue edging, but this is not compulsory (No. r). In most Irish Lodges, however, on ordinary meeting nights, aprons of linen (often home made) are worn similar to No. 2 ; and so much so is this customary that, according to J. W. Goddard, " a strange Brother visiting a Lodge there would certainly have the impression that linen was the only material in use under the Grand Lodge of Ireland." The apron of a Past Master is the same as that of a Master Mason, save that he may, if he pleases, have the square and compasses and G embroidered in silver thereon (No. 3).
The members of the Grand Master's Lodge wear aprons similar to those of the Grand Officers of and under the rank of Grand Warden, with the letters G.M.L. in gold embroidery on the fall.
The collars of officers of subordinate Lodges are to be of sky‑blue watered ribbon, about four inches in depth. They may be edged with silver lace not more than half an inch wide, and may have the number of the Lodge embroidered in silver on the front (No. q.).
Masters of Lodges wear as their jewel the square (No. 5).
Past Masters wear the square and compasses and, if the wearer pleases, the letter G and the number of the Lodge, or either, may be inserted between the legs of the compasses (No. 6). The Past Master's jewel is to be worn from a sky‑blue ribbon around the neck.
The Senior Warden's jewel is the level. The Junior Warden's jewel is the plumb. The Treasurer's jewel is the cross keys. The Secretary's jewel is the cross pens. The Deacon's jewel is the dove and olive branch, with two wands crossed saltirewise. The Chaplain's jewel is a book on a radiant triangle.
The Inner Guard's jewel is two swords crossed. The Tyler's jewel is a sword.
The Organist's jewel is an Irish harp.
These are all of similar pattern to the jewels of the Grand Officers, but must be of silver, except in the case of those of the Grand Master's Lodge, which are to be of gold, or metal gilded.
Nos. 7 and 8 are jewels which may be worn by Master Masons or by Past Masters respectively.
IRELAND 289 which a really comprehensive history of Irish Freemasonry might be written do not exist.
The Numerical List of Lodges on the Register of the kingdom of Ireland for 1885, shows the Grand Master's Lodge at the head of the Roll without a number, after which follow 387 Lodges, with numbers ranging from one to 1014. Of the 345 Lodges to No. 645 of 1785, only forty‑seven are dated the years when the Warrants were originally granted. No. 3 Cork, No. 4 Dublin and No. 7 Belfast, are now dated i 8o8, 1825 and 1875 respectively, though the Lodges which were originally constituted with those numbers must have been chartered in 1731‑2. These are but a few instances of the many curious numerical anomalies of the Register of Lodges under the Grand Lodge of Ireland and suffice to prove that the numbers which distinguish such Lodges at the present time frequently afford no real indication of their antiquity. There are, however, several Lodges on the Roll which date from 173 2 to 178 5, but how many of these can prove continuous working for a century, or for three Jubilees, or two centuries, as several have done in England, it would be difficult to determine.
Centenary Warrants‑as they are termed in England‑are not granted by the Grand Lodge of Ireland, therefore the Irish records are not searched with the same pertinacity as in England, where an emulation exists among the members of old Lodges to prove an uninterrupted Lodge‑existence of a century. Neither are there many histories published of particular Lodges, as in England, Scotland, Australia and America, so that not only the Irish Craft, but also the Brethren of other jurisdictions, have, except in a few solitary instances, to put up with the entire absence of those details of Masonic life and activity which would throw a strong light on the Freemasonry off the Sister Kingdom.
The first Lodge of Ireland, 1731, at Cork (with twelve others), enumerated by Milliken, was in existence in 1769, which year begins " the regular record," according to his authority, " after the lapse of forty years," but the " lapse " was not to such an extent as Milliken imagined. The Minutes of the Grand Master's Lodge from 1769 are worth reproduction and should be published. On December 5, 1770, according to these records, " Richard, Earl of Barrymore, was admitted Entred Apprentice and Fellow Craft and was afterwards raised to the sublime Degree of Master Mason." It will be recollected that the fourth Duke of Atholl was hurried through the Degrees in the same manner in 1775 and the cases of the two noblemen differ only in one particular, the Earl not being elected Master of the Lodge until the following evening, whilst the Duke was placed in that office the same night! Sir Robert Tilson Deane, Bart. and Governor Jeffreys were the Wardens.
In August 1773, in order to encourage the Irish manufactures, each member of No. 1 agreed " to provide a uniform of Irish Cloth, the colour garter blue, with crimson waistcoat and breeches " (Historico‑Masonic Tracts, p. I17). Neilson (The Freemason, October 1, 1881) mentions another Lodge, the members of which " wore the regimental uniform for nearly sixty‑one years." This, the first Volunteer Lodge of Ireland, No. 62o, was constituted on September 13, 1783. The 290 IRELAND members were fined if present at any of its meetings without being clothed according to the By‑Laws ; the prescribed uniform being worn until January io, 1844, when it was resolved that " the dress be black trousers and coat, satin faced and velvet collar, with white vest." The late Rev. J. J. MacSorley (Grand Chaplain of Ireland for more than a quarter of a century) states that the " satin facings " were of the same colour as the uniform.
Of the other twelve Warrants for Cork in 1769, as recorded by Milliken, nearly all have been reissued to other Lodges and bear later dates. Of these, No. 25 is now at Dublin and is dated 18 5 3 ; No. 28 is at Antrim and dates from 1825 ; No. 67 is at Bantry (1884) ; No. 167 at Athy (1840) ; whilst No. 224 went all the way to Bermuda in 1867 ; No. 295 is still held in the 4th Dragoon Guards, as it has been from 175 8‑so it was, in all probability, for a time in Cork during 1769and occurs in like manner in the lists of 1804 and 1813. In the latter Register, no fewer than 122 military Lodges are enumerated ; and, on the Roll of 1822, there were 42, whereas there were only 9 in 1885. No. 347 went to Tasmania in 1872, but is now in County Down. No. 95 is still at Cork, but dating from 1771, it must have been reissued since 1769. The only other Lodge to be accounted for is No. 27, which is now held at Dublin and is declared to date from 173 3. A sketch of this Lodge has been given by Hughan in the Masonic Magazine (April 1878), where its chequered career can be studied by the curious reader. The Shamrock Lodge, originally chartered about 173 3, was granted a singular privilege. Its members were allowed to wear aprons with green flaps and a golden shamrock embroidered thereon. As No. 27 Cork, it is inserted in the Register of 1804 and the name occurs on the Hon. Mrs. Aldworth's Masonic jewel, which was given by the then owner to a P.M. of that Lodge, May i, 18 16 ; its Warrant being exchanged by the members of No. 167, Castle Townshend, about 1840. Shortly afterwards it languished and, in 1876, was transferred to Dublin, the present title of the Lodge being the Abercorn. The Shamrock Lodge at one time kept a pack of hounds, called the Masonic Harriers and, after enjoying the pleasures of the chase, the Charter song was often called for, when the members sang in chorus the beautiful words of the Irish poet o O, the Shamrock 1 the green immortal Shamrock 1 Chosen leaf Of Bard and Chief, Old Erin's native Shamrock.
The old Lodge, No. 13, held at Limerick from the year 1732, is still on the Roll, the testimony of Milliken being, that it has, " although Lodges, like all human institutions, are prone to change, preserved its respectability from its first formation." The same writer relates a pleasing story in illustration of the good feeling of its members. In 1812 two small vessels were captured by Captain Marincourt of La Furel. One of these hailed from Youghal. The two Captains were Freemasons and the captor, who was also a Brother, allowed them their liberty on their pledge F. III‑Io IRELAND 291 to do their utmost to obtain the release of Brother Joseph Gautier, then a prisoner of war in England, or failing in their endeavours, " they bound themselves to proceed to France within a given time and surrender." Captain Marincourt and his ship were captured shortly afterwards by the British frigate La Modeste and, in consequence of his Masonic conduct, the French commander was unconditionally released. The Lodge, No. 13 Limerick, together with Nos. 271 and 952 oú the same town, by way of marking their esteem for his character, sent him a vase, of the value of one hundred pounds, but which he did not live long enough to receive. E The handsome gift was in consequence returned to the donors, " where it remains an ornament in Lodge No. 13 and a memorial of the sublime friendship existing between Freemasons " (Historico‑Masonic Tracts, p. i 19).
The Jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Ireland was invaded by Mother Kilr winning in 1779, whose Grand Master, the Earl of Eglinton, granted a Warrant in that year to " the High Knights' Templars of Ireland, Kilwinning Lodge," Dublin. The members of this Scottish Lodge fully considered that they were justified in working the Knight Templar Degree by virtue of their Charter and actually did so as early as December 27, 1779. Other Degrees were also wrought by the same body, such as the Royal Arch in 1781 and the Prince Rose Croix in 1782, whilst the Chair, the Excellent and the Super Excellent Degrees came in for a share of their attention. From this Lodge arose the Early Grand Encampment of Ireland, which chartered over fifty Encampments‑some having been for Scotland and England‑whilst the present Kilwinning Preceptory, Dublin, is an offshoot of the year 178o. When the rights of this Knight Templar Organization were disputed or questioned, their Sublime Commander (John Fowler) maintained that their Warrant was " holden from the Royal Mother Lodge of Kilwinning of Scotland, the true source from which any legal authority could be obtained " and it was declared that " the documents to support this statement are in the archives of the Chapter, ready for the inspection of such Knights Templar as choose to examine them." The Charter, however, simply authorized the formation of a Lodge, Mother Kilwinning never having worked any other than the three Degrees and those only since the third decade of the eighteenth century (see History of Mother Kilwinning Lodge, by Robert Wylie, 1882, pp. 370, 371).
The erection of this daughter Lodge encouraged, however, the belief in Kilwinning, being a centre of the Higher Degrees. In 1813 application was made to the Mother Lodge to authorize the transfer of a Black Warrant from Knights of the Temple and of Malta, in the Westmeath Militia, to Brethren in the same Degree serving in the Shropshire Militia. Lyon in History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 287, says It was to their intercourse with Brethren belon'zing to regiments serving in Ireland towards the end of the last century, that Scotch Lodges owed their ac:; quaintance with Knight Templarism. This order, then known as Black Masonry, was propagated, to a large extent, through Charters issued by the High Knights 292 IRELAND Templar of Ireland, Kilwinning Lodge‑a body of Freemasons in Dublin, who were constituted by Mother Kilwinning in 1779, for the practice of the Craft Degrees." But the Lodge of Kilwinning, in reply to the Sir Knights of the Shropshire Militia, repudiated the existence of any maternal tie between herself and any Society of Masonic Knighthood and confessed her inability to " communicate upon Mason business farther than the Three Steps " (see Freemasons' Magazine, February 18, 1865, P. 114).
Another old Lodge requires a passing notice. On St. John's Day (in harvest) i 8oo, the members of No. 6o, Ennis, attended the Roman Catholic chapel there and heard a sermon by the Rev. Dr. M'Donagh (Parish Priest), who subsequently dined with the Brethren. This Lodge was warranted in 1736 and is still on the roll, with the same number and place of meeting.
We learn from a non‑official source that in the year 1797 Freemasonry in Ireland flourished so greatly under its accomplished Grand Master, the Earl of Donoughmore, that scarcely a village was without its Masonic meeting. The numbers of Masons, therefore, in the sister isle, manifested an enthusiasm which greatly exceeded its popularity in England. About 5o Lodges met in Dublin alone and, in the city of Armagh, 34 Lodges of that single county assembled in general committee to vote resolutions expressive of their loyalty, with declaration to support the King and Constitution. In 1834 scarcely eight Lodges met in Dublin (see Freemasons' jQuarterly Revien,, 1834, p. 318).
There was a great deal of Masonic enthusiasm in Ireland during the closing years of the eighteenth century. This is placed beyond doubt by the large number of Lodges on the Roll at that period but, nevertheless, the supply was plainly in excess of the legitimate demand, for many of them ceased to meet within a very short period of their constitution. In a list for 1804 (printed by C. Downes) the numbers range from i to 951, but of these 178 were vacant, consequently there were only 773 Lodges in actual existence. A still larger proportion of extinct Lodges is disclosed by the printed report of June 24, 18 16. At that date only 607 Lodges had paid their dues, iio were in arrears not exceeding five years, 68 beyond that period. There were 25 military Lodges of which no account had been received " for many years " and 21 o were dormant or cancelled ! In other words 607 had obeyed the laws, 413 had not, with respect to the annual and other payments to the Grand Lodge, there being 81o on the Roll and 2io erased from the Register (see W. J. Hughan in The Freemason, August 18, 1877).
In order to dispose of the 2io numbers then vacant, together with such others as were in arrear of dues and cancelled, it was ordered " that on and after June 24, 1817, the vacant numbers shall be granted to existing Lodges, according to seniority." The petitioning bodies were to be qualified properly and recommended and a fee IRELAND 2‑93 of one guinea was sanctioned " to meet the expense of revival and exchange " of each Warrant.
" Perfect uniformity of Warrants " was also aimed at and Lodges undesirous of changing the numbers they then bore, were recommended to " take a duplicate of same off the improved plate," with a distinct pledge that the original date should be preserved and inserted.
On the completion of these changes it was designed that all new Warrants granted by the Grand Lodge should be ordered for the highest senior number then vacant on the List, so that the numerical order should not be increased till all the vacant numbers were disposed of.
On October 4, 18io, the Grand Lodge of Ireland passed a law: " That in all Masonic processions the precedence should be according to the number of the Warrant." From 1817 to the present time the " numerical order " has not been increased, the numbers distinguishing the Lodges in 1885 not having overlapped the list of June z4, 18 16. On the contrary, out of the 1,o2 o numbers then existing, many are at the present moment available for allotment! It has been observed by Neilson that " The custom in Ireland as to Lodges being known, is different from England and Scotland, as in Ireland every Lodge is known only by its number, the name being a secondary matter, consequently Lodge numbers have never been changed from the time of their first being granted." It would, however, be difficult to substantiate this statement, at all events with regard to the usage prevailing between the years 1816‑zo, for it is evident that some Lodges then took higher numbers, consequently violent numerical changes must have been made, of which no account has been officially notified from that period to this, the special regulations mentioned only affecting old Lodges, the new Warrants being provided for in the revised Laws. Under the original Grand Lodge of England, however, also in Scotland, changes of numbers have been dulychronicled, so that each Lodge can be traced through all its numerical vicissitudes and, if distinguished by a high number, though of late origin, the discrepancy is capable of explanation. In 1814 there were 647 Lodges on the Roll of England and about 32z‑of which 42 were dormant or erased‑on that of Scotland. Therefore, in the year named (1814) the total number of Lodges nominally at work under the three Masonic jurisdictions of these islands was as follows: In England, 647 ; in Scotland, z8o; in Ireland, 8io. Many of these were, of course, held out of the countries within whose jurisdictions they were comprised. According to the Irish Roll, for example, two Lodges met in England‑at Norwich and the Middle Temple, London, respectively‑a third in " Beeziers (sic), France " ; a fourth at New York; a fifth at Baltimore; besides some others which assembled in parts of the world‑the colonies and dependencies of the British Crown‑where their presence does not call for any remark.
In 1813 the Grand Lodge of Ireland was in great straits for money and the Military Lodges which had been exempt from payment of dues to Grand Lodge 2‑94 IRELAND relinquished voluntarily this exemption and agreed to pay the annual dues of ios. iod., while in Great Britain, Ireland or the British Isles and a law to this effect was passed by the Grand Lodge of Ireland on January 7, 18 13.
A very stringent law regarding funeral processions was passed on December 5, 18 11, when it was ordained that " No emblems shall be worn at any Masonic funeral except those of Blue [Craft] Masonry." Although Deacons as officers had existed in the Irish Lodges from " time immemorial," the first mention of them in Grand Lodge was on November 7, 18 11 and the appointment did not carry Grand Rank until many years later. The Minute runs The Committee of Inspection suggest the propriety of opening the Grand Lodge in the fullest form possible so as to impress every Brother with the proper idea of the dignity of a general representation of the Masonic Order in Ireland.
They therefore recommend that Grand Deacons be appointed every Grand Lodge Meeting, the Senr. Deacon to be appointed from the Senr. Wardens ; the Junr. Deacon from the Junr. Wardens, both Deacons to be called from the Junr. Lodge present.
The duty of the Senr. Deacon shall be to see that all the Brethren above the Senr. Grand Warden's chair are properly cloathed and that they sit in order according to the number of their Lodge and also to obey such orders as shall be given him by the Grand Master or his representative.
The duty of the Junr. Deacon shall be to see that all the Brethren below the Senr. Grand Warden's Chair are properly cloathed and sit in regular order and that the Gd. Pursuivant does not admit any Brother into the Gd. Lodge except the proper members thereof well known Past Masters or such Brethren as shall be passed by any of the Grand Officers or a Master of a Lodge and also to obey the orders of the Senr. Grand Warden.
The Deacons to collect the Charity of the night which will prevent the Grand Wardens' chairs being vacated during the sitting of the Grand Lodge. (See Lepper and Crossle's History of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, vol. i. p. 410.) The story of Irish Freemasonry since the World War is one of work in the face of opposition, acts of violence and denunciation by a hostile press. Persecution, however, has served to intensify the zeal of the Irish Freemasons. They have increased in numbers and their good works prove their loyalty.
The Masonic Female Orphan School, founded in 1792., and The Masonic Orphan Boys' School are the pride of Irish Freemasonry.
Reliable reviews state that in 192.2‑ there were 576 Lodges with about 40,000 members, while in 192.9 there were 608 Lodges and about 51,ooo members. The Grand Lodge of Ireland has a Provincial Grand Lodge in New Zealand, and other Lodges in South Africa, nine in India, one in China, two in Bermuda; others in Ceylon, Malta, Gibraltar and Australia. Also six Military Lodges. The headquarters of the Grand Lodge is located in Dublin. Dublin has 75 Lodges, and in Belfast there are 12.3.
CHAPTER VIII EARLY BRITISH FREEMASONRY SCOTLAND THE ordinary practice of Masonic writers, from Anderson to Oliver, having been to draw largely upon their imaginations, whilst professedly furnishing proofs of the antiquity of Freemasonry, has led many critical readers to suppose, that at best the existing society is simply a modern adaptation of defunct Masonic organizations and that the Craft, now so widely dispersed over the four quarters of the globe, dates only from the second decade of the last century.
The trite observation that " truth is stranger than fiction," finds an apt illustration in the early histories of the Fraternity for, however improbable, it is none the less a fact, that the Minutes of Scottish Lodges from the sixteenth century and evidences of British Masonic life dating farther back by some two hundred years, were actually left unheeded by the premier historiographer, although many of such authentic and invaluable documents lay ready to hand, only awaiting examination, amongst the muniments in the old Lodge chests.
Instead of a careful digest of these veritable records‑records, it may be stated, of unquestionable antiquity‑those anxious to learn anything of so curious a subject, had to wade through a compendium of sacred and profane history (of more than doubtful accuracy), entitled The History. and Constitutions of the most Ancient and Honourable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, collected from their old Records and faithful Traditions and then found very little to reward their search.
It will be seen that, by the collection and comparatively recent publication of many of the interesting records above alluded to, so much evidence has been ,accumulated respecting the early history, progress and character of the Craft, as to be almost embarrassing and the proposition may safely be advanced, that the Grand Lodges of Great Britain are the direct descendants, by continuity and absorption, of the ancient Freemasonry which immediately preceded their institution, which will be demonstrated without requiring the exercise of either dogmatism or credulity.
The oldest Lodges in Scotland possess registers of members and meetings, as well as particulars of their laws and customs, ranging backward nearly three hundred years. Many of these bodies were the founders of the Grand Lodge in 1736‑after the model of the Grand Lodge of England, 1717‑some, however, not participating in the first instance, were subsequently admitted, whilst others preferred isolation to union‑one of the last named existed as an independent Lodge till recently. It is therefore evident that a sketch of the salient features of zys 296 SCOTLAND these ancient documents, will form an important link in the chain which connects what is popularly known as the Lodges of Modern Freemasonry, with their operative and speculative ancestors.
Though not the first references to Masonry, or Freemasonry, in order of date, the St. Clair Charters deserve examination at the outset of the inquiry, because of the signatures attached to them. The original Charters are in the custody of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, presented by the late Professor W. E. Aytoun, who obtained them from Dr. David Laing, of the Signet Library (the purchaser of the late Alexander Deuchar's valuable MSS.). Lyon (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 5 8) states there can be no doubt of their genuineness, having compared several of the signatures in the originals with autographs in other MSS. of the period.
The Advocates Library at Edinburgh contains a small volume well known as the Hay MSS., in which are copies of these two charters, but Lyon, after a careful scrutiny, pronounces the transcripts to be faulty in character, which is probably due to the lack of exactitude in the transcriber. According to the Genealogie of the Saint Clares of Rosslyn (edited by James Maidment, Edinburgh, 1835) by Father Richard Augustin Hay, Prior of Pieremont, the junior of the Hay MSS. was subscribed at " Ed[inburgh] 1630," which entry does not occur in the original and, according to a communication from the editor to D. Murray Lyon (The Freemason, May 24, 1873), the date must have been an interpolation, the same year being assigned to the charter by Lawrie in his History of Freemasonry, 1804. They are written on scrolls of paper in a superior style, the one being 15 by 112 inches, and the other 26 inches in length, the width being the same as its companion. A few words are obliterated but are easily supplied, the only serious injury sustained, affecting the senior document, which is minus the south‑east corner. It has been suggested that the absent portion contained other signatures, which is quite possible. The dates have been approximately settled by Lyon, who supplied the interesting particulars respecting their character.
The first Charter could not have been written immediately after the Union of the crowns of England and Scotland (March 24, 1603), having been signed by William Schaw, master of work, who died in 16o2 ; its probable date is 16o1‑2, the names of the deacons of the Masons at Edinburgh affording some assistance in identifying this period. The second, long assigned to 1630, so dated in many of the transcripts, was evidently promulgated in 1628, according to the internal evidence which has been so well marshalled by Lyon (op. cit., viii, pp. 57‑66).
There are no insuperable difficulties besetting the comprehension of the quaint and obsolete phraseology of these singular documents, though modern renderings of similar records will usually be given, in the hope of averting the transient and perfunctory examination which ordinarily awaits all excerpts of this class. In all cases, however, it may be said that either the originals or certified copies have been consulted for such purposes and an intimation will always be given of the sources of authority upon which reliance is placed. No useful end SCOTLAND 2‑97 would be attained by a literal reproduction of all the curious Minutes to which there will be occasion to refer, but every care will be taken accurately to present their true meaning and intent.
It will readily be noticed that the two deeds are altogether silent as to the Grand Mastership of the Craft being hereditary in the St. Clairs of Roslin, yet that distinction has been claimed for this family. The author of what is commonly known as Lawrie's History of Freemasonry‑the late Sir David Brewster [ist ed., 1804; znd ed., 1859. Alexander Lawrie, wishing to publish a work on Freemasonry, asked Dr. Irving to undertake its compilation, on whose refusal he applied to Sir David (then Mr.) Brewster, by whom it was readily undertaken (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. S S ; Notes and.Queries, May 9, 1863)]‑observes " It deserves to be remarked that in both these deeds the appointment of William Sinclair, Earl of Orkney and Caithness, to the office of Grand Master by James II of Scotland, is spoken of as a fact well known and universally admitted " (1804 ed., p. 103). There is no corroboration of this assertion, which is simply untrue. Certainly the consent of the Friemen Maissones within the realm of Scotland is acknowledged, also that of the master of work, in favour of William St. Clair purchasing the position of patron and judge from " our sovereign lord," for himself and heirs ; and, as far as they could do so, the successors to these masons are pledged in like manner to support such an appointment. Yet the office of " master of work " was not superseded thereby and, whilst the first deed records a statement, that the " Lairds of Rosling " had previously exercised such a privilege for very many years, the Masonic body must have valued their patronage very slightly, to have required another deed to be executed in less than thirty years. The second being obtained from the hammermen‑blacksmiths and others‑as well as the masons and, though it is not mentioned in the text, the " squaremen " (according to M'Dowall, History of Dumfries, 1867, p. 741, this term comprehended masons, joiners, cabinetmakers, painters, and glaziers) were likewise a party to the agreement, these including the crafts of coopers, wrights (or carpenters) and slaters, who were represented on the charter by their deacons from Ayr The important declaration in the junior document, as to the destructive fire in Roslin Castle, by which some writings of extraordinary value to the Craft perished and were thus lost to the Freemasons, would surely have been announced in the deed executed at an earlier date by the Masonic body, had the conflagration been of the character represented. The misfortune is, that to refer the absence of confirmatory evidence to fire or other " visitation of Providence," is an old method of seeking to turn the edge of criticism and has been followed by Brethren in later times, when they have been pressed to account for the fact that the entire weight of evidence is opposed to the establishment of their own pet theories. Maidment has demonstrated the utter groundlessness of the claims put forward by the Lawries, that there ever was such an appointment made either by royal authority, or the vote of the Masonic Craft, to secure the office of hereditary Grand Master to the St. Clairs. These questions will still further be elucidated, when the formation 2‑98 SCOTLAND of what is acknowledged to be the premier Grand Lodge and the election of the first Grand Master, took place, about a century later, in London. Meanwhile it may be noted that there are no deeds known, which confer such a position as that claimed, on the Earl of Orkney in the fifteenth century (the representative of the elder branch of the St. Clairs), neither is there any record of that nobleman or his successors having conveyed such hereditary privileges to the younger branch of the family. The St. Clair Charters themselves give an emphatic denial to the absurd statement and, as Sir David Brewster in 1804, and the younger Lawrie in 1859 [W. A. Laurie, son of the publisher of the original work (i8o4) and author of the enlarged edition of 18 5 9. The altered spelling, adopted by the son, has conveyed an impression that the two editions are distinct works], cite the two deeds as confirming their assertions, which deeds, on an examination are found to contain no such clauses, the only wonder is, that such an improbable story as that of the hereditary Grand Mastership ever obtained such general credence.
The Lodges which were parties to Charter No. z met at Edinburgh, St. Andrews, Haddington, Atcheson‑Haven and Dunfermline respectively. The second deed bears the names of the representative Lodges at Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee, Stirling, Dunfermline, St. Andrews, also of the masons and other crafts at Ayr.
These several bodies united for the purpose of obtaining a patron for their craft; inasmuch as other districts in Scotland are not included, which there is every reason to believe contained Lodges at that period, such as Kilwinning and Aberdeen, it seems likely that the office of patron was more sought with the object of settling whatever local disputes might occur amongst the Freemasons in the exercise of their trade, than intended in any way to set aside the king's master of work, who supported the petition of the Lodges. If this were so, then it might fairly be expected that similar powers were obtained in other counties, which is just what we find did occur on September z5, 1590, on which day James VI granted to Patrick Coipland of Udaucht the office of " Wardene and justice " over the " airt and craft of masonrie " within the counties of Aberdeen, Banff and Kincardine, with the fullest liberty to act in such a capacity within the district named. The appointment was made in response to the vote in his favour, " by the maist pairt of the master masounes within the sheriffdomes," likewise because the nominee's " predecessoris hes bene ancient possessouris of the said office of Wardanrie over all the boundis." Lawrie accepts this appointment as " proving beyond dispute that the Kings nominated the office‑bearers of the order," but Lyon considers it " a strictly civil one, like that of the Barons to the wardenrie of the Crafts in 1427 " (op cit., p. 5). Supposing we take Lawrie at his word, what becomes of his " hereditary Grand Mastership " theory and how comes it to pass that different districts are thus allotted to wardens to act as judges of the Masonic Craft, if the Earl of Orkney and his heirs were empowered to act as Grand Masters of the Fraternity, from the reign and by the authority of James II ? Surely the master masons within the three counties named in the deed of 1590, who provisionally elected a warden to rule over them, would not have obtained the countenance and confirmation of James VI SCOTLAND 2‑99 had there been an office then existent of Grand Master of the Freemasons, whether hereditary or otherwise. As Hughan points out in his Early History of British Freemasonry (Voice of Masonry, Chicago, U.S.A., 1872‑3) (from which the terms of Coipland's appointment are quoted), the laws promulgated by William Schaw, Master of Work to King James VI, of December z8, 15 98, were in force in Aberdeen, Banff and Kincardine, just as in all other parts of Scotland ; this alone is sufficient to give a death‑blow to the illusions of the Lawrie school, in which, alas, there are believers even at this day.
As a matter of fact, it is not known that this warden [the office of warden over a large district in Scotland, herein noted of 15 coo, must not be confused with that of Wardens of a Lodge as provided for in Schaw Statutes of 1598‑9] and judge of 1590 was a mason. No actual minutes or documents record the admission of speculative members at so early a period, therefore it is not possible to do more than concede that he may have been " accepted " as a Brother and made " free " of the ancient Craft, out of compliment to his responsible position, in accordance with the motives which actuated the Fraternity in olden times, to secure the co‑operation and favour of those who exercised rule and authority over them.
These documents of the sixteenth and the following century, having retrospective as well as prospective clauses‑the former of which have been unduly magnified and distorted beyond all fair bounds of interpretation‑must be the excuse for placing them first in order, in a review of the MSS. of the Craft. Of still more importance and of especial value are the noted Statutes of 1598‑compiled in order that they might be sent to all the Lodges in Scotland, having received the unanimous sanction of the masters convened at Edinburgh‑and to which William Schaw, the master of work (by royal appointment) and general warden, had duly subscribed his name and enjoined their due observance by the Scottish Craft. Of scarcely less importance are the laws of the following year, signed by the same official, having particular reference to the old Lodges at Edinburgh and Kilwinning, the clauses of which are extraordinary in character, considering the period of their promulgation, while they afford an insight into the usages and customs of the Craft, superior to any other documents which have come down to us from remote times.
The older Masonic code bears the date of December z8, 1598, is written in a legible manner in the first volume of the records of the Lodge of Edinburgh and is duly attested by the autograph of Schaw as master of work. It consists of twenty‑two " items," not numbered and concludes with the attestation clause, which recites the obligation taken by the master masons who were convened, to keep them faithfully. The general warden was requested to sign the statutes in order that an authentic copy might be made and sent to all the Lodges in Scotland ‑the names and number of which, unfortunately, the record does not disclose; but evidently their scope was of a general character and by no means restricted to the Lodge of Edinburgh, which, from its situation, naturally served as the medium of their circulation throughout the realm.
300 SCOTLAND THE SCHAW STATUTES, No. I, OF A.D. 1598 In considering these rules in detail, the items are numbered in consecutive order and their leading characteristics briefly summarized. For the exact text of these regulations, see Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, pp. 9‑1I ; also Constitutions of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, 1848.
I. All the good ordinances concerning the privileges of the Craft, which ,vere made by their predecessors of gude memorie, to be observed and kept ; especially to be true to one another and live charitably together as becometh sworn brethren and companions of the Craft.
z. To be obedient to their wardens, deacons and masters in all things concerning the Craft.
3. To be honest, faithful and diligent in their calling, upright with the masters or owners of the work which they undertake, whatever be the mode of payment.
4. That no one undertake work, be it great or small, unless able to complete it satisfactorily, under the penalty of forty pounds [Scots], or the fourth part of the value of the work, according to the decision of the general warden, or the officers named in the 2d item, for the sheriffdom where the work is being wrought.
5. That no master shall supplant another under the penalty of forty pounds. 6. That no master take an uncompleted work unless. the previous masters be duly satisfied, under the same penalty.
7. That one warden be elected annually by every Lodge, " as thay are devidit particularlie," to have charge thereof and that, by the votes of the masters of the said Lodges, with the consent of the general warden if present. Should the latter be absent, then the results of such elections must be communicated to him, that he may send his directions to the wardens‑elect.
8. That no master shall have more than three apprentices during his lifetime, unless with the special consent of the officers previously mentioned, of the sheriffdom in which the additional apprentice shall dwell.
9. Apprentices must not be bound for less than seven years and no apprentice shall be made " brother and fallow‑in‑craft," unless he has served an additional seven years, save by the special license of the regular officers assembled for that purpose and then only, if sufficient trial has been made of his worthiness, qualification and skill. The penalty was forty pounds, as usual, " besyde the penalteis to be set doun aganis his persone, accordyng to the ordr of the Judge quhair he remains." io. Masters must not sell their apprentices to other masters, nor dispense with their time by sale to such apprentices, under the penalty of forty pounds.
ii. No master to receive an apprentice without informing the warden of his lodge [Judge], that his name and date of reception be duly booked.
12. No apprentice to be entered but by the same order.
13. No master or fellow‑of‑craft to be received or admitted except in the SCOTLAND 301 presence of six masters and two entered apprentices, the warden of that lodge being one of the six, the date thereof being orderly booked and his naive and mark insert in the said book, together with the names of the six masters, the apprentices and intender. Provided always that no one be admitted without " ane assay and sufficient tryall of his skill and worthynes in his vocatioun and craft." 14. No master to engage in any Masonic work under charge or command of any other craftsman.
i S . No master or " fellow‑of‑craft " to receive any cowanis to work in his society or company, or to send any of his servants to work with them, under a penalty of twenty pounds for each offence.
16. No apprentice shall undertake work beyond the value of ten pounds from the owner thereof, under the penalty aforesaid and, on its completion, a license must be obtained from the masters or warden in their own neighbourhood, if more is desired to be done.
17. Should strife arise amongst the masters, servants, or apprentices, they must inform the wardens, deacons, or their lodges, within twenty‑four hours thereof, under ten pounds penalty in case of default, in order that the difficulties may be amicably settled. Should any of the parties concerned therein, refuse to accept the award made, they shall be liable to be deprived of the privileges of their lodge and not be permitted to work during the period of their obstinacy.
18. Masters and others must be careful in taking all needful precautions as to the erection of suitable scaffolding and, should accidents occur through their negligence, they shall not act as masters having charge of any work, but for ever afterwards be subject to others.
ig. Masters are not to receive apprentices who " salhappin to ryn away " from their lawful service, under penalty of forty pounds.
zo. All members of the Mason Craft must attend the meetings when lawfully warned, under " the pane of ten punds " zi. All masters present at any " assemblie or meeting " shall be sworn by their great oath, not to hide or conceal any wrong done to each other, or to the owners of the work, as far as they know, under the same penalty.
zz. All the said penalties shall be collected from those who break any of the foregoing statutes, by the wardens, deacons, and masters, to be distributed " ad pios vsus according to gud conscience " and by their advice.
The Statutes, subscribed by William Schaw, " Maistir of Wark, Warden of the Maisonis," were agreed to on December z8, 1599, having apparently been duly compared with the code of the previous year; obviously they were arranged especially for the old Lodge at Kilwinning, Ayrshire. As there are several points mentioned in these ordinances which are not of a general character, but refer specially to the Lodge named and as it is desirable to examine the records of all the more ancient Scottish Lodges, the history of each will be taken separately as far as possible.
302 SCOTLAND It is the custom of some writers, to claim that the years when the various abbeys were erected, provide the surest means of determining when the Lodges originated, on the assumption that each of these structures required and had a Lodge of Freemasons as their builders. Lyon observes, that while their southern neighbours hold the Masonic Fraternity to have been organized at York in the time of Athelstan, A.D. 926, Scottish Freemasons are content to trace their descent from the builders of the abbeys of Holyrood, Kelso, Melrose and Kilwinning, the Cathedral of Glasgow and other ecclesiastical fabrics of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Not the slightest vestige of authentic evidence, however, has yet been adduced in support of the legends in regard to the time and place of the institution of the first Scottish Masonic Lodge. If it has to be acknowledged that the tradition regarding the introduction of Freemasonry into Scotland is somewhat apocryphal, the same is true of much that has been written of the Brotherhood as it existed at any time prior to the close of the sixteenth century.
If Holyrood is mentioned as the earliest of the Scottish abbeys, Kelso is at once brought forward as of the same period; when Kilwinning is proudly referred to as exceeding in antiquity any ecclesiastical edifice of the sister kingdom, the claims of Melrose to priority of institution are immediately asserted. It is scarcely possible that any agreement can be arrived at under such circumstances. Several of these old Lodges have to lament the loss of their most ancient manuscripts, whilst others are at the present time almost, if not quite, destitute of any records whatever. It is, therefore, safer to follow the decision of the Grand Lodge of Scotland as to their relative precedency, leaving their antiquity an open question; these old ateliers will, therefore, be marshalled according to their positions on the roll, after which those that have ceased to exist will be noticed, concluding with some remarks upon the Lodge of Melrose which till recently kept aloof from the Grand Lodge of Scotland.
MOTHER KILWINNING LODGE, AYRSHIRE, No. o The historian of Scottish Masonry in general and of the Kilwinning and Edinburgh Lodges in particular (Lyon), acknowledges that the pretensions of the former to priority of existence, based as they are upon the story which makes its institution and the erection of Kilwinning Abbey (1140) coeval, are weakened by the fact that the abbey in question was neither the first nor the second Gothic structure erected in Scotland. That the Lodge was presided over about the year 1286 by James, Lord Stewart of Scotland, a few years later by the hero of Bannockburn, afterwards by the third son of Robert II (Earl of Buchan), are some of the improbable stories which were propagated during the last century, in order to secure for the Lodge the coveted position of being the first on the Grand Lodge Roll, or to give countenance to its separate existence as a rival Grand Lodge. Whatever pre‑eminence the supporters of Mother Kilwinning may have arrogated to that ancient Lodge during the early part of the last century and, however difficult SCOTLAND 303 it might then have been to reconcile conflicting claims, there is no doubt as to the precedence given to the Lodge of Edinburgh in the Statutes of 1599, Kilwinning having distinctly to take the second place.
It is singular, in the circumstances presently to be mentioned, that the records of neither the Edinburgh nor Kilwinning Lodges allude in the slightest degree to these regulations and the Craft does not appear to have had any idea of the existence of such a document until modern times. That it was unknown in 1736 and during the struggles for priority and supremacy waged by the Grand Lodge and Mother Kilwinning, is quite certain, because its production as evidence would have at once settled the points in dispute. In 1861 the then Earl of Eglinton and Winton, through the then Deputy Grand Master (John Whyte‑Melville, afterwards Grand Master), presented the Grand Lodge with a copy of Memorials of the Mont gomeries, Earls of Eglinton. The muniment room in Eglinton Castle was diligently searched and placed under requisition for the purposes of that work and thus, through the devotion of the lamented Lord Eglinton to archxological studies and research, the Scottish Craft owes the discovery of this valuable code of Masonic laws and decisions. There cannot be a doubt as to the authenticity of the MS. and Lyon's suggestion that its preservation in the repositories of the noble house of Montgomerie was, in all probability, owing to that family's former connexion with the Masonic Court of Kilwinning, is one fully warranted by facts.
As far as possible, an accurate rendering of each of the thirteen items will be given, numbering them consecutively as in the case of the former regulations (Schaw Statutes, No. i).
THE SCHAw STATUTES, No. 2, OF A.D. 1599 (For the full text of this document, see Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 12) i. The warden to act within the bounds of Kilwinning and other places subject to that Lodge, shall be elected annually on the zoth day of December and that within the kirk at Kilwynning, as the heid and secund Judge of Scotland, the general warden to be informed accordingly. [The position of the Lodge in 1599 corresponds with that of a District Grand Lodge at the present time, its jurisdiction being defined in the next item. The status accorded to it is both strange and paradoxical, for how can that which is head be also second, Masonically or otherwise ? Before arriving at a decision, the third of the rules must be carefully examined.] z. The Lord Warden Generall, considering that it was expedient that all the Scottish Lodges should prospectively enjoy their ancient liberties as of yore, confirms the right of the Lodge of Kilwinning, second lodge of Scotland, to have its warden present at the election of wardens within the bounds of the " nether waird of Cliddisdaill, Glasgow, Air and boundis of Carrik," also to convene these wardens to assemble anywhere within the district (embracing the west of Scotland, including Glasgow), when and where they had to submit to the judgments of the warden and deacon of Kilwinning. [This clause disposes of the pretensions of the IUalcolm 304 SCOTLAND Canmore Charter of St. John's Lodge, Glasgow, which was foisted upon the Fraternity in comparatively recent times; for that city in i599 was Masonically subject to Kilwinning (see chapter on " Apocryphal MSS.").] 3. The warden general, for reasons of expediency, confirms the rank of Edinburgh as the first and principal lodge in Scotland, that of Kilwinning being the second, " as of befoir is notourlie manifest in our awld antient writtis ; " and the Lodge of Stirling to be third, according to their ancient privileges. [This item establishes the clear meaning and intention of Schaw, for he expressly declares that the Lodge of Edinburgh is the first and principal in the country, awarding to Kilwinning and Stirling the second and third positions respectively. Accordingly any one of the three might be termed " Head Lodge," there thus being a trio of head Lodges, only of these precedence was given to Edinburgh over Kilwinning, to both these Lodges over Stirling and, at the head of them all, was the Warden‑General by royal appointment. The usage of existing Provincial Grand Lodges affords an illustration of the working of this rule‑these are the heads or chiefs in their jurisdictions, as empowered by their common head, precedence being given according to their respective ages‑and over all presides the Grand Master, in some measure corresponding with the General Warden. This being so, whatever place on the roll is occupied by the old Lodges in question at the present time, Edinburgh was above its compeers in 15 99. Lyon cites an example of the use of the term " head," as applied to " several," in the case of some persons guilty of manslaughter being required by an Act of the Lords of Council, 1490, to repair to the market‑cross of Edinburgh, with their swords in their hands, to seek forgiveness from the friends of the slain man and then repair to the " four head pilgrimages of Scotland and there say mass for his soul " (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 243).
4. The wardens of every Lodge shall be answerable to the Presbyters within their sheriffdoms, for the Masons subject to their Lodges, the third part of the fines paid by the disobedient being devoted to the " godlie usis of the ludge," where the offences were committed. [In common with other trades, the masons were required to support the Church ; not only during the period prior to the Reformation but long after the influence of Roman Catholicism may be supposed to have ceased in Scotland; the examples are too numerous to quote, of a compulsory application of the fines levied upon masons towards the maintenance of ecclesiastical fabrics.] 5. An annual trial of all offences shall be made, under the management of the warden and most ancient masters of the Lodge, extending to six persons, so that due order be observed.
6. The lord warden‑general ordains that the warden of Kilwinning, " as second in Scotland," shall select six of the most perfect and worthy masons, in order to test the qualification of all the fellows within their district, " of thair art, craft, scyance and antient memorie," to the intent that the said wardens shall be duly responsible for such persons as are under them.
7. The warden and deacon of Kilwinning, as the Second Lodge, is empowered to exclude and expel from the society all who persist in disobeying the ancient SCOTLAND 305 statutes and "all personis disobedient ather to kirk, craft, consall " and other regulations to be hereafter made. [This remarkable rule is the direct corollary of the fourth item, for unless the officers had the authority to expel unruly members, their accountability to the presbyters would have been a meaningless phrase. That the cosmopolitan and unsectarian features of later Freemasonry are in direct opposition to the earliest teachings of the Craft may, however, be new to some readers.] 8. The warden‑general requires the warden and deacon (with his quartermasters) to select a skilled notary, to be ordinary clerk or scribe, by whom all deeds were to be executed.
9. The acts heretofore made by Kilwinning masons must be kept most faithfully in the future and no apprentice or craftsman be either admitted or entered but " within the kirk of Kilwynning, as his paroche and second ludge ; " all banquets arising out of such entries to be held " within the said ludge of Kilwynning." [According to old municipal records, it was the custom for public bodies to hold their meetings in the kirks of their own neighbourhoods, probably in what we now term the " vestry" part, hence there was nothing unusual in the provision made for the assembling of the masons therein. It may, however, only refer to the immediate neighbourhood of the kirk, just as in Cornwall certain parts contiguous to such edifices are still called " Church Town," the name of the town or village being prefixed. That this is, at least, a probable explanation may be inferred from the regulation respecting the banquets being served in the " said ludge." In 1665 the use of the " court‑house " was granted to the members for their assemblies.] io. All fellow‑craftsmen at their entry and prior to their admission must pay to the Lodge the sum of Cio, with 1os. worth of gloves, which shall include the expense of the banquet; also that none be admitted without " ane sufficient essay" and " pruife of memorie and art of craft," under the supervision of the warden, deacon and quartermasters of the lodge, as they shall be answerable to the warden. i i. Apprentices are not to be admitted unless they pay C6 towards the common banquet, or defray the expenses of a meal for all the members and apprentices of the Lodge.
i 2. The wardens and deacons of the second Lodge of Scotland (Kilwinning) shall annually take the oath, " fidelitie and trewthe," of all the masters and fellows of craft committed to their charge ; that they shall not keep company not work with coivans, nor any of their servants or apprentices, under the penalties provided in the former acts. [It will be observed that by these statutes fellowship with cowans is rendered a misdemeanour. The Lodge of Kilwinning, in 1705, defines a " cowan " as a " mason without the word " (Freemasons' Magazine, vol. ix, 1863, p. 156) ; the same body, in 1645, " ordanit that Hew Mure sall not work with ony cowane in tymes curving, under the pane of x lb. monie " (ibid., Aug. 4, 1866, p. coo). The word has been variously derived‑from the Greek, Kvcov, a dog; the French, chouan ; and many other sources. Lyon says, " May the epithet, as one of contempt toward craftsmen `without the word,' not have been derived from the Celtic word 3o6 SCOTLAND cu ? A Gael would so express himself by the term, a choin, `you dog ' " (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 24).
Mackey considers that the term has come to the English Fraternity from the operative masons of Scotland and accepts the first definition given in Jamieson's Scottish Dictionary (Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry) ; but Woodford believes it has crept into use in England from the old word covin [formerly couin or couen, as observed by W. H. Rylands], so frequently employed by the guilds (Kenning's Cyclopadia).] 13. The " generall warden " ordains that the Lodge of Kilwinning, being the Second Lodge in Scotland, shall annually test every craftsman and apprentice, according to their vocations and should they have forgotten even one point of the " art of memorie and science " thereof, they must forfeit zos. if fellow‑crafts ; and i is. if apprentices, for. their neglect. Fines to be paid into the box for the common weal, in conformity with the practice of the Lodges of the realm.
The regulations are followed by an intimation from the " generall warden of Scotland " that he had subscribed to them " with his hand," in token that they were to be observed, as also the acts and statutes made previously by the officers of the Lodge aforesaid ; so as to preserve due regularity, conformably to equity, justice, and ancient order. The same dignitary also empowered the officers to make acts according to the " office and law." The latter privilege corresponds with that enjoyed by modern Lodges, which are permitted to have by‑laws, binding upon their particular members, so long as they are not in conflict with the general regulations of the Grand Lodge.
The MS. concludes with an important certificate from William Schaw, which proves that the document of I S 99 was intended exclusively for the Masons under the jurisdiction of the Kilwinning Lodge, for it is addressed to the warden, deacon and masters of that Lodge; it testifies to the honest and careful manner in which Archibald Barclay, the commissioner from the Lodge, had discharged the duties entrusted to him. It seems that this delegate produced his commission before the warden‑general and the masters of the " Lodge of Edinburgh " ; but, by reason of the king being " out of the Toun " and no masters but those of the Lodge named being convened at the time, the deputation was not successful in obtaining all that the members desired. The chief requests of the Lodge (if, in the records of the warden‑general, their recital may be taken as indicative of their prominence) were to obtain additional powers to preserve order, which the Craft required for the conservation of their rights, especially to secure from the king (James VI) a recognition of the privileges of the Lodge, including the power of imposing penalties upon " the dissobedient personis and perturberis of all guid ordour." These Schaw promised to procure when occasion offered and so far thought good to signify unto the whole brethren of the Lodge. The statutes were duly attested at Holyrood Palace and occupied the parties, two days in their preparation, comparison and fraternal consideration.
These regulations and decisions are in many respects singular; for although, in some points, they are a reproduction of the Statutes of 1598 (Schaw, No. I), SCOTLAND 307 yet, as applicable to a particular Lodge and containing an authoritative judgment respecting the relative precedency of " the three head Lodges " in Scotland, they are unique. It is important, also, to notice that several of the laws in the Constitutions of modern Grand Lodges are but a reflection of these ancient rules and that many of the usages and customs of the Craft in the sixteenth century are actually practised at the present day in our Masonic Lodges.
The premier historiographer of Mother Kilwinning and of the Lodge of Edinburgh is D. Murray Lyon and it is to be regretted that his interesting sketch of the former, which appeared in the Freemasons' Magazine (1863‑5), has not been published in a separate form. Since then, another history of the Lodge has been written by Robert Wylie ; but, for present purposes, the elder production will be placed under requisition.
After alluding to the theories which connect the Kilwinning Lodge with the (modern) Degrees of Masonic Knights Templar and of the Royal Order of Scotland, Lyon emphatically declares that the Lodge " was never more nor less than a society of architects and artisans incorporated for the regulation of the business of the building trade and the relief of indigent Brethren, until the development, early in the eighteenth century, of Speculative Masonry." . . . " So imperceptibly," he adds, " has the purely operative character merged into the condition of a purely speculative one, that the precise date of such change cannot with any certainty be decided upon" (Freemasons' Magazine, May 30, 1863). For "Speculative" we should read " Grand Lodge " Masonry, the eventful changes of the early portion of the last century being thereby more accurately described, as the former expression is applicable to certain features of the Craft which can be traced back to much earlier times. Lyon, however, was not, in 1863, so fully conversant with all the facts relating to Masonic history as in later years, especially when writing the admirable work with which his fame will inseparably be connected; for we find him mentioning the appointment of the Baron of Roslin to the Grand Mastership by James II and adopting many other fanciful delusions which his magnum opus has since done so much to dispel. Two vexed questions, viz. the Masonic priority of the Lodge of Kilwinning and the alleged introduction, by this body, of Freemasonry into Scotland, need not be considered; for the sufficient reason that there is an utter absence of the evidence necessary to ensure a correct decision. There is, doubtless, something in the suggestion that Kilwinning may have been originally the chief centre of Scottish Freemasonry, the removal of the Masonic Court to Edinburgh being due to causes which can be explained; there is also much weight in the argument, that if Kilwinning ever was the headquarters of Freemasonry, as one or more of the legends declare, it is not likely that the Lodge would have accepted so quietly a secondary position in 1599 and by its representative agree that its authority should be restricted to Western Scotland. True, in 1643, it styled itself " The Ancient Lodge of Scotland " ; but that was only an indication of the vanity of its members and a claim to which others might have had recourse with just as much reason. The Schaw.Statutes effectually dispose of all such pretensions 3o8 SCOTLAND and, whilst admitting Kilwinning into the trio of head Lodges, place it immediately after its metropolitan rival.
The oldest Minute‑book preserved by the Lodge is a small quarto, bound in vellum, containing accounts of its transactions from 1642 to 175 8, but not regularly or continuously. The lapses in its records are not conclusive as to the suspension of its meetings, for detached scrolls referring to some of the years in which a hiatus occurs are still in existence and the members have to deplore the acquisitive propensities or careless conduct of its custodians, by which an older volume has been lost, while MSS. of value have been dispersed, which it is now scarcely probable will ever be restored to their rightful owners. As the record‑chest of the Lodge has been frequently subject to fire and other vicissitudes, it will be no cause for wonderment to hear of the paucity of its MSS. It is rather a matter for congratulation, in the circumstances, that so much remains of its ancient documents and that its first minute saved from destruction is dated so early as December 2o, 1642 (Freemasons' Ma ga7,ine, August 8, 1863). The precise object of the meeting appears to have been to receive the submission of members to the Lodge and the laws thereof. Over forty signatures follow the Minute; also the marks of the Brethren, of whom a few, however, were undistinguished by these symbols, owing, in the opinion of Lyon, to their being apprentices. Though this may correctly explain the apparent anomaly, apprentices had marks given them in the Aberdeen Lodge. Three of the members are recognized as one deacon and two freemen of the Ayr Squaremen Incorporation, representing trades other than the masons. [Lyon speaks of the " squaremen word," also of the " grip and sign," peculiar to that organization, which the members were sworn to keep secret. He also says that other crafts than the Masons had their secret modes of recognition through several generations (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 23). No authority is cited by the Scottish historian, but probably he follows W. P. Buchan, who says: " A few days ago, I met an old man, a smith, his name is Peter Cree ; he told me he was made a squareman in i 8 zo, at Coilsfield, near Tarbolton and received a word, grip and sign and took an obligation‑but not on the Bible " (Freemasons' A1agazine, November 12, 1869). Judging by his past contributions to the Masonic press, no one, I feel sure, would deprecate more strongly any reliance being placed upon this startling assertion than W. P. Buchan himself.] One year later " the court of the Ludge " was held in the upper chamber of the dwelling‑house of Hew Smithe, Johne Barclay, mason‑burgess of Irwine, being the deacon, the other brethren being termed masters of work. Barclay was chosen warden and Hew Crauford, deacon. Several of the regulations of 1598 are recited and described as " ancient statutes " and officers were appointed in charge of the districts of Carrick, Kyle, Cunningham and Renfrew, who were duly " obligated " as to their duties ; and James Ross, notary, was appointed clerk, who also took " his aithe " (oath). The quarterage was agreed for the masters and apprentices, the latter having to pay double if not prompt in the settlement of their dues and the " quartermasters " were instructed to take pains in collecting such subscriptions.
SCOTLAND 309 It will doubtless surprise those who are unfamiliar with old Masonic records, that the Lodge, on December zo, 1643, passed a law that " the deacon and warden shall pay to the box, on their first election to office, the sum of C3 each," which was to be paid before the next choice, the officers named having agreed thereto. This is a very early instance of " Fees of honour " being exigible, just as are now levied in some modern Lodges, and other Masonic organizations. Uniformity, however, was not observed as to this matter, for the Lodge of Edinburgh required no such payments, though others followed the example of Kilwinning. Apart from Masonic Degrees, it is not easy to discover much that is either new or original in the practices of the Lodges of to‑day, for, generally speaking, the ancient Minutes afford abundant evidence that our modern Masonic usages are but survivals of the time‑honoured customs of former days.
In 1646 (December ig), the Lodge assembled in the same " upper room," other chief officers being recorded. Three Masons were " received and accepted " as " fellow Brethren to ye said tred " (trade), having sworn to the " standart of the said Lodge ad titam "and five apprentices were received. Hew Mure in Kilmarnock was mulcted in ten pounds for working with cowans. Some ten years later (January zo, 1656), another member was obliged to promise, on his oath, not to work with any cowans for the future, under pain of being fined according to the ancient rules ; and those, who had been disobedient in other respects (not named). were required to be present at a meeting in Mauchline in the following month, or abide by the penalty if they failed in their attendance. Lyon terms this meeting " a sort of Provincial Grand Lodge," as it was virtually, for their twelve delegates represented Ayr, Maybole, Kilmaurs, Irvine, Kilmarnock, Mauchline and Renfrew. Still, the prefix " Grand " may as well be omitted until applied to assemblies of the Craft some fifty years later. Lyon states that the fees at this period in force at Kilwinning were, for apprentices, zos. ; felloes‑of‑craft, 4os., with 4s. additional on selecting a mark‑" Scots money," be it remembered, hence about a twelfth of English value. The fines for non‑attendance were levied with military precision, the absentees being as regularly named in the Minutes as those who were present.
In 1659 (December zo) the Lodge appointed certain representatives in the four districts, previously mentioned, to assemble annually in Ayr upon the Wednesday before Candlemas " to take ordours with the transgressors of the actis of the court in the Mason Court buiks [books] of the Ludge of Kilwinning " and that due report be made to the Lodge on December 2.9 in each year.
Lyon inclines to the belief that these stated meetings were ordered in consequence of the disaffection of the squaremen (masons, carpenters, slaters and glaziers) of Ayr, who, claiming the privileges granted to the crafts of Scotland by the charter of Queen Mary in 1564, declined paying dues into the Kilwinning treasury, having a box of their own (Freemasons' Maga.Zine, August 8, 1863). This opinion is strengthened by the fact that the regular representatives of the " squaremen " of Ayr acted independently of the Kilwinning Lodge, in joining with the 309 310 SCOTLAND Lodges that signed the agreement known as the St. Clair Charter, No. 2 (A.D. 1628, circa) ; and the motive of the deputation from the Lodge, seeking the powerful authority of the king in upholding their ancient privileges, is all the more apparent, if Lyon's view be accepted as the correct one. The monopoly in connexion with the Freemasons, as with other crafts, was being gradually but surely undermined and neither the " ancient privileges," nor the indignant remonstrances of the head Lodges, were sufficient to arrest the growing aversion to the interference of these old associations with the development of the Masonic Craft, either in Kilwinning or elsewhere and especially did the cowans object to be banished by the Lodges, when they were competent to work in their trade, even though they were not actually Free‑masons.
The introduction of the speculative element, whilst it was doubtless intended to strengthen the authority of the old Lodges, must, in effect, have paved the way for their ultimate surrender of many rights and privileges no longer suitable to the times.
The Earl of Cassillis was elected a deacon of the Lodge in 1672, but, singularly to state, he was not entered as Fellow‑craft until a year later, when Cunninghame of Corsehill was his companion and, in the following year, occupied the same office. The latter was created a Baronet of Nova Scotia by Charles II in 167z. Alexander, eighth Earl of Eglinton, appears in the sederunt of the annual meeting in 1674 as a " fellow‑of‑craft," being elected as the chief deacon in 1677. [This nobleman succeeded to the earldom in 1669 and was a warm partisan of the principles which led to the Revolution, enjoying the confidence of King William. His social relations were, in one respect at least, very unusual ; for on his second marriage he became the fourth husband of a lady then in her ninetieth year (Freemasons' Magazine, August 8, 1863). Lord Cassillis was as able at handling a sword as presiding in a Lodge; for he fought valiantly at the battle of Marston Moor on the king's side, who, as we know, was beaten by the parliamentary forces.] These appointments necessitated the selection of operative brethren to act as deputies, so that the office of " Deputy Master," an arrangement of modern times, may be said to have its archetype in the election of deputies for Lords Cassillis and Eglinton. It was customary for the deacons and wardens, on their election, to subscribe to the enrichment of the " Box " ; so, after all, it may have been the exercise of a little business prudence and foresight which led the members of Kilwinning and other Lodges to obtain the patronage of the aristocratic class. The earliest instance of such an appointment will be found duly noted in the sketch of the Aberdeen Lodge, No. 34. In 1676 three candidates were proposed for the office of deacon, the votes being signified by strokes drawn opposite each name. This primitive mode of recording the suffrages of the members prevailed for many years. The result was tabulated as follows : Three for Cunninghame of Corsehill, seven for Lord Eglinton and eight for Cunninghame of Robertland, the last named being declared elected by a " pluralitie of vottis." The same custom prevails to this day, as respects the ballot for the Master, the Brother having the greatest number of votes SCOTLAND 311 in his favour, of those who are eligible, being elected to the chair, even if there is not an absolute majority of those who voted.
Lord Eglinton was again deacon on December zo, 1678, his warden being Lord Cochrane, eldest son of the Earl of Dundonald. At the same meeting two apprentices were entered, who "paid their buiking money and got their marks." Lord Cochrane's mark is appended to this record and was of the ordinary kind.
In the year 1674 occurs an entry of six pounds from fellow‑crafts in Glasgow. Lyon considers these Brethren hailed from the Mother Lodge and that, at the period noted, it was not at all likely the masons of the city of Glasgow in any way recognized the right of Kilwinning to levy dues upon them.
Glasgow was, in all probability, the first to escape from the jurisdiction of Kilwinning and, " in the eternal fitness of things," there do seem to be very grave objections to an insignificant place, which claimed to be the source of Scottish Freemasonry, possessing authority over an important city like Glasgow, which, even at that time, was certainly not a likely district for the deacon of a Lodge " holding its head court in an upper chamber in a small country village," to have any rule or power over, Masonically or otherwise.
The members of Kilwinning, however, were not willing to lose their Masonic influence and, in 1677, exercised what they deemed to be their rights by chartering a Lodge in the city of Edinburgh, which was a direct invasion of jurisdiction and contrary to the Sehaw Statutes, No. z. It was, to all intents and purposes, a new Lodge that was thus authorized to assemble, subject to its parent at Kilwinning and is the first instance of its kind in Great Britain, being practically the premier Lodge warranted by a body taking upon itself the position and exercising somewhat of the functions, of a Grand Lodge for Scotland, though neither so designated, nor was such an institution thought of at the time.
That the ancient statutes were not looked upon as " unalterable as the laws of the Medes and Persians " is evident from the frequent departures from their exact requirements, as exemplified in the records. So long as their evident intention and spirit were preserved, the members dispensed with a servile adherence to every minute item; and, provided a new law was duly passed in the regular way, at times even directly overruled some of the old enactments. Take, for example, the ninth rule of the Sehaw Statutes, No. 2. A minute of 1720 states that a plurality of members, having taken into consideration the " many jars and debates of entering freemen," agreed that " no freeman be entered or passed without conveying his money before he be admitted either in the Lodge or elsewhere " (Freemasons' Magazine, vol. ix, p. 15 4). The old regulation distinctly prohibited such admissions taking place outside the precincts of the Kirk of Kilwinning. Ere long it became clear to the chief promoters of the Lodge that numbers brought wealth and rejections meant loss of funds to the " Box " ; otherwise it is difficult to account for the laxity in the mode of receiving new members. In 173 S, two individuals claimed to belong to the court, one having been entered by a member resident in Girvan (thirty‑five miles from Kilwinning), the other under similar circumstances in Maybole. Half 312 SCOTLAND of the fee for entry was paid at the time and, on July 12, the balance was tendered and was accepted by the Lodge (so Lyon informs us), the members having satisfied themselves that the couple were in possession of " the word." Other instances occur of such private modes of admission on behalf of the Mother Lodge and, apparently, so long as the fees were paid the acts were condoned.
The plurality of members on December zo, 1725, enacted and ordained that two of its brethren " are discharged from entering the societie of honest men belonging to the Lodge of Kilwinning and also discharge every freeman to give them no strocke of worke under the penaltie of _zo Scots, until they be convinced of their cryme." That this severe sentence meant something more than mere words is proved, beyond a doubt, by the Masonic " criminals," two years afterwards, appearing before the Lodge and, acknowledging their fault, being, on due submission, restored to membership. In the interim, it is not unlikely that being placed " under the ban " was found to act prejudicially to their employment, hence they solicited pardon for the offence committed. They regretted the consequences of their misdeeds, if not the faults themselves.
The fees for the admission of apprentices were gradually raised from 23s. 4d. in 1685‑9 to 40s. 4d. (Scots) in 1704‑5, the latter, however, being unusually high and not the ordinary sum then charged. In 1736 the English money was reckoned for payment, at which period a non‑working mason was charged ios. sterling as an apprentice, 6s. as a fellow‑craft, one‑half being placed in the box and appropriated for " Liveries," etc. The fees for working masons were a crown and half a crown respectively and 1s. and 6d. for " liveries." It was also agreed that " every gentleman mason " shall pay 1s. sterling annually and " every working mason or other mechannick," 6d. sterling. Then follows the suggestive clause that, in the event of any deficiency, each defaulter " shall be distressed for the same, on a signed complaint to a justice of the peace, or other magistrate and his warrant obtained for that effect " (Freemasons' Magazine, September 26, 1863).
The Kilwinning version of the Old Charges provides for recourse " to the common law as usuallie is," in the event of the award of the masters and fellows not being respected and, apparently, without the " strong arm of the law " being invoked occasionally, the old Lodges would have experienced considerable difficulty in gathering in their arrears, for, even with its aid, there were at times still a considerable number of defaulters.
There are many points of resemblance between any ordinary version of the Old Charges and the Schaw Statutes. Nor is it possible for the latter to be consulted, side by side, with such a roll as the Buchanan MS., without the belief being intensified that some such document was accepted as the basis of the regulations promulgated by the Master of Work, A.D. 1600‑30 Those intolerable nuisances, Masonic tramps‑in general very unworthy members of the Craft‑vexed the souls of the Kilwinning Brethren in days of yore, as they do the Society in these more favoured times. In 1717, the members passed a resolution that, " as the Lodge have been imposed upon by begging Brethren, SCOTLAND 313 both here and at Irvine, it is resolved that no charity be given to travelling Brethren without an order from the Master " (Freemasons' Magazine, No. 231, ‑1863). After a lapse of more than a century and a half, no better regulation has been made to lessen this evil, for indiscriminate and profuse relief to Masonic mendicants tends but to widen the area over which their depredations extend.
Indicative of the spread of modern designations, the records from 1720 contain descriptions of meetings, such as " Quarterly," " Grand " and so many gentlemen and tradesmen sought admission to the ranks of Kilwinning, that, operatively, the Lodge may be said to have ended its career.
The Grand Lodge of Scotland was formed in 1736‑nearly twenty years after the institution of the premier Grand Lodge in London‑but in the north the functions of such a body were exercised by two, especially of the " Head Lodges," Kilwinning having been the chief in that respect. Though these united with the other Lodges in forming the Grand Lodge at Edinburgh, the Kilwinning members still continued to grant Warrants after 1736, which was inconsistent, to say the least, with its profession of adhesion to the new regime. The Brethren were also uneasy at accepting the second position on the roll and soon fully resumed their independent career. Three Lodges and, probably, several others, were constituted by Mother Kilwinning prior to 1736, viz. Canongate Kilwinning (No. z), Torphichen Kilwinning (No. 13) and Kilmarnock Kilwinning. In fact, there are numerous references in the Records and old papers, which testify that the Kilwinningites were very actively engaged in extending their influence by chartering Lodges soon after 1670. As a Lodge warranted for Paisley, by its authority bore the number 77 and, later, charters being 78 and 79 respectively for Eaglesham and East Kilbride, although in the lists of Kilwinning Charters, published by Lyon (Freemasons' Magazine, December 12, 1863) and Wylie (History of Mother Lodge Kilwinning, Glasgow, 1878), only some thirty‑three are recorded, it is clear that there are still more than forty Lodges to be accounted for. These are more likely to have been constituted by Mother Kilwinning before 1736 than afterwards and, probably, several were established‑‑or, in Scottish phrase, erected‑during the latter part of the seventeenth century. This point of itself is sufficient to account for the number of old Lodges which append the name Kilwinning to their own special titles, such as Hamilton Kilwinning, Dalkeith Kilwinning, Greenock Kilwinning, St. John's Kilwinning (Hamilton) and others, whose claims to antiquity range from 1599 to 1728. There were, it is supposed, seventy‑nine Warrants issued by the Lodge down to 18o3, but neither Lyon nor Wylie can trace even half that number.
Now it is noteworthy that, throughout all these vicissitudes, struggles and rivalries, the different parties never fell out upon the point of a correct knowledge of the " secrets of Freemasonry." The members of Kilwinning and its offshoots were accepted as individuals by the Grand Lodge and its subordinates, even when as Lodges they were refused countenance and the old Lodges that joined the Grand Lodge had sufficient information esoterically to obtain a brotherly greeting from post Grand Lodge organizations. Intercourse between the representatives of the 314 SCOTLAND old and the new systems of Masonic government was uninterrupted for many years subsequent to 1736 and nothing can be plainer than the fact that, whatever changes were introduced by the Edinburgh Freemasons, through the visit of a Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England in 17zI (of which more anon), the fellowship between the friendly rivals remained unaltered, thus proving that a sufficiency of the old forms of reception must have been retained to constitute a common means of recognition, whatever else was superadded, to keep pace with England.
The Degree of Master Mason is, for the first time, alluded to in the Kilwinning records on June 24, 1736, when a By‑law was passed that such as are found to be qualified as apprentices and fellow‑crafts " shall be raised to the dignity of a master, gratis." The terms " enter, receave, and pase " (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. ioz) occur in the Warrant to the Lodge chartered in 1677 by Kilwinning, but these words, by reference to the records, are found to describe the admission and acknowledgment of apprentices and craftsmen. When the three Degrees were worked, that circumstance was soon notified in the Minutes, so also when the new titles were adopted. Deacon was the designation of the chief officer in Kilwinning from " time immemorial," until, in 173 5, the presiding officer is termed " Alaster of ye Freemasons " ; in the succeeding year the prefix " Right Worshipful " was used and soon afterwards the same officer is denominated " The Right Worshipful the Grand Master." In 1735 was witnessed the addition of a second (entitled the junior) warden but, in previous years, wardens did not assume the chair in the absence of the deacon, the chairman under such circumstances being elected by the members. They not infrequently chose an apprentice to preside over them, which suggests the improbability of Degrees, as we now understand them, having been worked at that period in the Lodge. Taking all the peculiar circumstances into consideration, we are not likely to err in assuming, that the mode of admission, so far as respects its esoteric character, was exceedingly simple and in accordance with the capacities of the operatives, of whom the Lodges generally were mainly composed.
LODGE OF EDINBURGH, No. I Lyon's history of this ancient Lodge is so exhaustive, that it would be superfluous to attempt to present anything like a comprehensive account of its career from its earliest records, dating back to 1599 down to the year 1736, when the Grand Lodge of Scotland was inaugurated. As some four hundred pages of closely printed matter are uJell filled by the Scottish historian in doing justice to so important a subject, even then the old Minutes are not exhausted, it will readily be seen that all to be done is to offer a reproduction of some of the chief excerpts from the records, with a running commentary on their general scope and character.
When this ancient Lodge originated is not known, but the memorandum affixed to its title on the " Roll of Lodges holding under the Grand Lodge of SCOTLAND 315 Scotland " (Constitutions and Laws, Edinburgh, 1881, p. 120) (as also to the previous Lodge No. o), may safely be accepted as correct, viz. " Before 1598." Its earliest minute bears date " Vltimo July 15 99 " and is a deliverance on a breach of the statute against the employment of cowans. George Patoun had vexed the souls of the deacon, warden and master masons, by presuming to employ " ane cowane " to work at " ane chymnay heid " but, on his humble submission and expression of penitence, the penalty was not imposed, though he and all others were duly warned of what awaited them, should they ever violate the law, after this exhibition of leniency. The warden's mark is appended to the Minute (Lyon's History, p. z5). Lyon draws attention to the silence of the records upon this vexatious subject from 1599 until 1693, when, on December z7, the matter is again noticed, but only to impose the same penalty for permitting cowans to work, as enacted by Schaw in 1598. The Zznd regulation states that the fines shall be devoted to " pious uses " but, in 1693, the penalty was to be " for the use of the poor," which is an excellent practical illustration of the word pious.
That the Lodge was in existence and flourishing the year before that of its earliest Minute, already noted, is clear from the fact that the Schaw Statutes, No. 2, rule 3, style it " the first and principal Lodge in Scotland." Almost an unbroken series of Minutes are preserved of its transactions, from 15 99 to the transition period of 1717; from that year to 1736, when Scotland had its own Grand Lodge, down to 1883, extending over nearly three centuries ; an extraordinary preservation of its privileges and the continuity of its life, as a Lodge, for so many years, under such eventful changes and occasionally most adverse circumstances, may be cited as one of the strongest links in the chain of evidence which proves that several Lodges, working long before the epoch of Grand Lodges, united to form such organizations ; that they retained, nevertheless, their inherent right of assembling without warrants‑maintaining, in all material points, their autonomy‑and were, to all intents and purposes, as much Masonic Lodges after, as they were before, the era of such formations.
Two items of uncertain date, but in the same handwriting as the Minute of 15 99, are to the effect, firstly, that wardens are to be chosen yearly, upon St. John's Day (the Evangelist) ; and secondly, that commissioners be elected at the same meeting, who are to act as conveners, by command of the General Warden (Schaw). The transition from December zo, as enjoined by Schaw, to December 27 was easy and the election had the advantage of falling on a special saint's day.
Although the Schaw Statutes, No. 2, rule 13, provide for an annual test of apprentices and craftsmen, with regard to their skill as masons, neither the Kilwinning nor the Edinburgh Lodge Minutes contain any account of such yearly trials of skill, though they may have been in force notwithstanding ; and it is argued that the prescription of the essay [Regular " Essay Masters " were appointed in each case, whose duty it was to be present at the performance of the task and see that the candidate actually did the work as settled on by the " House." An allusion to these craft trials will readily occur to the memories of those familiar 316 SCOTLAND with the ‑works of Sir Walter Scott‑himself a member of the " mystic tie "‑viz. in Rob Roy, where Diana Vernon characterizes the behaviour of her lover as a " masterpiece."], as well as the final examination and decision, rested with the Incorporation of Mary's Chapel, so far as Edinburgh was concerned, not with the Lodge, the two being quite separate and distinct bodies. As Scbaw's Statutes affected the Lodges only, one can hardly concur in this view. Lyon thinks it probable that the " power of raising fellow‑crafts to the position or status of masters in operative masonry " in the seventeenth century, was vested in the Incorporations, not in the Lodges, the latter simply certifying that the candidates for such positions were duly passed as competent fellow‑crafts. On January 30, 1683, the Lodge objected to a son of the late Deacon Brown being passed as a Fellow‑craft, in order to qualify and be admitted to an essay by the " whole House " (the Incorporation), because he was only nineteen, therefore, too young to be " admitted to " an essay before acceptance as a master, the minimum age being fixed at twenty‑one years. Three present at the meeting are termed " old dickins " (deacons), which correspond with modern Past Masters. In 1714 the Lodge prohibited its journey men from acting as deacon, warden, or " intendents." The office of " intendar " is a very ancient one and, according to Lyon, a relic of it is recognizable in the custom which prevailed in the Lodge till the middle of the last century, of its operative apprentices imparting certain instruction to the non‑operative or speculative section of its intrants (Lyon's History, p. 18).
The Incorporation of Wrights and Masons was constituted by an act of the Magistrates and other authorities of Edinburgh in 1475 and, though originally confined to the members of those two trades‑who have for many centuries generally worked harmoniously together‑in time received into their number, the glaziers, plumbers and others, by decision of the Court of Session (1703). It was known usually as the United Incorporation of Mary's Chapel, from its meetings being held in a chapel dedicated to the Virgin Mary, which was swept away on the South Bridge being built in 1785 (Freemasons' Magazine, March 1858). As the Lodge assembled in the same building, its rather curious name, The Lodge of Edinburgh (Mary's Chapel), is explained.
The Seal of Cause is given in full by Lyon (History, p. 231) and, in many points, deserves very careful examination. The petition of the masons and wrights was presented for the purpose of obtaining the consent of the Lord Provost and others, to certain statutes and rules made amongst themselves for the honour and worship of St. John, in augmentation of Divine service and the regular government of the two crafts. On a scrutiny of the regulations, they were found to be " gud and loveable baith to God and man," so their prayer was granted and the Aisle of St. John in the " College Kirk " of St. Giles was assigned to them. The statutes are probably those which are recited in the document [see Records of the Burgh of Edinburgh (Publications of the Burgh Records Society) ; the Statute of 1491 anent the Masons of St. Giles, p. 61 ; and Contract, 1500‑1, for Building the Tower of the Old Tolbooth, p. 89. The Rev. A. T. Grant (of Rosslyn) has also drawn attention SCOTLAND 317 to an old indenture between a laird and the Provost, etc., of Edinburgh, on the one part and certain masons on the other, for building five chapels on the south side of the parish church of date, November 29, 1387] of October 15, 1475, viz.
i. Two masons and two wrights were to be sworn to act faithfully as overseers of the work of the allied crafts.
2. All complaints to be referred to the deacon and the four overseers and, in the last resort, to the provost and bailies (magistrates).
3. Craftsmen entering the city and desirous of obtaining work, were to pass an examination before the " said four men " and, if accepted, they were to give a mark to the repair of the altar.
4. Masters were not to take apprentices for less than seven years ; the latter to pay half a mark at entry and to be mulcted in fines for disobedience. Apprentices duly " passed " by the overseers were to pay half a mark to the altar and " brouke the priuilege of the craft "‑each man " worthy to be a master " was to be made " freman and fallow." 5. Those causing discord were to be brought before the deacon and " Overmen " [i.e. the four overseers], so as to secure their better behaviour but, if still contumacious, they were threatened with the strong arm of the law.
6. The overseers were charged to take part in all general processions, " lyk as thai haf in the towne of Bruges, or siclyk gud townes " and, should one of the number die and leave " no guds sufficient to bring him furth honestly," the wrights (or masons) shall, at their own cost, provide a befitting funeral for " thair brother of the Craft." 7. The masons and wrights were empowered to pass other statutes, which were to have similar force to the foregoing, on being allowed by the authorities and upon their being entered in the " common buke of Edinburgh." It should not be lost sight of, that the " passing " of fellow‑crafts connected with the masons and wrights was relegated to'overseers appointed by both trades (1, 4), who, together, formed a quartette of inspectors, hence all notions of there being secret ceremonies connected with Scottish Masonic receptions of the fifteenth century, save, possibly, such as the whispering of " the word," are utterly opposed to the evidence contained in this old document, as well as in others of later date, so far as respects the promotion of apprentices to fellow‑crafts.
That the Incorporation would act independently of the Lodge of Edinburgh, even sometimes in quite an opposite direction, might be expected, considering the mixed character and varied aims of the former. That the members of the Incorporation respected neither the laws nor the customs of the Freemasons of the Lodge, is amply proved by reference to the records, which testify that, when the funds of the first were concerned, the rules were relaxed and elastic measures adopted which were opposed to Masonic precedent. The innovations, however, introduced by the mixed body of artificers paved the way, not only for the gradual curtailment of the Lodge privileges, but for the complete overthrow of the monopolies peculiar to the Trade Incorporations themselves ; hence, without intending it, the one 318 SCOTLAND body, by undermining the foundations of the exclusively Masonic combination, were, at the same time, weakening their own until, finally, as trade monopolies, both ceased to exist.
Not only did the Lodge use every means in its power to prevent " unfremen," as they were called, from engaging in work on their own account in the city of Edinburgh (as in 1599, when Alexander Stheill was placed outside the pale of the free masters, who were not allowed to employ him but at their peril, because he set the Lodge at defiance by working as a master), but even those who had lawfully served their apprenticeships, were prohibited from obtaining work, or from utilising the services of other apprentices and servants until they had secured the consent of the Lodge, by taking up their freedom, and of the municipal authorities, by the purchase of their tickets as burgesses (Lyon, History, p. Zo).
Enterprise amongst the apprentices was evidently viewed with great horror by the Free Masters, who discouraged it in every possible way, notwithstanding the early statutes provided for apprentices undertaking work under certain circum stances. Lyon cites a case (A.D. 1607), in which an apprentice passed as a fellowcraft and received his freedom, but the latter was conditional on its non.‑exercise for two and a half years from the date of its nominal bestowal by Mary's Chapel ! The bond also arranged for the conditional freeman not working outside Edinburgh during the period named. The " brethreine fremen of the masons of Edr." in 165 2, on finding that a " maisone jorneyman " had wronged them in " several relations," unanimously agreed not to give the offender work within their liberties for seven years, not even then until due submission had been made. The same parties viewed with great disfavour the importation of craftsmen and resolutely set their faces against employing, any who were not approved of by the Lodge. In 1672 such an event occurred ; the strangers, hailing from a town about three miles distant from the city, for seven years were subjected to all possible annoyances in order to obtain their removal or prevent their securing work ; eventually the small minority left‑i.e. gave up the struggle‑in 1680. Beyond the exhibition of spleen and imposition of fines, these outsiders were apparently not otherwise interfered with, from which it may be inferred that the Lodge then possessed no real authority over craftsmen who did not acknowledge its rights and privileges. The members were naturally averse from seeing any of their customs neglected, especially when their funds decreased thereby; hence the disinclination of apprentices to pass as fellow‑crafts and pay the requisite fees, was the subject of several special rules or resolutions. In 1681 it was resolved that no masters shall employ any apprentices who act as journeymen, though not " passed " as such, if two years have elapsed since the expiration of their time; again, in the following year, the deacon, warden, and remnant masters agreed that, for the sake of their funds for the poor, each journeyman who does not belong to the Lodge shall pay the sum of i 2s. (Scots) per annum, for the privilege and liberty of working with a freeman, which was to be deducted from his first month's pay by his master and given to the warden for the time being. Should this law be disregarded, the journeyman SCOTLAND 3 I9 was to be discharged from working in the city (which meant simply not being employed by members of the Lodge) and the master be censured accordingly.
In 1685 the Incorporation agreed to exact and accept fees from the apprentices of journeymen (not masters) for whom they charged wages, just as if they were regular servants or journeymen, which was in direct opposition to the Lodge, though certainly, at the time, it was for the benefit of their own funds.
it is interesting to note that, however strong were the declarations of their adherence to the Schasv Statutes, the Edinburgh Freemasons of the seventeenth century did not scruple to depart from some of the rules when circumstances appeared to warrant such a course. The term of apprenticeship is a case in point, which varied according to the whims and wants of the individual members of the Lodge, who rarely mustered in any force at the meetings, the " seven years " being sometimes reduced to a much shorter period at Edinburgh and Kilwinning ; hence, even in those early days, the regulations of the general warden, the highest Masonic official in Scotland, were not looked upon or accepted as " unalterable landmarks," but were subject to change according to circumstances. As late as 1739 the Grand Lodge of Scotland agreed to bind, at its expense, a son of a poor operative mason to one of the Freemen Masons of Edinburgh and, in 1740, the indentures were agreed to for the period of eight years. This laudable custom of aiding poor lads ceased about 1754.
It may be of interest to note the wages received by the masons generally in Edinburgh and elsewhere. Lyon is authority for the statement that the system of " monthly pays " was usual in Edinburgh some two hundred years ago. In Aberdeen, the master mason who was employed on church work by the Town Council received Cz4 16s. 8d. Scots quarterly (i.e. a little over Cz sterling) and his journeyman zo marks per annum (ú1 6s. 8d.). In 1500, the masons engaged in building the steeple of the Old Tolbooth were paid weekly, each master ios. Scots (iod. sterling) and each journeyman 9s. Scots (9d. sterling). In 1536, the master mason employed by the town of Dundee was paid every six weeks at the rate of úz4 Scots and úio Scots for his apprentice, per annum; and at Lundie, Fife, in 1661, the master had per day 1od. and his journeyman 9d. " and all their diet in the house." In 1681, Lyon tells us that the value of skilled labour had much increased, the Incorporation of Mary's Chapel then enacting that‑no mason should work under 18s. Scots per day in summer and zs. less in winter. Much information as to this matter is obtainable by reference to Lyon's History.
The hours of labour furnish another subject intimately connected with the question of wages ; and there is a remarkable " statute anent the government of the maister m :noun of the college kirk of St. Giles, 1491," extracted by Lyon from the burgh records of Aberdeen. The master and his servants were to begin their work in summer at 5 a.m. and continue until 8 a.m., then to be allowed half an hour, resuming labour from 8.30 a.m. to ii, when two hours were given, one o'clock witnessing the resumption of work until 4 p.m. ; " and then to gett a recreatioun in the commoun luge be the space of half ane hour," the remainder of the time 32‑0 SCOTLAND from 4.30 p.m. to 8 being devoted to " lawbour continually." In winter the work was to commence with the (it is hoped) welcome appearance of daylight, the hours else to be kept as before, provided the men having " bot their none shanks allanerly afternone " and labour until " day licht begane." So far as can be traced or known, this document contains the earliest use of the word " luge " (lodge) in connexion with the Scottish craft. An earlier instance of its use at York, by more than a century, is to be found noted in the Fabric Bolls (Publications of the Surtees Society, xxxv) of that cathedral and the context, with other evidence to be enumerated, clearly establishes the fact that, at both periods, the word " lodge " was understood to mean the covered shed in which the Freemasons assembled to fashion the stones, to which only the regular Craft had access, cowans being especially excluded.
The Schaav Statutes, No. i, indicate that the Lodge was particular in regard to the employment of a notary for registering its proceedings ; but gradually the members grew careless about the matter and, eventually, as Lyon informs us, the writing in the Minutes devolved upon those members who were competent, hence many matters of moment were quite passed over, such as the annual election of wardens‑not a single register of this important office having been made during the seventeenth century, though, fortunately, it often happens that their names are traceable through the signatures of those present at the meetings. From 1701 that omission was repaired and afterwards the annual elections were as systematically recorded as they had previously been neglected.
The exact position of the journeymen masons connected with the Lodge of Edinburgh was, for a long period, a tender subject and was fraught with many difficulties, eventually culminating in an open rupture with the master masons and a severance of their connexion with the Lodge. From this secession sprang the journeymen Lodge, No. 8. Though the journeymen were admitted to a voice in the affairs of No. 1 from 1706, or practically from Schaw's time, they were but as cyphers in the Lodge, the latter body itself being virtually an auxiliary to the incorporation of masters, the deacon or head of the Masons in their incorporate capacity being also the ex offcio head of the Lodge and, like the warden, held his appointment by the suffrages of those of its members whom the municipal authorities recognised as master masons (Lyon, History, p. 41). Sometimes the offices of deacon and warden were held by the same Brother, which was an unwise combination. Apparently, from early days to the last century, the warden acted as treasurer, the corresponding officer in the Incorporation being the box master, an office not unknown to some of the seventeenth‑century Lodges. The unlimited powers of the warden, as the dispenser of the funds, were found to be prejudicial to the interests of the members ; so the Lodge ordained, in 1704, on St. John's Day, that no portion of the moneys in " the common purse " was to be disposed of without the consent of the deacon and a quorum of the Brethren.
The early records of the Lodges Nos. o and i (Mother Kilwinning and the Lodge oú Edinburgh) contain no note of the initiation of the clerk (or notary), but SCOTLAND 32.1 there is no reason to suppose, from the absence of any record of the circumstance, that they were not regularly admitted. The first notice of the kind occurs in the records of No. i, of date December 23, 17o6, when William Marshall, clerk to the Incorporation, was admitted as an " entered apprentice and fellow‑craft and clerk to the Brethren Masons, whom he is freely to serve for the honour conferred on him " (Lyon, History, p. 43). On St. John's Day, 1709, Robert Alison was similarly admitted, his being the last election under the old system. This Brother continued to act as clerk to the Lodge for the long period of forty‑three years, for, though elected the first clerk to the Grand Lodge of Scotland in 1736, he remained secretary of the lesser institution and his son subsequently followed in his steps, the latter having been initiated on St. John's Day, 1737, without aught being contributed to the Lodge's own funds, " on account of his father's services." That the Lodge eventually agreed to compound for the intrants' banquet, just as Lodges did for gloves (hence " glove money "), might be anticipated, but what will be thought of a similar arrangement being made for the payment of money in lieu of arms ? Strange as it may sound, the Incorporation of Mary's Chapel agreed on September 6, 1683, through the " deacons, masters and bretheren " present, that it was unprofitable and possibly dangerous to keep adding to the " magazine of arms," which each freeman had to contribute to on his admission and, as money, besides being " usefull in the meantyme," could be used for the purchase of such implements of warfare in the event of there being a demand for more, instead of freemen giving in their quota of arms as formerly, the sum of ~i2 (Scots) was paid to the box master. There are several entries of C3 ios. each being paid for " firelocks," so that the cash of the Incorporation was often employed to provide warlike weapons, if not directly for warlike purposes. Evidently the craftsmen composing the Incorporation were not satisfied with having only the " sinews of war," for, on March 23, 1684, the vote alluded to was rescinded and the return to the old custom was defended in a most elaborate account of the reasons which led thereto. The members considered the arms were " no less usefull defensively than offensively " and that, having at that period fortified their house and rendered it suitable for the custody of arms " keeped and reserved for the defence of the true Protestant religion, king and country and for the defence of the ancient cittie and their own privileges therein," they were determined to require that " armes be given to the house," so that all of them may have the means at hand, as they were pledged " to adventure their lives and fortunes in defence of one and all " of the objects named.
These craftsmen were in no manner of doubt as to the Presbyterian form of religion being the " true " kind, for their house was granted for the use of that body as a place of worship in 1687 and they consented to the erection of " a loft in the easter gable " of the building for their better accommodation, a step which was rendered unnecessary by the Revolution of 1688 (Lyon, History, p. 49).
Lyon has not been able to trace more than one instance of an old Scottish Lodge, acknowledging the lawfulness of a female occupying the position of " dame " in 322 SCOTLAND place of a master mason‑i.e. in consequence of the decease of her husband‑but such occurrences probably were not infrequent, though not cited in the records and the following Minute of April 17, 1683, from the books of the Lodge of Edinburgh, corroborates this opinion. The deacon, warden and several masters being present, it was agreed, in accordance with " the former practise," that a widow might, with the assistance of some competent freeman, receive the benefit of any work the latter may undertake on her behalf, which was offered to her by the " ancient customers of her deceased husband " and the freeman who thus obliged her was prohibited, under heavy pains and penalties, from participating in any profit which accrued. Whilst one cannot help giving credit to the motives which prompted the passing of the foregoing resolution, it is not a little curious to note how anxious the members were to guard against the potential rivalry of Masonic " dames," thus proving, if any proof were needed, that widows of Freemasons were not permitted to join the Lodge, although, to a certain extent, they were made free of the trade.
The early records of the Lodge are, of course, mainly taken up with accounts of the admission and booking of apprentices and such entries need not be recapitulated. It is remarkable, however, to note the fact that apprentices were frequently present in the Lodge during the making or passing of fellow‑crafts ; they were also in attendance as active members, their names being inserted as attesting the entry of William Hastie, June 12, 16oo ; later on, certain apprentices are mentioned as " consenting and assenting " to the entries made of new receptions.
These facts certainly dispel the notion that apprentices were only present at the constitution of the Lodge, but were not in attendance when the passing of fellows or masters was being transacted. Whatever Masonic secrets were known to the Lodge, all its members freely participated in them, from the youngest apprentice to the oldest master mason, until the era of separate Degrees was inaugurated in the eighteenth century.
A singular office is introduced into the Minutes of St. John's Day, 1721, viz. " eldest Entered Apprentice." Alexander Smely accepted that position and promised " to be faithful therein " for the ensuing year. The " eldest Apprentice " officiated March 2, 173 2, at the passing of a Fellow‑craft and it was his duty apparently to act as president at any assemblies of apprentices but, as the modern Masonic customs crept into use, this and other old titles gradually fell into desuetude and were no more heard of. Indicative of the introduction of titles into the Lodge and the appointments to office, the following list and dates of their adoption in the Lodge of Edinburgh are given on the authority of Lyon: 15 98, warden (who was president and treasurer) and clerk; 1599, deacon, as ex officio president, with warden as treasurer; 17110, chairman first called " preses " ; 1712, officer (tyler from 1763) ; 1731, presiding officer designated "grand master"; 1735, presiding officer designated "master"; 1736, depute master first appointed; 1737, senior and junior wardens, treasurer and two stewards ; 1739, " old master " (changed to past master in 1798) ; 1759, substitute master; 1771, master of ceremonies; 1798, SCOTLAND 32‑3 chaplain; 18og, deacons; 1814, standard bearers; 1814, inside and outside tylers ; 1836, architect ; 1840, jeweller ; 1848, trustees ; 1865, director of music.
The office of clerk to the Lodge was a life appointment until 175 2, when it became subject to an annual election. In 16go William Livingstone, writer in Edinburgh, presented a petition to Parliament praying to be reponed in office as clerk to the Incorporation of Mary's Chapel, to which he had been appointed ad vitallz aut culpam, from which he had been deposed, " because he refused to comply with the Test Act of 1681." The petitioner had his prayer granted and the Incorporation was ordered to reinstate him.
Before concluding the excerpts from the records of the Lodge of Edinburgh, reference must be made to the admission of Speculative Masons, the first being in 16oo. The word " speculative " is used as an equivalent for non‑operative and these adjectives are employed as convertible terms, so that the expression " Speculative Mason " need not rouse the susceptibilities of any one after the explanation thus given. The meaning is one who has been admitted as a mason, without any intention of qualifying as such, save as respects any esoteric knowledge or peculiar privileges and the same definition applies to any persons who join other trades in like manner. The earliest Minute of the presence of a Speculative freeman Mason in a Lodge and taking part in its deliberations, is dated June 8, 16oo, a facsimile of the record from the Minutes of the Lodge of Edinburgh being one of the adornments of Lyon's History. When the brother in question was admitted it is impossible now to decide, suffice it to say, that " Jhone Boiswell of Achinflek," with the others (ye saidis maisteris), " affxit yr markis," in witness of the accuracy of the entry, the clerk styling him " ye Laird of Aichinleck." It appears to have been a special assembly at " Halerudhous," the " Master of ye werk to ye Kingis Ma'stie " being present and, probably, was chiefly convened to determine what fine " Jhone Broune, Warden of ye Lodge of Edr.," had incurred through his having " contraveinit ane actt." It might surely have been expected that this instance of the attendance and participation at a Masonic meeting, by a non‑operative or Speculative Brother (for they were all called Brethren even then), would have been allowed to pass muster without any embellishment or addition of any kind. Not so, however. Lawrie declares that Thomas Boswell, Esq., of Auchinleck, was made a warden of the Lodge in the year 16oo. It will be seen that, short as the preceding sentence is, it contains two errors, one being of a grave character, viz. that Boswell was made a warden in 16oo, which is not true; the first Speculative Mason in No. i who held that honour not being appointed until 1727, in which respect it will be seen that Mary's Chapel was long behind such Lodges as Kilwinning and Aberdeen, which, many years previously, permitted non‑operatives to rule over them. The chief of the seventeenth‑century initiations, accepted by the Lodge of Edinburgh, is thus referred to in the ancient records The 3 day off Joulay 1634. The quhilk day the Right honirabell my Lord Alexander is admitet folowe off the craft be Hewe Forest, diken, and Alexander 31‑4 SCOTLAND Nesbet, warden ; and the hell rest off the mesteres off mesones off Edenbroch ; and therto eurie mester heath supscriuet with ther handes or set to ther markes [Deacon and Warden's marks], Jn. Watt, Thomas Paterstone, Alexander, John h,fylln.
Similar entries attest the reception of Anthonie Alexander, Right Honourable Master of Work to his Majesty; Sir Alexander Strachan of Thorntoun, on the same date ; and of Archibald Steuaret in July 163 5 ; whilst on December 27, 1636, " John My line, dekene and warden, with the heall consent of the heall masters, frie mesones of Ednr., Dauied Dellap, prentes to Parech Breuch, is med an entert prentes " ; on August z5 and December 27, 1637, Daued Ramsay and Alexander Alerdis were respectively admitted to membership, the former as a fellow and Brother of the Craft and the latter as a " fellow off craft in and amongst the Mrs. off the loudg." On February 16, 1638, Herie Alexander, " Mr. off Work " to his Majesty, was received as a " fellow and brother " ; and, on May zo, 1640, James Hamiltone being Deacon, Johne Meyenis, Warden " and the rest off Mrs. off meson off edenbr. conuened," was admitted the Right Hon. " Alexander Hamiltone, generall of the artelerie of these kindom, to be felow and Mr. off the forsed craft." Further entries show the admission of William Maxwell, " doctor off Fisek," July 27, 1647 ; and on March z, 1653, of James Neilsone, " master sklaitter to his majestie," who had been " entered and past in the Lodge of Linlithgow." On December z7, 1667, Sir Patrick Hume of Polwarth was admitted as " fellow of craft and IWaster " ; on June 24, 1670, the Right Hon. " Mr. William Morray, His Mai'ties Justic Deput, Mr. Walter Pringle, Advocat," and the Right Hon. Sir John Harper of Cambusnethen, as brothers and fellow‑crafts.
Lord Alexander, who was admitted as a fellow‑craft in 1634 (died 1638) with his brother Sir Anthony Alexander (sons of the first Earl of Stirling), took an active interest in the society and frequently attended the meetings, signing the records, in the first instance,with the addition of their marks, as did also SirAlexander Strachan. The second mentioned (died 1637) was, at the time of his reception, Master of Work to Charles I and presided over an important assembly of master tradesmen at Falkland, October 26, 1636.
Archibald Stewart (initiated July 1635), judging from his autograph, was also a man of education and, as he attended the Lodge with the three Brethren previously recorded, who attested his reception, it is probable, as Lyon suggests, that he was a personal friend of theirs.
The David Ramsay mentioned in the excerpt of 1637 (August z5), was " a gentleman of the Privy Chamber " according to Bishop Burnett (Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, 1677) ; and Henrie Alexander, who was passed a Fellow‑craft in the following year, succeeded his brother as General Warden and Master of Work, occupying that office, however, prior to the reception named. He became the third Earl of Stirling and died in 165o; but he did not regularly attend the SCOTLAND 32‑5 Lodge of Edinburgh, though we meet with his name in the Atcheson‑Haven Lodge records, March 27, 1638.
The Right Hon. William Murray, who became a Fellow‑craft in 1670, was " a member of the Faculty of Advocates and rose to considerable eminence at the Bar " ; and Walter Pringle, also an advocate, was the second son of John Pringle, by his wife Lady Margaret Scott, daughter of the Earl of Buccleuch and brother of Sir Robert Pringle, the first baronet of Stitchel ; the third reception being that of Sir John Harper, also a member of the Scottish Bar, and sheriff depute of the county of Lanark.
The admission of General Alexander Hamilton, on May zo, 1640, and of the Right Hon. Sir Patrick Hume, Bart., on December 27, 1667, are especially recorded as constituting these intrants, " felow and Mr. off the forsed craft," and " fellow of craft (and Master) of this lodg," respectively.
It may be assumed that the term " Master " simply meant that a compliment was paid these two Brethren and nothing more. Certainly there was nothing corresponding with the ceremony of a separate Master Mason's degree at that time, for the position of Master then, amongst the operatives, merely implied that certain privileges were exercised, with the approval of the trade; this status, moreover, was generally conferred by the Incorporation. As these two Brethren were Speculative members, no objection appears to have been raised to their being called " Masters," hence apparently they were so described; we may feel tolerably confident that they did not set up as Master Masons on their own account ! Many of the operatives did not view the introduction of the speculative element with favour and, at one time, the promoters and the opponents of the innovation were divided into hostile camps, but, eventually, those who supported the Gentlemen or Geomatic Masons won the day, the Domatics having to succumb to the powerful influences arrayed against them. In No. i, however, the latter held " the balance of power " in their hands ; but, in the Lodge of Aberdeen, the majority in A.D. 1670 were actually non‑operative or Speculative members! General Hamilton was present with the Scottish army at Newcastle, May zo, 1641, on which day, together with certain masters and others of the Lodge of Edinburgh, he took part in the admission of " Mr. the Right Honerabell Mr. Robert Moray (Murray), General Quarter Mr. to the armie off Scotlan." The proceedings of this emergent meeting were duly accepted by the authorities, though taking place beyond the boundaries of the Scottish kingdom. The Minute states that " the same bing approven be the hell mester off the mesone of the Log. off Edenbroth " and the entry is ratified by the signatures and marks of four brethren, including the two Generals. The Quartermaster‑General took part in the business of the Lodge held July 27, 1647, on the occasion of the admission of Dr. William Maxwell, as already cited. These irregular admissions, however, were not so readily condoned in the event of ordinary operatives being the offenders, or, in other words, it made every difference who it was that presided at the meetings. On December z7, 1679, John Fulton, one of the freemen, was placed in " Coventry " 32.6 SCOTLAND and his servants called upon to leave his employ, because of his presuming " to pass and enter severall gentlemen without licence or commission from this place." The neighbourhood of Ayr was selected by this over‑zealous Mason for introducing Speculative members into the Fraternity and, as his conduct so greatly roused the ire of the authorities, he must have thought " discretion was the better part of valour," for he humbly supplicated a return of his privileges, paid C4 as a fine and " promised to behave as a Brother " for the future; whereupon the vexed souls of the masters relented and he was duly " reponed." Still it is singular to mark that there is no resolution passed against the reception of gentlemen as Masons, either in or out of the Lodge and the objection seems to have arisen out of the fancy of a particular Brother to select himself as the medium of such admissions. The subject presents many features of interest and is worthy of more careful consideration than either time or space will now permit.
The entry of March 2, 165 3, is an important one, for it is nothing more nor less than the election of a " joining member." It seems that James Neilsone, " master slaiter " to the king, who had been " entered and past in the Lodge of Linlithgow," was desirous of being received as a member of the Lodge of Edinburgh and, on the day named, the whole company elected him as a " brother and fellow of their companie " and, in witness thereof, they all " set to their hands or marks." One more remark on these records. Lyon declares that the reference to " frie mesones," in the Minute of December 27, 1636 (before quoted), is the earliest instance yet discovered of " Free‑mason " being in Scotland applied to designate members of the mason craft and considers that it is used as an abbreviation of the term " FreeTnen‑masons." As regards the earliest use of the word Freemason (in connexion with Lodges), it may be traced back to 1581, when the Melrose version of the Old Charges was originally written, of which the copy of 1674 is alone preserved. In that document the expression Free mason (" frie mason ") occurs very frequently and clearly was then used as synonymous with freemen‑masons, the term " frie‑men " being cited therein as an equivalent for " Freemason." There are so many examples of the use of freemen, freemasons, brother freemen, freemen masters and like terms, back to the fifteenth century, that unless violence be done to the ordinary meaning of words, no interpretation can be placed upon such designations other than that advanced, with which both Lyon and Hughan agree.
CANONGATE KILWINNING LODGE, NO. 2 It was the custom in the seventeenth century for some Lodges to permit certain members to enter and pass Masons at a distance from their regular places of meeting, which occasioned much irregularity of proceeding and prevented the exercise of that due care with regard to admissions which is so essential to the prosperity of the Craft. These practices appear generally to have been reported at the next assembly of the Lodge and duly noted, the fees paid and membership allowed.
SCOTLAND 327 The first authoritative commission or Warrant seems to have been that issued by the Lodge of Kilwinning (No. o) to several of their own members resident in the Canongate, Edinburgh, dated December Zo, 1677. This was a direct invasion of jurisdiction, for it was not simply a Charter to enable their members to meet as masons in Edinburgh, but it empowered them to act as a Lodge, quite as much as Mother Kilwinning herself, totally disregarding the proximity of the First and Head Lodge of Scotland. A friendly invasion of England was Masonically consummated in 1641 at Newcastle by No. i, but the transaction was confined to the initiation of one of their own countrymen, there the matter ended ; but the authority granted to the Canongate Kilwinning Lodge amounted to a Warrant for its constitution and separate existence, which was the actual result that ensued.
The Charter to this Lodge, which maybe fairly termed the " Premier Scottish Warrant of Constitution," runs as follows At the ludge of Killwining the twentie day of december 1677 yeares, deacons and wardanes and the rest of the Brethren, considering the love and favour showne to us be the rest of the Brethren of the Cannigate in Edinbroughe, ane part of our number being willing to be boked and inroled the qch day gives power and liberty to them to enter, receave and pass ony qualified persons that they think fitt, in name and behalf of the ludge of Killwinning and to pay ther entry and booking moneys due to the sd ludge, as we do our selves, they sending on of ther number to us yearly and we to do the lyke to them if need be. The qlk day ther names are insert into this book " (see Lyon's History, p. 101, and Freemasons' ‑Maga!Zine, August 8, 1863).
The document was signed (actually, or by proxy) by twelve Brethren, their marks being generally attached and it is entered verbatim in the books of the Mother Lodge, the original Warrant being now lost. The record of the transaction in theMinutes of the Canongate Kilwinning Lodge for 1736‑the year next following that from which its earliest writings are believed to date‑is not a correct version of the proceedings and appears to have been penned with a view to sustaining the claim of the members to a high position on the Scottish roll. The Lodge was reorganized in 173 S by Speculative Freemasons and, in that year, the members worked the third Degree, although not the first so to do in Scotland, that honour being claimed for another offshoot of the Mother Kilwinning, viz.‑the Edinburgh Kilwinning Scots Arms of 1729, the Brethren of which were theoretical or Speculative Masons.
No. 2 performed a very important part in the inauguration of the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the latter body has acknowledged that the former dates from December zo, 1677.
SCOON AND PERTH LODGE, NO. 3 This ancient Lodge, like several others, is much older than No. 2, but has had to rest satisfied with its position as fourth on the roll, though the authorities state that it existed " before 165 8 " and the Grand Lodge acknowledges this date at the present time, placing Nos. o and i, however, as " before 1598 " and No. 57 (Haddington) at 1599, there being also many bearing seventeenth‑century designations.
Lawrie says that the Lodge is one " of great antiquity and possesses a series of well‑kept records for upwards of two hundred years " (Lawrie's History of Freemasonry, 1859,P‑368). It is singular that the Minutes have so far escaped examina tion by any known Masonic historian. Even when Hughan visited the city he failed to obtain a glance at them; the little he found out about the Lodge is given in his Early History of British Freemasonry (Voice of Freemasonry, May 1873). He also printed in the Masonic Magazine (October 1878) an exact transcript of a document known as its Charter, dated December 24, 165 8. This instrument‑which is signed by J. Roch, " Mr. Measone," Andro Norie, warden, with thirty‑nine membersis quite different from any other of the seventeenth‑century MSS. It combines features of the Old Charges with items of local interest and also recites the Kilwinning and other legends. It speaks of the Lodge of Scoon as being second in the nation, priority being given to Kilwinning and a singular reticence is observed as to Edinburgh. The Masons are frequently described as masters, friemen and fellow‑crafts and the recital of the traditions and laws begins‑" In the name of God, amen," the conclusion being very rare, as will be seen And Lastlie, wee and all of ws off ane mynd, consent and assent, doe bind and obleidge ws and our successoris, to mantayne and wphold the haill liberties and previledges of the said Lodge of Scoon, as ane frie Lodge, for entering and passing within ourselves, as the bodie thereof, residing within the burgh of Perth as sd is ; And that soe long as the Sun ryseth in the East and setteth in the West, as we wold wish the blessing of God to attend ws in all our wayes and actiones.
This reference to the "glorious luminary of nature" will at least arrest our attention, as suggestive that Speculative Freemasonry was then not wholly unknown in the city of Perth and may well challenge the research of those modern craftsmen who find for every existing ceremony an ancient prototype. The term free lodge is also a most expressive one, pointing to the use of the word free as a prefix to mason, a conjunction upon which many comments have been made.
The same record states that, according to the " Knowledge of our predecessoris ther cam one from the North countrie, named Johne Mylne, ane measone or man weill experted in his calling, who entered himselff both frieman and burges of this brugh." In process of time, because of his skill, he was preferred to be the king's master mason; he was also Master of the Lodge.
His son, " Johne Milne," succeeded him in both offices, " in the reigne off his Majestie King James the Sixt, of blessed memorie, who, by the said second Johne Mylne, was (be the King's own desire) entered Freeman, measone and fellow‑craft." This royal initiation naturally calls for special remark, hence we read, " During all his lyfetime he.mantayned the same as ane member of the Lodge of Scoon, so that this Lodge is the most famous Lodge (iff weill ordered) within SCOTLAND 32‑9 the kingdome." Of the family of Mylne there continued several generations who were master masons to their majesties the Kings of Scotland until 1657, at which time " the last Mr. Mylne being Mr. off the Lodge off Scoon, deceased, left behind him ane compleit Lodge of measones, friemen and fellow‑crafts, wh such off ther number as wardens and others to oversie them and ordained that one of the said number should choyse one of themselves to succeid as master in his place." The several persons named, nominated and made choice of James Roch to be master ad vitam and Andrew Norie as warden (both being subject to the " convenience " of the masters and fellow‑crafts) ; all agreeing to confirm the old acts, the chief being i. No friemen to contradict another unlawfully.
2. " Nor goe to no other Lodge, nor mak ane Lodge among themselves, seeing this Lodge is the prin'e within the Shyre." 3. If any freeman leave the lodge for another, he can only return on payment of three times the sum exigible on his joining either and shall " be put cleane from the company of the Lodge he was last in." 4. The master and warden before named to see these rules carried out. S . No master to take another's work unless so entitled.
6. Masters not to " go between " their fellows engaged in seeking work.
7. Apprentices and journeymen belonging to this (or any other) Lodge must have their free discharge from their previous masters prior to re‑engagement, an exception, however, permitted in the case of twenty days' services only.
8. All Fellow‑crafts passed in this Lodge, shall pay C16 (Scots), beside the gloves and dues, with C3 (Scots) at their " first incoming, efter they are past." 9. If these sums are not paid at once, " cautioners " must be obtained outside the Lodge.
io. Apprentices not to take work above 40s. (Scots) and not to have apprentices under the penalty of being " dabared from the libertie of the said Lodge." The Milnes were a famous Masonic family, the third John Milne having been called to Edinburgh in 1616 to undertake the erection of the king's statue. On the death of William Wallace in 1631, Milne was appointed master mason to Charles I, which office he resigned in 1636 in favour of his eldest son " John, Mylne, younger," who, in 163 3, was made a Fellow‑craft in the Lodge of Edinburgh, became " deacon of the lodge and warden " in 1636 and served in the former office for many years, having been re‑elected ten times during twenty‑seven years. This same Mylne was at the Masonic meeting at Newcastle in 1641 and his brother Alexander was "passed" June z, 163 S, in the presence of his "brother," Lord Alexander, Sir Anthony Alexander and Sir Alexander Strachan. Robert was apprenticed to his uncle John, in Lodge No. 1, December 27, 165 3 and was elected warden in 1663, also deacon in 1681, taking a leading part in Masonic business until 1707. Robert Mylne appears to have succeeded his uncle as master mason to Charles I, being so designated in an agreement with the Perth authorities for the rebuilding of the cross which had been removed from High Street, through the possession of the city by Cromwell.
330 SCOTLAND William, his eldest son, was received into the Lodge of Edinburgh, December 27, 1681, was warden several times from 1695, dying in 17z8.
Thomas Mylne, eldest son of the latter, " was entered and admitted as apprentice, December z7, 17z1 ; chosen Eldest Prentice, December z7, 17zz ; admitted and received Fellow‑craft, December 27, 17z9 ; chosen ` master of the society,' December z7, 1735." Noticing the connexion of this worthy with the Lodge of Edinburgh, Lyon points out the remarkable fact " of his having been entered in what may emphatically be termed the transition period of its existence‑of his having been advanced during the Masonic twilight which preceded the institution of the Grand Lodge of Scotland‑and of his having maintained a connexion with the Lodge until every vestige of its operative character had disappeared " (History, P‑ 94)ň Robert and William Mylne (sons of Thomas Mylne) were also members of the Lodge and, on the death of the former in 1811 (who was buried in St. Paul's Cathedral, having been surveyor of that edifice for fifty years), this family's connexion with the Lodge of Edinburgh, which had been maintained through five successive generations, was terminated.
This ancient Lodge at Perth joined the Grand Lodge of Scotland in 174z, not having taken any part in the inauguration of that body, its age being admitted, as already noted, to be " before 165 8." LODGE OF GLASGOW ST. JOHN, NO. 3 his This is an old Lodge undoubtedly, though its documents do not date back quite as far as some of its admirers have declared. Its secondary position to" Mother Lodge Kilwinning " does not appear to have lasted for any long period and, at all events, it did not affect its separate and distinct existence, for its name appears in the second of the St. Clair Charters. The noted fabrication, entitled the Malcolm Charter, originally said to be of the year 1057, but, afterwards, dated about a century later, have been examined in another chapter. The second in order, or rather the first of the genuine documents, is the William the Lion Charter of the twelfth century. The original has not been preserved, but a copy is to be found in Hamilton of Wishatv's description of the Sherifdoms of Lanark and Renfrew, compiled about 1710 and it is recorded in the venerable Register of the Bishopric. A translation is given in the history of the Lodge which is attached to its By‑laws (1858).
Every line of this singular document is inconsistent with the charter phraseology of the period to which it has been assigned. Money was required for the restoration of the cathedral ; it was evidently for this purpose that the patronage of the king was solicited. The " Charter " proceeds to state that " the fraternity appointed by the Right Rev. Jocylin, Bishop of said Cathedral, with advice of the Abbots, Priors and other clergy of his diocese, we devoutly receive and confirm by the support of our Royal protection, aye and until the finishing of the Cathedral itself; and all the collectors of the same fraternity and those who request aid for its building, SCOTLAND 331 we have taken into our favour." It has been too hastily concluded that the word "fraternity" means the Lodge, but the intention manifestly was to describe a religious fraternity which had been formed to promote the renovation or restoration of the cathedral. The inference that the Charter referred to a Masonic Lodge appears wholly unwarranted by the context. Moreover, who ever heard of the builders of a fabric being also collectors of the funds ? The " Seal of Cause " of A.D. 16oo was required to separate the wrights from the masons as an Incorporation, the coopers having been disjoined in 1569. The reasons offered by the wrights for such division are carefully recited and appear to be fair and conclusive, the prayer of the petitioners being granted by the magistrates and town council on May 3, 16oo. The wrights (carpenters) had a deacon and elder and are called freemen. They pointed out that the masons could not judge of their work and vice versa; and that the same arguments which led to the separate establishment of the coopers, operated also in their favour. The grant was made " For the lovying of God almyty Father Sone and Halie Gaist " (as with the Old Charges) and provision was made therein for the regular management of the Incorporation, election of officers, etc. Mention is made of the expensive banquets in former times, which it was decided not to continue. They were given by each freeman on his entry. " Booths to work in," corresponding with the Lodges of Freemasons are mentioned; apprentices were bound for seven years ; the most experienced masters were selected to pass and visit all men's work; and no craftsman was to set up a booth in the city until he was first made burgess and freeman of the same (Seal of Cause, etc., 16oo, printed from the original at Edinburgh, MDCCCXL, 4to, 12 pp.).
W. P. Buchan (Freemasons' Magazine, April 3, 1869) states that the first notice in the Minutes of the Glasgow Incorporation of Masons bears date September 22, 162o, viz.
Entry of Apprentices to the Lodge of Glasgow, the last day of december 1613 years, compeared John Stewart, Deacon of Masons and signified to David Slater, Warden of the Lodge of Glasgow and to the remenant Brethren of that Lodge ; that he was to enter John Stewart, his apprentice, in the said Lodge. Lykas upon the morn, being the first day of January 1614 years, the said warden and Brethren of the said Lodge entered the said John Stewart, younger, apprentice to the said John Stewart, elder, conform to the acts and liberty of the Lodge.
The deacons' courts in 16o1 consisted of a deacon, six quartermasters, two keepers of the keys, an officer and clerk. James Ritchie was accused of feeing a cowan and, in the record of the Incorporation, May I, 1622, it is stated in his favour that He was entered with a Lodge and had a discharge of a master in Paisley.
No old records of the Lodge have as yet been discovered, but the foregoing proves its existence early in the seventeenth century and as we know the Incor‑ 332 SCOTLAND poration has continued to exist, from its separate constitution in I6oo to the present time, there need be no doubt thrown upon the continuity of the Lodge during the period covered from 1613 to the commencement of its existing Minutes. That it was represented on the occasion of the second " St. Clair Charter " is unquestionable, for it was described as " The Ludge of Glasgow, John Boyd, deahin ; Rob. Boyd, ane of the mestres." After a deal of delicate management the Lodge was placed on the roll of the Grand Lodge of Scotland in ‑1850 as No. 3 bis, though it was not the fault of the members that they failed to obtain a higher position. Thus one after another the old Lodges became united to the Grand Lodge.
The membership of the Lodge of Glasgow, unlike that of other pre‑eighteenthcentury Lodges, was exclusively operative and " although doubtless giving the mason word to entered apprentices, none were recognized as members till they had joined the Incorporation, which was composed of mason burgesses. The erection of St. Mungo's in 1729 was the result of an unsuccessful attempt to introduce nonoperatives into the St. John's Lodge, Glasgow, an object which was not attained until about the year 1842 " (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 413).
CANONGATE AND LEITH, LEITH AND CANONGATE LODGE, NO. 5 This Lodge is authoritatively acknowledged as dating from A.D. 1688, in which year the schism is recorded in the Minutes of the Lodge of Edinburgh, the seceders being composed of Masons in Leith and the Canongate, hence the title of the Lodge. They were charged with disobeying the Masonic laws, by presuming " to antar and pase " within the precincts of the old Lodge and of having erected a Lodge amongst themselves without the authority of any royal or general warden. Then followed, as usual, a recital of all the pains and penalties but, notwithstanding the strong measures taken to stamp out the rebellion, only one of the defaulters appears to have made submission and returned within the fold, viz. James Thomson, who was pardoned on payment of the fine of Cio (Scots). The earliest Minutes now possessed by the Lodge begin in 183 o, but the Charter of Confirmation, dated February 8, 1738, acknowledges its descent "from the Mason Lodge of Mary's Chapel in Edinburgh," its precedency being allowed from May 29, 1688, " in respect its book was produced which contains a minute of that date, which was openly read in presence of the Grand Lodge." Its presence at the constitution of the Grand Lodge in 1736 was objected to by the parent Lodge, but without avail, soon after which the harmonising influences of the new organization led to a renewal of the old friendship. As a Lodge it was mainly of a speculative character, for of the fifty‑two names enrolled on November 30, 1736, only eighteen were operative masons LODGE OF OLD KILWINNING ST. JOHN, INVERNESS, NO. 6 A charter of confirmation was granted by the Grand Lodge of Scotland to this Lodge on November 30, 1737, its existence being admitted from the year 1678 SCOTLAND 333 but much of the value of the record is vitiated from the fact, that it is gravely stated therein that the Lodge had " practised the passing of master masons from that period " (Lyon, op. cit., p. 215)‑ Its antiquity is not noted in the registers of Mother Kilwinning, though Lawrie says, " it goes the farthest back of all the Kilwinning Lodges, none of the others going beyond 1724," which opinion, however, is open to question.
HAMILTON KILWINNING LODGE, NO. 7 The Lodge occurs on the roll of the Grand Lodge as No. 7 and is considered to date from the year 1695. Of its history, but little is known.
LODGE OF ,JOURNEYMEN, EDINBURGH, No. 8 Officially entitled to precedence from 1709 and numbered 8 on the revised roll, the journeymen of Edinburgh have much reason to be proud of their position and prosperity, considering the strong influence originally brought to bear against their Lodge.
The introduction of the speculative element into the Lodge of Edinburgh and the exclusive character of the Incorporation of Mary's Chapel, as well as the domineering spirit of the masters in both organizations, all tended to keep the journeymen Masons in a subordinate position. They did not, however, submit easily to the yoke and, as their class increased in knowledge and monopolies were gradually abolished, the leading spirits among them rebelled and soon set the masters at defiance. In 17o5 steps were taken to enforce the rules against journeymen working on their own account, i.e. without masters employing them. William Hunter thinks that the subjection of the journeymen in the Lodge arose from their condition in life rather than from their belonging to a lower grade in Speculative Masonry. The masters referred to in almost every one of the early Minutes, were, therefore, most probably simply masters in trade and not masters in the sense in which they are now regarded in the Masonic Lodges of this country (Freemasons' Magazine, March 1858, p. 571). The old records of No. 8 are missing, those preserved commencing in ‑1740; but there are not wanting evidences of its career years before that period. The centenary of the Lodge was celebrated in 1807 and probably its origin or separation from No. I was in 1707, not 1709. The resolution passed by the journeymen in 17o8 to raise money for the poor members was signed by forty‑four Brethren, the name of almost every one of whom is found in the books of No. I, for that Lodge was most particular in enrolling all those whom it either entered or passed. On December 27, 1708, the Fellow‑Crafts (Journeymen) presented a petition to the parent Lodge, asking for a fuller inspection of the accounts and, in response to the memorial, six discreet " fellows " were allowed to be nominated as a committee of inspection. This arrangement continued for some years, but the smouldering embers of discontent were fanned into renewed life by the imposition of an annual subscription of 20s. Scots, payable by 334 SCOTLAND journeymen for the privilege of being employed by masters of the Incorporation! Hunter, in his excellent sketch, expresses an opinion that the decisions of the Lodge of Edinburgh in August 1712 finally completed the rupture, for the masters rescinded the resolution appointing the committee of inspection, doubtless being aggrieved at the separate Lodge formed by the craftsmen and the zealous watch they kept over the general funds of the society. On the passing of the resolution, all the journeymen present but two left the Lodge, headed by James Watson, deacon of the Incorporation and preses (master) of No. i. Then, " war to the knife" was declared; all who were left behind in the Lodge agreed that none of the recusant journeymen should be received back into the society until they had given full satisfaction for their contemptuous conduct and the masters prohibited the apprentices from assisting the journeymen in entering apprentices, under the penalty of being disowned by the parent Lodge. The desertion from No. i of the deacon and preses (James Watson) was a severe blow to its prestige and proved of immense benefit to the journeymen, who thus had a competent master to preside over them. On February 9, 1713, the parent Lodge met and elected David Thomson, " late deacon of the masons, to preside in all their meetings." He was succeeded by William Smellie, a determined antagonist of the seceders, who initiated stringent measures against them. All this while the journeymen were working actively and lost no opportunities of entering and passing Masons within the royalty of No. i to the manifest injury of the original Lodge. They would neither surrender their arms nor break up their society, notwithstanding the severity of the laws passed against them, even though all the united influence of the old Lodge and Incorporation was exerted to procure their suppression. The opposition they received and the indomitable courage they evinced, are unparalleled in the early history of the Scottish Craft and, whilst proving that the powerful influence of the Lodge and Incorporation, wielded in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, was on the wane, foreshadowed that the pluck and perseverance of the journeymen were finally to overcome all obstacles and secure for ever their independence. On the assumption, apparently, that the journeymen would be overawed and eventually succumb on resort being made to the law, the Lodge of Edinburgh and the Incorporation jointly agreed to obtain a warrant for the apprehension and detention of two of the malcontents named William Brodie and Robert Winram. Accordingly these two Journeymen were confined in the city guard‑house and the books of their society were also seized at the instance of the same authorities.
How long the detention lasted we are not told, but the journeymen did not delay in bringing an action for the unlawful imprisonment of two of their number and the abstraction of their records. The damages were laid at a considerable amount, the defendants being the deacon of the wrights and the deacon of the masons (representing the Incorporation), who was also the preses of the lodge. Whilst the case was before the Lords of Council and Session, the dispute was referred to the arbitration of Robert Inglis (late deacon of the goldsmiths) on behalf of the plaintiffs and Alexander Nisbet (late deacon of the surgeons) on the part of SCOTLAND 335 the defendants, while, in the event of an amicable settlement being impossible, then the final decision was left to John Dunbar, deacon of the glovers, full powers being given to the said parties for the purpose of obtaining all needful testimony on the various points raised. This was arranged on November z9, 1714, the Decreet Arbitral being accepted and subscribed to on January 8, 1715, by those interested and the necessary witnesses. The document, which is without parallel Masonically, proves that the Craft had no insuperable objection to their disputes being adjusted under the sanction of the law and, in a matter of such consequence, there being nothing said about the hereditary grand mastership, it may safely be concluded that at the period in question, there were no Brethren invested with any Masonic rank beyond what was conferred by individual Lodges or the Incorporation (see Voice of Masonry, July 187z and Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh).
The arbitrators adjudged úloo to be paid Brodie and Winram by the two deacons, because they had used undue severity and that the books must be returned to their lawful owners on a receipt being given by the plaintiffs. They next decided that the deacons and the whole body of Freemen Masters of the Incorporation of Masons were absolved from accounting to the journeymen for the money received " for giving the mason word, as it is called," either to freemen or journeymen, prior to the date of the Decreet Arbitral. In order to put an end to the disputes arising between the said freemen and journeymen, " anent the giving of the mason word," the two deacons were instructed to procure from their Incorporation, " an act or allowance, allowing the journeymen to meet together by themselves as a society for giving the word," etc. Provided always (1) that their " meetings, actings and writings be only concerning their collecting the moneys for giving the Mason word," etc. ; (z) that the moneys thus obtained be used for charitable purposes connected with themselves ; (3) that a register be kept of the moneys so received and disbursed; (4) that a chest be provided with two different locks, one key being kept by a Freeman Mason elected annually by the Incorporation and the other by " one of the journeymen to be elected by themselves " ; (S) that the said Freeman attend the meetings, see all is done in order and report, if need be, to his Incorporation; (6) that the journeymen produce their books and accounts to the deacon of the Masons and the Incorporation each half year; and (7) that five journeymen form a quorum‑" their purse keeper for the time being a sine qua non." The penalty of disobedience by either party was fixed at Cioo Scots and, as the Lodge of Edinburgh persistently ignored the award, steps were taken by the plaintiffs to enforce its terms, as well as to obtain their books. The " charge " itself was discovered about thirty years ago by David Laing of the Signet Library, by whom it was presented to Kerr, who very properly deposited it in the charterbox of the Lodge No. 8. Singular to state, nothing is known at the present time of the result of the application; the records of the parent Lodge, whilst they contain a Minute of its decision to contest the claim, are silent as to the ultimate 336 SCOTLAND result ; but they record what is of more consequence, viz. the rescinding of the obnoxious resolutions, that the journeymen were readmitted " upon certain conditiones mentioned in a paper apart signed and approven of both masters and jurnaymen " (so they must have concocted another agreement), that Deacon Watson was actually re‑elected in 1719 to his former position in the old Lodge and Incorporation. Little difficulties, however, again cropped up affecting the independence of the journeymen Lodge but, eventually, as Lyon well observes, Lodges and Incorporations parted company, free trade in Mason‑making became popular and the bone of contention that had long existed between the Lodge of Edinburgh and its youngest daughter having thus been removed, the journeymen Lodge was left in full and undisturbed possession of its privileges.
LODGE OF DUNBLANE, No. 9 The existing Minutes begin in January 1696 and, strange to say, neither then, nor later, contain any " marks " or (references thereto), in which respect they differ from the generality of old Masonic records. John Cameron of Lochiel was a member of the Lodge in 1696. He served with the Earl of Mar in the Rebellion Of 1715, was the husband of Isabel Campell (sister of Sir Duncan Campell, one of the four initiates of Dr. Desaguliers, in 1721, at Edinburgh), his eldest son, Donald, being one of the most celebrated and influential chiefs who joined Prince Charles Edward Stuart, who was the first to obtain possession of Edinburgh on its investment by the Highlanders in 1745. In fact, the majority of the Brethren were not only " speculatives," but several were noted Jacobites. Lord Strathalane (Master, 1696), Lord John Drummond, brother of the Duke of Perth (initiated March 13, 1740, and Master in 1743‑5), with other leading members of the Lodge were prominent actors on the Stuart side in the Risings of '1715 and 1745 ; but, as if to prove the unpolitical character of the society, their disaffection was counterbalanced by the strong partisanship on behalf of the House of Hanover manifested in other Lodges.
Lyon furnishes transcripts of several of the old records, the first in order, dated January 28, 1696, being of unusual length. In the list of members present are to be found several gentlemen, the operative masons being in the minority. There cannot be a doubt that this assembly was not the first of its kind, for the text of the earliest preserved record entirely dissipates any such illusion ; why the Lodge should be accorded precedence only from the year 1709 on the official roll, is difficult to understand. The business transacted in 1696 partook of the nature of a Masonic Court (as it was termed) and was certainly of a representative character. The meeting was called " The Lodge of Meassones in Dunblane," Lord Strathalane (the second viscount) being entitled " master meassone " ; Alexander Drummond of Balhadie, warden, an " eldest fellow of craft," was also appointed ; and a " deput " (deputy), a clerk, a treasurer, an officer and a " Pror. Fiscall." These constituted the Court, with other members also named. Each SCOTLAND 337 workman on his " entry " was required to pay C6 and half that sum on his " passing," in addition to the ordinary dues. It was likewise agreed that no one present, or any one who joined subsequently, should divulge any of the acts passed by the Court to any person whatsoever who was not a member of the Lodge, save the two rules as to entry and passing, " under the breach of breaking of their oath." As many of the laws passed at this meeting, others in 1696 and later, relate to the Craft in its operative character, they need not be quoted. Commissions were issued by Dunblane to authorize the entry elsewhere than in the Lodge, " of gentlemen or other persons of entire credit and reputation living at a distance from the town," provided that the holders thereof obtain the co‑operation " of such members of this Lodge as can be conveniently got, or, in case of necessity, to borrow from another Lodge as many as shall make a quorum." It was the custom for such as were entered in this fashion to be " passed " in the Lodge; but by an enactment of the Court in September 1716, which prohibited the entry and passing " at one and the same tyme," exception was made in favour of " gentlemen who cannot be present at a second diet." The Minutes record the presentation of aprons and gloves to three speculative intrants on January 8, 1724, the Lodge itself having been presented with a copy of the Constitutions of the Freemasons of A.D. 1723, a little while before. The following is worth giving in extenso : " Dunblane, the twenty‑seventh day of December 1720 years. Sederunt : Robert Duthy, deacon; Wm. Wright, warden; Wm. Muschet, eldest fellow of craft. . . . Compeared John Gillespie, writer in Dunblane, who was entered on the 24 instant, and after examination was duely passt from the Square to the Compass and from an Entered Prentice to a Fellow of Craft of this Lodge, who present as said, is bound, obliged and enacted himself to stand by, obey, obtemper and subject himself unto the heall acts and ordinances of this Lodge and Company " (Lyon, op. cit., p. 416). After due examination, another apprentice was similarly passed on November 28, 1721 ; and, on September 6, 1723, it is certified that others gave " satisfieing answers of their knowledge " prior to receiving the promotion solicited. A remarkable entry occurs, of date December 27, 1729. Two apprentices (one being a merchant in Dunblane) applied, from the Lodge of Kilwinning, to be " entered " as apprentices in the Lodge and then " passed " as Fellow‑crafts. James Muschet was instructed " to examine them as to their qualifications and knowledge and, having reported to the Lodge that they had a competent knowledge of the secrets of the mason word," their petitions were duly attended to. It will be noticed that the Minutes speak of the " secrets of the mason word," the Decreet Arbitral of Edinburgh alluding only to the " mason word." That the esoteric ceremony or ceremonies consisted of secrets is testified by the records of two Lodges‑Dunblane and Haughfoot‑which are more explicit than those of Nos. 1 and 8. The Lodge of Dunblane did not join the Grand Lodge until 1760‑1, therefore its proceedings are the more valuable, because they were uninfluenced by modern organizations. As with the Minutes of certain other old Lodges, those of Dunblane contain numerous references to the appointment of " intenders," or 338 SCOTLAND instructors, for the intrants. An enactment relating thereto is on the books of the Lodge of Edinburgh so late as 1714, the duties of such an officer being defined in 1725 by the Lodge at Dunblane to consist of " the perfecting of apprentices, so that they might be fitt for their future tryalls." In the Lodge of Peebles, " intenders " were selected at times for such a purpose, extending over a century and a half, a similar officer being known at Aberdeen so early as 1670.
TORPHICHEN KILWINNING LODGE, BATHGATE, No. 13 This Lodge, whilst it dates only from the latter year officially, existed, according to Hughan, many years earlier. On December 12, 1728, twelve Fellow‑crafts and seven " Enter Prentices " petitioned Mother Lodge Kilwinning for a constitution and based their request upon the fact that they held their rights and privileges from that ancient society. The application was made on behalf of the nineteen members who signed the petition and also " absent brethren." The privileges solicited were granted May 15, 172‑9; but on the Lodge deciding to join the Grand Lodge in 1737, the members again applied for the recognition of Kilwinning (Freemasons' Magazine, August 29, 1863), on the ground of their having once accepted " a charter of erection, of a very ancient date," from that source. The year in which this Warrant was originally issued is nowhere recorded, but Kilwinning Lodge agreed on March 30, 1737, that " their former ancient charter be corroborated," and the request of the Brethren be granted.
PEEBLES KILWINNING LODGE, No. 24 There are not a few old Lodges which appear with modern dates attached to them in the official roll, of which No. 17, Linlithgow, is an example, for an extract from the records of No. i, which refer to that Lodge as early as 1653, has already been quoted, yet it is placed as No. 17 and dated 1736. Peebles is another instance of chronological and numerical anomalies, ranking as it does from A.D. 1736, though at work in 1716. The Lodge, from 1716 to the end of last century, regularly observed the custom of holding an annual trial of the Apprentices and Fellow‑crafts. In 1726 an inventory of its property was made in the minute‑book, consisting of " Ane Bible, the Constitutions of the haill Lodges in London [presented by the Provost of Peebles (a member of the Lodge) on December 27, 1725, who was heartily thanked for so acceptable a gift. Several old Lodges in Scotland had copies of the Constitutions of 1723, soon,after their publication], the Square and a piece of small tow." Next year the entry reads " Square, tow and compass." Some of the marks registered by its members are of an exceptional character : that of a captain of the King's Foot Guards being " a V‑shaped shield, bearing on each half a small cross, the whole being surmounted by a cross of a larger size. Amongst other varieties are a slater's hammer and a leather cutter's knife ; whilst later on (1745), the mark " taken out " by a wigmaker was " a human head with a wig and an ample F. III‑13 SCOTLAND 339 beard 1 " (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 68). At the opening ceremony the members engaged in prayer and the Brethren were sworn to refrain from undue partiality in the consideration of the business, which, Lyon tells us, was called " Fenc ing the Lodge " and was so observed at Peebles for very many years. From its origin in 1716, the Lodge was speculative in part and observed many ancient customs long after they had disappeared from other Lodges, such as the foregoing, the appointment of instructors (intenders) and the annual testing of apprentices and fellows. The third Degree is not alluded to in its first volume of records, which end in 1764, Kilwinning being added to its name in 1750.
The original record of October 18, 1716, is peculiar, for it is an intimation of the Lodge being self‑constituted by " a sufficient number of Brethren in this Burgh," in order to repair the loss they sustained " by the want of a Lodge." The record is signed by twelve members, who also attach their marks and, during the meeting, a deacon, warden and other officers were regularly elected. The Festival of St. John the Evangelist was annually celebrated by the Lodge, on which day the annual subscriptions were payable and the officers elected.
John Wood, merchant, having been " gravely and decently entered a member of the said ludge " on St. John's Day, 1717, " any complement to be given being referr'd to himself," which seems a delicate way of saying that they, as members, did not wish to decide the amount of his gift, but left the matter in his own hands. On December 19, 1718, John Douglass, brother‑german to the Earl of March, with Captain Weir, were received and admitted members, each choosing their two " Intenders " and their marks, paying a guinea and half a guinea respectively to the Box, whereupon the " honourable society having received ane handsome treat," also did its part to enhance the feast, " being that which was due to their carecter." David White, on January 13, 1725, was charged with a breach of the laws, in that he threatened to " enter " some persons in a certain parish and to set up a Lodge there. He was found guilty and " ordained to beg God and the honourable company pardon and promise not to doe the like in time coming which he accordingly did." On December 27, 1726, the members finding that the annual subscription of one shilling each, payable by the Brethren who were not workmen, was considered excessive, agreed " to restrict in all time coming the sd shilling to eightpence." Robert Sanderson has compiled an excellent sketch of the records from 1716, some of which originally appeared in the Scottish Freemason, but subsequently the chief excerpts were given in the Masonic Magazine (December 1878, February 1879 and 188o‑z), many of the more curious marks being reproduced. In those days the delta was not a prohibited mark, as in these modern times. The collection of these old marks scattered over so many volumes of ancient records, many being really good geometrical figures, would provide an excellent assortment for the Registrars of Mark Lodges and prove the absurdity of limiting the choice of such appendages to any set number of lines or points.
340 SCOTLAND LODGE OF ABERDEEN, NO. 34.
The eventful history of the ancient Lodge of Aberdeen deserves a volume to itself, hence a sketch of its chief characteristics is all that can now be undertaken and is really all that can be accomplished, as its complete history, in anything like the full ness of that of the Lodge of Edinburgh, has yet to be written. The materials, from which a brief account of this very ancient Lodge is compiled consist mainly of the Burgh Records (Publications of the Spalding Club, vol. v, pp. z6, 41, 52, 68, 141, zc9o), Hughan's series of articles in the Voice of Masonry (1872‑4, " Early History of British Freemasonry ") and chapter xliv of Lyon's excellent history.
The original formation of a Lodge at Aberdeen ranges back into the mists of antiquity and wholly eludes the research of the historian. The editor of the work first mentioned states that the records of the burgh of Aberdeen present a greater combination of materials for a national history‑glimpses of the actual social position of the people, as seen in a system of jurisprudence in legal pleadings, as exhibited in various professions and trades, pageants and sports and styles of manner and dress‑than is generally to be found in similar sources. Their historical importance has long been acknowledged by those who have had access to them. They comprehend the proceedings of the Council and of the Baillie and the Guild Courts from 1398, when the first volume commences, to 1745, being the period comprised in the selections printed for the Club (the Spalding Club was instituted in 1839). The records extend to sixty‑one folio volumes, containing on an average about Goo pages each and, with the exception of the years from 1414 to 143 3, there is no hiatus in the series.
The first volume (1399) contains an account of an early contract between the " comownys of Ab'den " on the one part and two " masonys " on the other part, which was agreed to on the Feast of St. Michael the Archangel. The work con tracted for was to hew " xii durris and xii wyndowys, in fre tailly " and the work was to be delivered in good order at any quay in Aberdeen.
On June 27, 1483, it is noted that the " master of the kirk wark," appointed, decreed and ordained that the " masownys of the luge," consisting of six members, whose names are duly recorded, were to pay zos. and 40s. to the Parish Church (Saint Nicholace Wark) for the first and second offences respectively, in the event of either of them raising any debate or controversy, for it appears that previously there had been disputes in consequence of their so doing. It was also provided that " gif thai fautit the thrid [third] tym," they were " to be excludit out of the luge as a common forfactour." It seems to have been a common practice from that day to this to give two warnings and to inflict as many (though increasing) fines, preparatory to the exclusion which was to follow the third offence and, in this case, what may be termed a " By‑law " is certified to have been agreed to by the members concerned and approved by the Aldermen and Council, the masons being " obligated " to obedience " be the faith of thare bodiis." Two of the number were particularly specified as offenders and were cautioned SCOTLAND 3411 that, should either of them break the rule they had agreed to, " he that beis fundyn in the faute thairof salbe expellit the luge fra that tyme furtht." In 11493 (November 115) three masons were hired for a year by the Aldermen and Council, to " abide in that service, batht in the luge and vtenche and pass to Cowe‑[There was an old castle and church at Cowrie, fourteen miles south of Aber deen. It was a " Thanedom " and at one time belonged to the Bruces. This is probably the spot referred to in the agreement of 11493. The Rev. A. T. Grant, however, identifies it with Cove, a fishing village four miles from Aberdeen.]‑that to heave and wirk one that aone expensis, for the stuf and bigyne of that kirk werke, and thai haue sworne the gret bodely aithe to do that saide seruice and werk for this yet, for the quhilkis thai sal pay to ilk ane of the said masonis xx merkis vsuale money of Scotland alarnelie, but al accidents of trede." One of the three masons bore the name of Mathou Wricht, who was also mentioned in the decree of 11483 and probably was the same who is referred to (November 22, 11498) as agreeing, " be his hand ophaldin [in the Scottish form of taking the oath the right hand is still " upholden," as of yore], to make gude seruice in the luge "‑" the said day " (it is also noted) " that Nichol Masone and Dauid Wricht olbist thame be the fathis of that bodiis, the gret aithe sworne, to remane at Sanct Nicholes werk in the luge . . . to be leile trew in all pontis," etc. The foregoing furnish early instances of the use of the word Lodge (Luge) and, assuredly, the context in each case‑by the penalty of exclusion‑suggests that something more was meant than a mere but or covered building. Even in the fifteenth century, at Aberdeen, it would appear that the Lodge was essentially a private building, strictly devoted to the purposes of masonry. To work in a Lodge was the privilege of free masons, cowans and disobedient members being excluded ; and as it was a covered building, tyled or healed, a very early use of the words Tyler and Heal (or Hele)‑[From the Anglo‑Saxon, hilan, to conceal, to cover or to close up. The oath imposed at Reading, temp. Henry VI, at the admission of a burgess, was to this effect: " The comyn counsell of this said gilde and felishipp of the same, that shall ye heele and secret kepe and to no p'sone publice, shew, ne declare, except it be to a burgess .‑. All these things shall ye observe, and truly kepe in all poynts to y'or power, so help you God and holy dome and by this boke " (Rev. C. Coates, History and Antiquity of Reading, i 802, vol. ii, p. 5 7). In the last will and testament of Thomas Cumberw orth occurs the following " I wyll that my body ly still, my mouth open, unhild xxiii owrys " (Harleian MSS., 6952). Cf. Smith, English Gilds, pp. 356, 398 ; and ante, p. 377, note i.]‑in British Freemasonry is here apparent.
On February 11, 11484, it was ordered that " Craftsmen " bear their " tokens " (Publications of the Spalding Club, vol. v, pp. 290, 4113, 450) on their breasts on Candlemas Day and, on January 23, 11496, that every craft have its standard. The latter were carried when any procession took place. On May 22, 153 11, it was ordained by the Provost and Council that, in " honour of God and the blessit Virgin Marye, the craftismen, in thair best array, keep and decoir the processioun on Corpus Cristi dais and Candilmes day, every craft with thair awin baner, with the armes of 342 SCOTLAND thair craft thairin . . . last of all, nearest the Sacrament, passis all hammermen, that is to say, smythis, wrichtis, masonis, cuparis, sclateris, goldsmythis and armouraris." A visitor was chosen every year by each of the crafts, according to the rule of October 4, 15 5 5, who was required to be sworn before the " Provest and Baillies in judgement," his duty being to see that all the statutes and ordinances were faith fully kept and, particularly, that " thair be na craftsman maid fre man to vse his craft except he haf seruit as prentise under ane maister thre yeiris and be found sufficient and qualifeit in his craft to be ane maister." This regulation is quoted to emphasize the fact‑for such it must be designated‑that the prefix free was generally applied to those Scottish craftsmen who were, free to exercise their trades, by virtue of due service and qualification, hence free mason, free sewer, free carpenter and the like. [" That nae maner of person occupy nor use any points of our said crafts of surgery, or barber craft, within this brugh, but gif he be first frie‑man, and burgess of the samen. . . . Every master that is received frie‑man to the saids crafts, shall pay his oukly penny, with the priest's myte "‑vide Seal of Cause of Chirurgeons, A.D. 1505 (History of the Blue Blanket, or Craftsmen's Banner, Edinburgh, 1832, pp. 6z, 64). In 15 83 it was decreed, " That na manner of person be sufferit to use merchandice, or occupy the handie wark of ane free crafts‑man within this brugh, . . . without he be burgess and free‑man of the same " (ibid., p. 112).
" The first cathedral church of Aberdeen," says Jamieson, " stood for only about zoo years and was demolished by Bishop Alexander, the second of that name ‑he deeming it too small for a cathedral‑to make room for the present edifice, which he is said to have founded in 1357. Now, whatever of truth may have been in the early tradition of the Craft, it is evident the present building was erected by Freemasons, from the Mason Marks found on it from the foundation upwards, just such marks as were common among the fraternity; masons marks have also been found on Greyfriars' Church, founded in 1471, also in King's College and Chapel, founded in 1494; likewise on the Bridge of Dee, begun in 15o5 and finished in 1527 " (Aberdeenshire Masonic Reporter, 1879, p. 16). So far this writer ; but if the existence of marks is to be taken in every instance as affording conclusive evidence of a contemporaneous Freemasonry, the antiquity of our venerable Society would be at once cast back much farther than historical research could attempt to follow it. The tradition he alludes to is, that a Mason named Scott, with several assistants from Kelso, was employed by Matthew Kininmonth, Bishop of Aberdeen, in building St. Machar's Cathedral about 1165, that, by Scott and his associates, the Aberdeen Lodge was founded. Without doubt the fact that the Lodge of Aberdeen existed at a very early date, can be verified without recourse to the traditions of the Craft, too many of which unfortunately are altogether trustless. The references in the fifteenth century to the Lodge in that city, of themselves, abundantly prove, that, at the period in question, the Masons assembled in a Lodge and, apparently, not always for strictly operative purposes, though doubtless the main object of a Lodge being built was to secure privacy for those engaged in fashioning the stones for the SCOTLAND 343 kirk and other structures. It is now impossible to prove the identity of the ancient Lodge of Aberdeen with that described in the Burgh Records of 1483, though there seems no reason to doubt the probability of their being one and the same. In early days there does not seem to have been more than a single Lodge in each town or city which had a monopoly of the rights and privileges pertaining to the tradeuntil secessions gradually led to the formation of a rival sodality, as at Edinburgh in the seventeenth century.
The Seal of Cause of the masons and wrights was confirmed on May 6, 1541 [See Voice of Masonry, June 1873. The deacons were required to examine candidates for the freedom of their craft, no one being allowed the privileges of a freeman until duly admitted and acknowledged as such], under the common seal of the burgh and then included the coopers, carvers and painters. From this confirmation the Brethren of Aberdeen date the institution of their Lodge and the Grand Lodge of Scotland, on granting a Warrant to it, November 30, 1743, acknowledged that year as the period of its formation. It was likewise recited on the Charter " that their records had by accident been burned, but that since December z6, 1670, they have kept a regular Lodge and authentic records of their proceedings " (Lazes of the Aberdeen Lodge, 1853, Appendix II). The members may as well claim from 1483 as from 1541, although their Lodge is now only officially acknowledged as " before 1670 " (Constitutions, 1881, p. 121), for, as an undoubted fact, it must have been at work long before the latter year, according to the declaration of its veritable records, which, of those preserved, commence A.D. 1670.
Although the Lodges in both England and Scotland have been numbered very capriciously, the assignment of the thirty fourth place on the Masonic roll of the latter country, to the subject of the present sketch, must strike everyone as a patent absurdity. Of its relative antiquity, credentials are not wanting and, though inferentially, it may date from a far more remote period than is attested by existing documents ; yet, even restricting its claims within the limits imposed by the law of 1737‑[" In the course of this year it was resolved that all Lodges which held of the Grand Lodge of Scotland should be enrolled according to their seniorities ; that this should be determined from the authentic documents which they produced; and that those who produced no vouchers should be put at the end of the roll " (Lawrie's History of Freemasonry, 1804, p. 15 2)]‑two or three Lodges only in all Scotland are entitled to take precedence of it‑though several of these bodies, chartered so late as the last century, are above it on the register of the Grand Lodge.
The dignified protest of the Lodge of Aberdeen against what may, with propriety, be termed its comparative effacement, failed to avert the calamity and, had it not been that the members were more solicitous to preserve and extend brotherly love and concord, than to haggle for precedence, there would have been a rival Grand Lodge formed in the North of Scotland, as well as by Kilwinning in the South.
Before proceeding to consider the actual records of the Lodge, it will be well to note that a grant was made in favour of Patrick Coipland of Udaucht as warden 344 SCOTLAND " over all the boundis of Aberdene, Banff, and Kincarne," by no less an authority than King James VI. Hughan cites the document in the Voice of Masonry and Lyon states that the original is contained in the Privy Seal Book of Scotland. The terms of the grant are singularly interesting and suggestive, for they are to the effect (a) that the Laird of Udaucht possessed the needful qualifications to act as a warden over the " airt and craft of masonrie " ; (b) that his predecessors had of old been warden in like manner; (c) the said Patrick Coipland having been " electit ane chosin to the said office be common consent of the maist pairt of the Master Masounes within the three Sherriffdomes " ; (d) the king graciously ratifies their choice, constitutes Coipland " Wardane and justice ovir them for all the dayes of his lyif " ; and (e), empowers him to act like any other warden elsewhere, receiving all fees, etc., holding courts, appointing clerks and other needful officers, etc. The grant is dated September 25, 159o and is certainly a remarkable instrument. According to Lawrie it proves " beyond dispute that the kings nominated the office‑bearers of the Order," but Lyon says that it does no such thing. The appointment was simply a civil one, as with the St. Clairs and, of itself, is quite sufficient to demonstrate that the hereditary Grand Mastership declared to be centred in the latter is a myth. If the office of Grand Master for all Scotland had been held by the St. Clair family (putting on one side the question whether the younger branch could or could not claim this hereditary privilege), clearly Coipland's appointment would never have been made by the king, neither would the masons of Edinburgh, Perth and other cities have allowed it to pass sub silentio.
That the semi‑hereditary office of warden for the counties named was lawfully held by succession in the case of Coipland, subject to the consent in part of the Master Masons and ratification by the king, completely sets aside Lawrie's claim on behalf of the St. Clairs, as Hughan fully demonstrated in the history referred to. It is a subject for regret, however, that the grant of 15 90 contains no mention of " Lodges," though it was to settle the various trade disputes connected with the masonshence any matters which affected their interests or conduct, either in or out of lodgesalso to see that the general statutes were obeyed by the particular craft in questionthat the Laird of Udaucht was appointed and empowered to act in a magisterial capacity. Assuming this to have been the case it would seem probable that the old Aberdeen Lodge‑represented by its Master Masons‑was a party to his election and acknowledged him as its warden by royal authority. Such an appointment, however, was of a purely local character, being confined to the districts named, other wardens doubtless acting in a similar capacity for the other counties, while superior to all these was the General Warden, William Schaw. The Constitutions of 1848 (Grand Lodge of Scotland) contain a biography of this high Masonic official. He was born in 15 5 o and seems to have been early connected with the royal household, as his name is attached to the original parchment deed of the National Covenant of 1580‑1. In 1583 Schaw succeeded Sir Robert Drummond as Master of Work, hence all the royal buildings and palaces were under his care and superintendence. In the treasurer's accounts various sums are entered as being paid to him for such SCOTLAND 345 services. He died in April 16oz and was buried in the Abbey Church of Dunferm line, Queen Anna erecting a handsome monument to his memory. It was, however, as Genera! Varden, not as Master of Work, that he exercised authority over the masons. He may have been an honorary member of the fraternity and doubtless was, but of that we know nothing.
In subsequent years the operatives whose proceedings it was the function of this high official to regulate and control, appear to have considered it only right and proper that they should have a hand in his appointment. The Acts of the Scottish Parliament, under the year 1641, contain, " the humble remonstrance of all the Artificers of the Kingdome, who 'in one voyce ' doe supplicate his Majestie and the Estates of Parliament, least men incapable of the charge of Mr of Work may attaine to that : therefore it may be enacted that none shall ever bruik or be admitted to that place of Mr of Work, but such as shalbe recommended to his Majestie as sufficiently qualified, by the whole Wardens and Deacons of the Masons, Wrights and others chosen by them, assembled for that purpose by the Parliament and Priuie Councell when the place of Mr of Work shall happen to be vacant." This petition or " remonstrance " would appear to have been dictated by the apprehension that some unfit person would be designated to the charge of the king's works and the petitioners lay great stress on the importance of the " Wisdome, Authoritie and Qualities " of this high officer, " being such, as may make him deserue to be Generall Wardene of the whole artificers of buildings, as worthy men haue ewer formerly bene." Whether any answer was returned to this remonstrance does not appear and the only further allusion to the office of which it sought the nomination, is in volume vi of the Scottish Statutes (pt. 1, p. 426), under the year 1645, where there is a " ratification by Sir John Veitch of Daruall, in favour of Daniel Carmichael of the office of master of work and general warden of the king's tradesmen." The veritable records of the Lodge date from 1670. The book in which the traditions, laws and transactions are entered, measures about 1 z inches by 8, each leaf having a double border of ruled lines at the top and sides, the writing being on one side of the page only; the volume originally consisted of about one hundred and sixty pages. According to a minute of February z, 1748, Peter Reid, the box‑master, was ordered to have the precious tome rebound, as it was being injured by the iron clasps which confined its leaves. Whatever special talents Reid may have possessed, neither book‑making nor book‑binding was amongst the number, for instead of having more pages inserted, as he was instructed to do, he had all removed save about thirty and even these are somewhat singularly arranged. There is much, however, to be thankful for, as the Lawes and Statutes of 167o remain intact, if not undisturbed; also the Measson Charter, the general laws, the roll of members and apprentices and the register of their successors, etc. Many of these documents possess features exclusively their own, whilst some are unsurpassed by any others of a similar character in interest and value. This, the first volume of the records, which has been preserved, is and has long been, known as the " Mark Book," doubtless 346 because the mark of each member and apprentice is attached to the register of the names, the book possibly having been intended for that purpose only. The old seal of the Lodge is lost, the present one dates from 1762, though, in all probability, the design of the former reappeared in the latter. The 176z seal does duty as a frontispiece to the Lodge By‑laws of 18 S 3. It is divided into four quarters, in the first are three castles ; in the second, the square and compasses with the letter G in the centre ; in the third, four working tools, viz. the level, plumb‑rule, trowel and gavel; and in the fourth, the sun, moon and ladder of six staves ;‑the whole being surmounted by the motto : Commissum tege et vino tortus et ird (see Horace, EP‑, i. 18, 3 8 : " Commissumque teges et vino tortus et ira " SCOTLAND An edition of the rules was printed in either 168o or 168 z, but no copy can now be traced, which is much to be regretted, as it is very possible that a history of the Lodge may have been bound up with these regulations, which, compiled at so early a date, would be of great value to the student of Masonic history. Though the search for this missing record has hitherto proved abortive, it is nevertheless to be hoped that it will be proceeded with and that the living representatives of former members may be induced carefully to examine all books, papers and bundles of documents, among which such a copy of By‑laws might possibly have become entombed.
The " Lawes and Statutes ordained be the honourable Lodge of Aberdein, December 27, 1670," claim next consideration. They consist of eight rules or enactments duly numbered, several being of unusual length. A careful scrutiny reveals the fact that they are original and independent regulations, agreed to by the members and compiled to meet the wants of the Lodge without uniformly respecting either the ancient ordinances or the Measson Charter. They differ singularly and, at times, materially, from all other laws of the period and will be found to present a vivid picture of some of the customs of the fraternity, absolutely unique in expression and very suggestive in character.
THE LAWS AND STATUTES OF THE LODGE OF ABERDEEN, A.D. 1670. These were published by Buchan (from a transcript by Jamieson) in The Freemason, August 12‑ and September z, 1871 ; by Hughan in the Voice of Masonry, February 1872 ; by Lyon, in his History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, 1873 ; and in the Masonic News, Glasgow, 1873,‑all from the Jamieson text.
"FIRST STATUTE‑ARTICLE FOR THE MAISTER."‑The master masons and " Entered Prentises " who are subscribers to the book, vow and agree to own the Lodge on all occasions‑unless prevented by sickness or absence‑as they did at their entry and on receiving the " Mason Word." " SECOND STATUTE‑MAISTER CONTINUED."‑The master to act as judge in all " Let none thy secret trust divine, Though racked with wrath or dazed with wine ").
SCOTLAND 347 disputes, to inflict fines, pardon faults, " always taking the voice of the honourable company " and he may instruct his officer to impound the working tools of malcontents (" to poynd his work loomes ") who, if they are further rebellious, shall be expelled from the Lodge.
" THIRD STATUTE‑WARDENS."‑By the oath at entry, the warden is acknowledged " as the next in power to the Maister " and, in the absence of the latter, he is to possess similar authority and to continue in office according to the will of the company. The master is to be elected annually on each St. John's Day, also the box‑master and clerk, no salary being allowed the latter, it being " only a piece of preferment." The offieer to be continued till another be entered in the Lodge. No Lodge was to be held within an inhabited dwelling‑house, save in " ill weather," then only in such a building where " no person shall heir or see us." Otherwise the meetings were to take place " in the open fields." This regulation accords with the old tradition that Lodges assembled on the " highest hills or in the lowest valleys " and, moreover, is indicative of esoteric practice as Free‑masons at the reception of apprentices in their " outfield lodge " (see Statute V).
" FouRTH STATUTE‑BOX FOR OUR PooR," ETc.‑Thus lengthy regulation will be better understood by a perusal of the fuller text. From its tenor it appears that, in 1670, there was a reorganization of the Lodge, the meetings for many years pre viously, owing to the unsettled condition of the country, having been held only at rare intervals. It is said that the Masons of Aberdeen had a tent which was erected (on the occasion of an initiation) in the hollow at Cunnigar Hill, at Carden Howe, or at the " Stonnies," in the hollow at the Bay of Nigg, sites offering peculiar facilities for such assemblies. The members to whom further reference is made, describe themselves as the authors of the " Measson Box "‑a charitable scheme emanating from themselves‑and, in the furtherance of which, they not only pledged their own support, but also that of their successors. Several of the clauses are worthy of modern imitation, though at the present time we may fail to appreciate the rule which permitted money to be taken from the treasury " to give a treat to any nobleman or gentleman that is a measson," considering that the funds were to be devoted to the sacred purposes of charity.
" FIFTH STATUTE‑ENTERED PRENTESES."‑Each apprentice was required to pay four rix dollars at his admission and to present every member of the Lodge with a linen apron and a pair of gloves [there were over fifty members in 1670] ; though, if his means were insufficient to " clothe the lodge "‑as this custom continued to be called for nearly a century later‑a money payment was substituted for one in kind and two additional dollars, with a dinner and some wine, sufficed for his contribution, exclusive of one mark piece for his Mason Mark and another to the convener (officer) of the Lodge. A dinner and pint of wine also commemorated his attainment of the fellowship, though a stranger " entered " in another Lodge, being desirous of becoming a Master Mason at Aberdeen, was to pay two dollars, accompanied by the invariable pint of wine or more, should the company will it, but the benefit of this last proviso was limited to " gentlemen masons." Persons duly 348 SCOTLAND apprenticed to the handicraft were to pay fifty marks at their entry and the customary dues and, if unable to provide the money, they were to serve their masters for three years without remuneration and could not receive the fellowship earlier. The funds so obtained were to be divided equally between the box and the entertainment of the members. The eldest sons of the " authoires of the Book " (and all their successors) were to have the benefit of the mason word, free of all dues, save those for the box, the mark, the dinner and the indispensable " pint of wine." Similar privileges were to devolve upon those who married the eldest daughters of the brethren. The By‑laws of the Lodge (1853) provide in the " Table of dues " for the lowest fees being paid by the " eldest son, or husband of the eldest daughter of a member " ; the intermediate fees by " the other sons, or those marrying the other daughters of members " ; and the highest, by ordinary applicants, the least being in advance of the highest now charged by some Lodges in Scotland. Apprentices were to be entered in the " antient outfield Lodge, in the mearns in the Parish of Negg, at the stonnies at the poynt of the Ness." " SIXTH STATUTE‑FOR THE BOX MAISTER."‑The sums received by this official were not to be retained by him, but placed in the box, the oversight thereof being in the hands of the three masters of the keys.
" SEVENTH STATUTE‑ST. JOHNE's DAY."‑All apprentices and fellow‑crafts were required to pay twelve shillings Scots to the Master Mason or his warden at each St. John's Day and, in default, their tools were to be seized and kept in pledge until redeemed. The St. John's Day was to be observed as a day of rejoicing and feasting ; the subscriptions were devoted to that purpose according to the votes of those present, absentees being fined. The rules were to be read at the entry of each apprentice, " that none declare ignorance." " SECOND PART‑INTENDER " [Also Intendar or Intendent. The Minutes of the Lodge of Dunblane (1725) define the duty of Intender to be " the perfecting of appren tices so that they might be fitt for their future tryalls. The appointment of instructors has for a century and a half obtained in the Lodge of Peebles " (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 18).). Apprentices were to be taught by their" Intenders " only, until " given over " as being instructed and, when interrogated at " public meetings," were to pay for forgetfulness " as the company thinks fit," except they could prove that they were " never taught such a thing," in which case the penalty was shifted to their " intenders." All were to love one another as brothers born and each man was to have a good report behind his neighbour's back " as his oath tyes him." The Lord's day was to be kept holy and Sabbath breakers, habitual swearers, unclean persons and drunkards were severely to be punished.
" EIGHTH STATUTE‑THE BOOK."‑The Master Masons and Apprentices ordained that the book of laws be kept in the box, securely locked, save when required to be carried to any place where there was an apprentice to be received. After comers and successors were equally to be required careful, the clerk only being allowed to have access to the volume whilst making entries therein, the three key masters being present at the time. Future members were further commanded by SCOTLAND 349 the oath, taken at their entry, not to blot out the names of any of the then subscribers nor let them decay, but to uphold them for all time as their patrons. The regulation terminates by placing on record an emphatic statement that there was never a poor‑box amongst the Masons of Aberdeen, within the memory of man, until established by the authors of the book.
These laws conclude with a general clause which amply attests the brotherly feeling prevailing in i 670 and, as the subscribers invoked the blessing of God on all their endeavours and those of their successors, we may be justified in supposing that the latter were true to the trust which subsequently devolved upon them. Indeed, it is a matter of notoriety that the example set by the Masons of i 67o has been emulated by the Brethren of later years, who, in all periods, notably at the present date, cherish in affectionate remembrance the memories of their worthy predecessors, the originators of the mark book of 1670.
These curious ordinances of a bygone age present some remarkable features, which, as yet, have been very imperfectly considered. We perceive that upwards of two hundred years ago " Speculative Masonry " was known and provided for gentlemen‑masons being required to pay higher fees at entry and their presence being heartily welcomed at the festivals of the Lodge. Examined in connexion with the list of members, the existing records of the Lodge of Aberdeen afford conclusive evidence, not only of " Speculative " customs, but actually of Speculative ascendancy, in the year 1670. The power of the Master was then even more absolute than it is now and the duties of the Warden corresponded very closely with those peculiar to that position in modern times. The " officer " received a gratuity in those days from initiates, much as many Tylers do now and no more precautions are taken under the modern system to secure privacy than in days of yore. The charitable nature of the Fraternity is embodied in the rules for the " Poor‑Box," which article of furniture is not neglected in modern ceremonies and, during the eighteenth century, not to say later, the candidates had often to provide a treat at their admission ; the regulations, also, for the annual festivals were, at both periods, somewhat alike in character.
The " Intenders " are now represented by the proposers or introducers of candidates, who are supposed to see that the latter are duly qualified to pass in their " Essays " or " questions " prior to promotion; while the careful preservation of the Minute‑books and other effects of modern Lodges is happily not lost sight of. The allusion, in the fifth statute or clause, to the practice of making strangers " Master Masons " will not fail to arrest attention. Yet it should be distinctly understood that the title or grade of " Master Mason " was then unaccompanied by any secret mode of reception, such as, in modern parlance, would be styled a Degree. By the expression " Master Mason " was signified, in those days, a duly passed apprentice who was competent to undertake work on his own account and a gentleman (or geomatic) Mason, upon whom the title was bestowed in an honorary or complimentary sense. There were but two classes noted in the rules of 1670, viz.
350 SCOTLAND Master Masons and Apprentices, the former being sometimes described as Fellowcrafts, i.e. those who had served their lawful time as apprentices. Throughout the entire series of records of the Scottish Lodges, of an earlier date than the eighteenth century, there is not a single reference to any separate ceremony on the making or acknowledging of Master Masons, whilst, on the contrary, there are several entries which strengthen the belief that this title simply denoted promotion or dignity, that it could not have implied a participation in a secret knowledge, with which, if we are guided by the evidence‑no Scottish Mason of that period was ever con versant. Some leading members of the Fraternity, contend that the fact of many Lodge records being silent as to the exact date when the three existing Degrees were introduced or practised, furnishes, negatively at least, some evidence that they were worked prior to the formation of Grand Lodges in England and Scotland; this view, resting, it would seem, upon a supposition that, had not ceremonies akin to the present ones been in vogue in those early days, the occasions upon which the innovations first took place, could not fail to have been recorded by some scrupulous clerk of one or more of the old Lodges whose Minutes have come down to us. Now, what does such an argument amount to ? Are we to assume from the uniform silence of all ancient Masonic records with regard to the three Degrees, that these were worked or wrought under an impenetrable veil of secrecy, behind which their very existence lay concealed ? By a similar process of reasoning it would be quite easy to establish the antiquity of all those Degrees known to be of modern construction, such as the Royal Arch, the Masonic Knights Templar, with others too numerous to mention; though it would be necessary to reject the testimony of the actual Minutes of these old Lodges, which clearly demonstrates the impossibility of there being a separate and secret ceremony at the admission of a Master.
It is satisfactory to find, in a point of so much importance, that the opinions of experts mainly incline in the same direction towards which we are led by the evidence. Hughan and Lyon, both authors of repute and diligent students of Masonic records, whose familiar acquaintance with the details of Lodge history is unsurpassed, concur in the belief that there were no Masonic Degrees (as now understood) known to the early members of the Fraternity,‑the separate ceremonies or modes of reception, incidental to the more modern system, having (they contend) been introduced by those members of the Society who, in 17 I6‑17, founded the premier Grand Lodge of the World. Findel observes : " There was but one Degree of initiation in the year 177; the Degrees or grades of Apprentice, Fellow, and Master, were introduced about the year 1720 "(History of Freemasonry, p. 15o). Against this, however, must be arrayed the higher authority of the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, who argues with great ability in support of a tri‑gradal system, analogous to, if not identical with, the present arrangement of Degrees, having prevailed long before the date which has been arbitrarily assigned (1717) as marking the era of transition from Operative to Speculative Masonry. Hughan emphatically states that " no records mention the Degree of a master mason before the second decade of the last century " and Lyon, in the same chapter of his History of Freemasonry (History of the Lodge of SCOTLAND 351 Edinburgh, c. xxii, pp. zog, zii), where this dictum is cited, points out that " the connexion which more or less subsisted between the Scottish Lodges and Societies of Incorporated Masons, whose province it was, as by law established, to admit to the privileges of mastership within their several jurisdictions‑accounts for the former confining themselves to entering apprentices and passing fellow‑crafts. The increase of theoretical craftsmen neutralized operative influence in the Lodge of Edinburgh, eventually leading it to discard its ancient formula, for that which had been concocted by the English Speculatives in 1717." " The institution of the third Degree," he continues, " was an expansion of this system of Freemasonry. The prescription of the Master Masons' essay lay with the" Incorporation" as respects Edinburgh and, according to Lyon, the same rule was observed by other incorporations, these and not the old Lodges, having the power to make or constitute the Fellow‑crafts as Master Masons. Now, as these incorporations were composed of many different trades united for purposes of general trade legislation, it follows that there could not have been any esoteric Masonic ceremony at the admission of such masters, because the court was of so mixed a character and not exclusively Masonic. Furthermore, the clerks and the Brethren generally at these old Lodges were not very reticent as to the fact of there being a secret ceremonial at the reception of apprentices, though so laudably were they faithful to their trust that no one can now say precisely of what the secret or secrets consisted. The " Masonic word " is frequently mentioned and, as seen, a grip is also alluded to, but only and always in connexion with the apprentices. Therefore, as it is evident that the Freemasons of old had no objection to declare publicly that they had a secret word, which was entrusted to apprentices on their solemnly swearing not to divulge it improperly‑the entire absence of any allusion whatever to words or secrets imparted at the passing of Fellow‑crafts or the admission of Master Masons‑seems conclusive, that no such Degrees, in the sense we now understand that term, existed. Moreover, apprentices could be present at all meetings of the Lodge; and there is no Minute of their exclusion on the occasion of a higher Degree being conferred, in any of the Scottish records, until after the formation of the Grand Lodge of Scotland (1736). [Lyon observes : " The Minute of November zz, 1759, records the fact that on the Brethren ` resolving themselves into a Fellow‑crafts' Lodge, and then into a Masters' Lodge,' the Entered Apprentices were ` put out,' an act indicative of the formal obliteration of an ancient landmark and the rupture of one of the few remaining links uniting Operative with Symbolical Masonry " (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 76).] The Mason Charter, as well as the regulations contained in the Mark Book, were read at the entry of each apprentice. At least this practice was rigorously enjoined, though, if strictly carried out, the ceremonial of reception in those days must have been rather a protracted affair and of very little practical benefit to the parties chiefly concerned, who could have carried away but a faint recollection of the curious traditions and quaint customs which were rehearsed to them.
It is a remarkable fact that all Scottish versions of the Old Charges are of 352 SCOTLAND English origin. It is difficult to explain such a strange circumstance, but the fact is abundantly confirmed, though, in most other respects the Scottish Craft was both independent and original‑especially in the scope and intent of its laws and customs until its acceptance of the modern system of Freemasonry in the third or fourth decade of the last century.
Next in order we have the general laws of the crafts in Aberdeen, which are similar in many points to those entered in the Minutes of the Lodge of AtchesonHaven Of A.D. 1636. These will be found to confirm the view which has been pre viously advanced, viz. that the prefix free, or in other words the freedom of the crafts, constituted their rights to certain privileges, the " unprivileged companies " being denied these liberties. They are given in full in the appendices from the transcript made by Jamieson for Hughan and have never before been published in extenso.
It will be convenient next to consider the special feature of the Aberdeen records, upon which rests the statement of there having been a Speculative ascendancy so early as A.D. 1670. The word Speculative is used when applied to persons, as meaning (I) a non‑operative, (z) when applied to tools, as referring to moral symbolism drawn from operative implements of labour. In this interpretation there is nothing either strained or unusual; there should be no possible misapprehension of the meaning which is attached to that expression.
It is not possible to present in facsimile the remarkable list of members of the Lodge in 1670, the period of its reconstitution. James Anderson, the clerk (No. I 1 on the Register), was by trade a glazier and styles himself " Measson and Wreatter of this Book." The initial letters of the Christian and surnames, especially the former, are rather elaborately sketched and great care was taken to render the calig raphy worthy of the occasion. Anderson succeeded in this respect, for the list is easily read after a lapse of more than two centuries, the names being very legibly written and, after each, save in two instances, is the Masonic Mark. The list was intended to exist for ever as an enduring monument of the " authoires of the Book," though no objection appears to have been raised to the practice of supplementing the information contained in the original register by occasional interlineations.
THE: NAMES OF: US: ALL: WHO : ARE : THE AUTHOIRES OF : AND : SUBSCRYUERS OF : THIS : BOOK : IN : ORDER : AS : FOLLOWETH.
1670.
I. HARRIE ELPHINGSTON : Tutor of 3. WILLIAM: KEMPTE : Measson.
Airth : Collector of the Kinges Customes of Aberdein : Measson : 4. JAMES: CROMBIE : Measson.
and: Master of our Honour‑ 5. WILLIAM MAC KLEUD : Measson able : Lodge of Aberdein. and Warden : of : our Lodge.
z. ALEXANDER : CHARLLS : lhrighte [IY>illiam M'Leod.] and: Measson : and Master of 6. PATRICK: STEUISON : Measson.
our Lodge. [Patrick Stevison.] SCOTLAND 353 7. JOHN ROLAND : Measson : and Var‑ 22. Maister : GEORG : LIDDELL, den: of: our: Lodge. Professor of Mathematickes.
And y░ first Warden of our 23. Mr ALEX" IRUING : Measson 4 Lodge.
[John Ronald.] 24. WALTER : SIMPSON : Piriuige 8. DAVID MURRAY : Measson. Macker : and: Measson.
David Murray, Key Master, 25. WILLIAM: RICKARD :Merchand 1686‑7 and 8. &Meason : and Treassurer [David Murray in 1693 Master.] of : our : Lodg.
9. JOHN CADDELL :Measson. 26. THOMAS : WALKER : Wright [John Cadell.] and : Measson.
10. WILLIAM: GEORG : Smith: and 27. JOHN: SKEEN : Merchand : and Measson : and Maister : of : Measson.
our: Lodge. 28. JOHN : CRAURIE : Merchand L w‑ George.] and : Measson.
29. WILLIAM: YOUNGSON : Chyrurgeon and: Measson.
30. JOHN : THOMSON : Chyrurgeon and Measson. r 31. EARLE : OF : DUNFERMLINE, Measson. [1679.] 3 2. EARLE :OF ERROLLE : Measson. 33‑ JOHN : GRAY : Younger : of Chrichie and Measson.
34ň Mr GEORG : SEATTON : Minister of Fyvie : and Measson.
3 5 ň GEORG : RAIT : of : Mideple Measson. [1679.] 36. JOHN FORBES : Merchand : and Measson.
37. GE ORG : GRAY : Wrighte : and Measson.
3 8. JOHN DUGGADE : Sklaiter : and Measson. [1677.] II. JAMES : ANDERSON : Glassier and Measson : and Wreatter of this Book, 1670.
[And Master of our Lodge in y` year of God 1688 and 1694.1 12. JOHN : MONTGOMERIE : Measson : and Warden : of : our Lodge.
13. THE: EARLE : OF: FINDLATOR: Measson.
14. THE: LORD: PITSLIGO : Measson.
I5. GEORGE: CATTANEUCH : Piriuige : Macker : and: Measson.
16. JOHN: BARNETT : Measson.
17. MR WILLIAM: FRASSER : Minister : of : Slaines : and: Measson.
18. MR GEORG : ALEXANDER Aduocat : in: edinburghe : and Measson.
I9. ALLEXANDER : PATTERSON, Armourer : and: Measson. [And m, of our Lodge in the year of God 169o ‑}‑ 1692 + 1698.] 20. ALEXANDER : CHARLES, YOngerT, Glassier: and: Measson.
21. JAMES : KING : I‑Yrighte : and Measson : and: Theassurer of our Lodge.
39. ROBERT : GORDON : Cadde Macker : and Measson.
40. PATRICK: NORRIE : Merchand and Measson.
41. JAMEs : LUMESDEN :Merchand and: Measson.
42. JOHN: COWIE : Merchand and Theassurer of our Lodge. 9~ 43. ALLEXANDER : MOORE : Hook Macker : and: Measson.
354 SCOTLAND 44. DAVID: ACHTERLOUNIE : Mer‑ 47. TOHN : BURNET : Measson chand : and: Measson.
45. Mr GEORG : IRUING : Measson and: Preacher.
46. PATRICK MATHEWSON Sklaiter : and Measson. [Patrick Mathewson.] [John Burnet.] ~' 48. WILLIAM: DONALDSON : Merchand : and: Measson.
Ve' tr 4.9. ALEXANDER: FORBES, Sklaiter: and : Measson. % So endes ye names of us all who are the Authoires off this Book and ye meassonis box in order, according till our ages, as wee wer made fellow craft (from qth wee reckon our age) ; so wee intreat all our good successores in ye measson craft to follow our Rule as yor patternes and not to stryve for place, for heir ye may sie above wr░ and amongst ye rest our names, persones of a meane degree insrt be for great persones of qualitie. Memento yer is no entered prentises insrt amongst us who are ye Authoires of yis book. And therefor wee ordaine all our successoires in ye measson craft not to Insrt any entered prenteise until he be past as fellow craft, and lykwayes wee ordaine all our successores, both entered prenteises and fellow crafts, to pay in to ye box ane rex dollar at yer receaving, or ane sufficient caut░ for it till a day by and attour yr composit░. Wee ordaine lykwayes yat ye measson charter be read at ye entering of everie entered prenteise, and ye wholl Lawes of yis book, yee shall fynd ye charter in ye hinder end of yis book. Fare weell.
" THE NAMES OF THE ENTERED PRENTEISES OF THE HONOURABLE LODGE OF THE MEASSONE: CRAFTE : OF: ABERDENE IN ORDER AS FOLLOWES." (Mark of James Anderson.) I. GEORGE: THOM. 2. WILLIAM FORSYTH.
3. WILLIAM SANGSTER. 4. WILLIAM MITCHELL. ~I 5. KENETH FRASSER. 6. WILLIAM MONTGOMERIE. Z 7. NAMES BAUERLEY. 8. WILLIAM CHALLINER. , , 9. IOHN ROSS. 10. PATRICK SANGSTER. II. WILLIAM ROUST.
Then a list is inserted, entitled, " Heir: Begines : the : names of our: Successores : of: the : Measson Craft: in : order : as Followes : as : Maister : Meassons," which, according to the instructions of the 1670 rules, was not to contain the names of any apprentices. The foregoing eleven " Prenteises " and the forty‑nine " Authoires and Subscryuers of this Book" composed the Lodge in that year. In subsequent years Apprentices who became " Fellow‑Crafts " or " Master Masons,"‑convertible terms, signifying passed apprentices who were out of their time‑received an accession of dignity by the insertion of their names in the roll of " Successors," and F. III‑I4 judging from the similarity of names and marks, Sangster (3), Frasser (5), Bauerley (7) and Roust (i i), were duly passed and honoured accordingly. The last‑mentioned record of members is not so well entered up as the two preceding lists, many of the marks not being registered. The mark, however, of William Kempte, No. 3 of the " Authoires," is the same as follows another of that name, who is the thirtythird of the " Successors." Alexander Kempte, No. 13 and Allexr. Kempt, Elder, No. 2‑9 of the " Successors," have each the same mark, but Alex% Kempt Yor, No. 32, chose quite a different one. The marks are composed sometimes of even, at others of odd, points, several being made up of the initials of the Christian and surnames, as monograms. Some represent an equilateral triangle, one or two being used to furnish a single mark, but, in the forty‑seven marks attached to as many names in the first roll, no two are exactly alike. It will be noted that the Apprentices had similar marks to the Craftsmen (or Master Masons) and that, on their being promoted to a higher grade, the same marks continued to be used; yet, until this was pointed out by Hughan some years ago, it was generally believed that marks were conferred on Fellow‑Crafts only, a fallacy which the Aberdeen records effectually dispel.
Amongst the " Successors " the Speculative element was still represented, the fourth in order being Alexander Whyt, merchand ; the fifth Thomas Lushington, merchand in London; the seventh Patrick Whyt, hookmaker and measson ; the eighth George Gordon, taylior and measson, the mark of the latter being a pair of scissors or shears 1 The clerk appears never to have taken any notice of past rank for, whether the member served as Warden or Master, the fact is recorded by the name of the office only,, each list being made to read as if there were several Wardens and Masters at, the same time. It may be, that owing to the predominance of the Speculative element, the same care was not observed, as time rolled on, in registering the marks of this section, there not being the same need for them, as with the operatives. However this may be, the later registers are not so complete as those of 1670, while it is just possible that the operatives kept a separate mark book for themselves soon after the period of the reconstitution of the Lodge. In 1781 the bulk of the operatives left the old Lodge, taking their mark book with them, establishing the Operative Lodge, No. 150, on the register of the Grand Lodge of Scotland. Since then the senior Lodge of Aberdeen has ceased to register the marks of its members, a circumstance to be regretted, as such an ancient custom was well worthy of preservation.
In the opinion of Jamieson, eight only of the forty‑nine members described as " authors " and " subscribers " were operative masons. Of the number, whatever it be, the Master for the year 1670 was a tutor and collector of the customs and enjoyed the distinction of presiding (in the Lodge) over four noblemen, three ministers, an advocate, a professor of mathematics, nine merchants, two surgeons, two glaziers, a smith, three slaters, two peruke makers, an armourer, four carpenters and several gentlemen, besides eight or more masons, with a few other tradesmen.
It may be urged that the register was not written in 1670; but the objection 356 SCOTLAND will carry no weight, there being abundant internal evidence to confirm the antiquity of the document. Furthermore, the style of caligraphy and orthography and the declaration of the penman, all confirm the fact that the record was compiled in the year named, that it is a bona fide register of the members of the Lodge of Aberdeen for 1670. The noblemen who were enrolled as Fellow‑crafts or Master Masons at the period of reconstitution were the Earls of Findlater, Dunfermline and Erroll with Lord Pitsligo. The only member of the Lodge in 1670, whose death can be recorded with any certainty, was, according to Jamieson, Gilbert, Earl of Erroll, who died at an advanced age in 1674, therefore, in all probability must have joined the Craft many years previously. A few rays of light have been cast upon the careers of these noblemen by Lyon (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 4zz). The Earl of Erroll succeeded to the title in 163 8, was colonel of horse in the " unhappie engagement " for the rescue of Charles I from the hands of the Parliamentarians and, subsequently, raised a regiment for the service of Charles II.
Charles, second EarI of Dunfermline, succeeded his father in 16zz and was the Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland in 1642. He was at Newcastle with Charles I in 1642 ; but, after the execution of that unfor tunate monarch, went abroad, returning with Charles II in 1650. At the Restoration he was appointed an extraordinary Lord of Session and Keeper of the Privy Seal. Alexander, third Lord Forbes of Pitsligo, died in 16gi. He was greatgrandfather of Sir William Forbes, Grand Master Mason of Scotland in 1776‑7. James, third Earl of Findlater, died in 1711. He was a firm supporter in parliament of the Treaty of Union.
It may safely be assumed that, as the Lodge of Aberdeen was, doubtless, in the inception, a purely operative body, many years must have elapsed, prior to 1670, before such a predominance of the Speculative element would have been possible; for, unless the " Domatic " [According to Lyon, the operative and speculative elements into which the old Scottish Lodges were divided, in common parlance, became distinguished by finer shades of expression. Thus the former, consisting of actual handicraftsmen, was held to comprise " Domatic " masons only ; and the latter " Gentlemen " masons, " Theorical " masons, " Geomatic " masons, " Architect " masons, and " Honorary members." In the view of the same writer, " Domatic " is derived from the Latin domus, a house ; and " Geomatic " from the Greek yea, the land or soil, the former of these adjectives signifying " belonging to a house," the latter having special reference to " landed proprietors, men in some way or other connected with agriculture." But the last‑named title, whatever may have been its origin, was ultimately applied " to all Freemasons who were not practical masons " (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 8z).] section of the Aberdeen Lodge was actuated by sentiments differing widely from those which prevailed in other Masonic bodies of a corresponding period, the admission of members not of their own class, except, perhaps, representatives of the nobility and gentry of the immediate neighbourhood, must have been viewed, certainly in the first instance, with extreme disfavour. Hence the introduction of members of other trades could not have been very rapidly SCOTLAND 357 effected ; and though, unfortunately, we literally have nothing to guide us in forming an opinion of the internal character of this Lodge in the sixteenth century, yet, on the safe assumption that human nature is very much the same everywhere, it is more than probable that the Operative Masons were but slowly reconciled to the expediency of such an innovation‑‑or, as the parties affected might have termed it, invasionas allowing themselves to be outnumbered by members of distinct and possibly of rival crafts.
Neither can it be supposed that the Geomatic masons who, as seen, constituted the larger section of the Lodge in ‑1670, were the first of their kind admitted to membership‑which, indeed, would be tantamount to believing that the Lodge was suddenly " flooded " with the Speculative element. Upon the whole, perhaps, it will be safe to conclude that the character of the Lodge had been, for many years, very much the same as we find it revealed by the early documents which have passed under review ; but the precise measure of antiquity to which it is entitled, as a body practising to any extent a speculative science, cannot, with any approach to accuracy, even be approximately determined. In the opinion of a high authority (Hughan), the Lodge of Aberdeen may reasonably claim for their mixed constitution of ‑1670, an ancestry of at least a century earlier and, possibly, longer.
One of the operative members, John Montgomery (No. ‑1z), a Warden in ‑1686, contracted with the magistrates for the building of the present " Cross," which is an ornament to the " brave toun " and good old city. With rare exceptions, from ‑1670, the Master has been elected from the Gentlemen or Geomatic masons; the Senior Warden being usually chosen from the Domatic or Operative element until ‑1840. " In ‑1700 the Brethren purchased the croft of Footismyre, on which they built a house and held their Lodge meetings, when, owing to the number of noblemen and "gentlemen in town and country who were admitted members, together with other professions and trades, the place became too small and inconvenient " (Aberdeenshire Masonic Reports, 1879, pp. ‑1 8, i cg) and a change was rendered necessary.
Kenneth Fraser, who was Warden ‑1696‑‑1708 and Master in ‑1709 (No. 5 of the apprentices, ‑1670), was the " king's master mason." In ‑1688 he took down the bells from the great steeple of the cathedral of St. Machar. According to Lyon, there is a hiatus in the records between ‑1670 and ‑1696, in which latter year the election of officials is entered in the Minutes. Two Wardens were appointed until ‑1700, when the first (or Senior Warden) was discontinued. The old custom of having two Wardens was resumed in ‑1737.
In the By‑laws of the Lodge of ‑18 5 3 is a list of the Masters and Wardens from ‑1696, but an earlier one might be compiled from the notes subsequently inserted in the Mark Book of ‑1670. Many of the " Authoires " held office in the Lodge and not a few occupied the chief chair for many consecutive years, their names also occurring as Wardens.
The second volume constitutes the " Apprentice " Minute‑book and contains undoubted records from ‑1696 to ‑1779, but it is probable that some of the admissions 358 SCOTLAND date from 1670. The elections are in one part of the book and the entries in another. The following may serve as a sample of these Minutes Aberdeine Massone Lodge.
Election 1696 Att Aberdeine, the 27 of December, being St. John's Day, 1696, thee Hone Lodge being convened hes unanimusly choysen James Marky, Maister. John Ronald, Wardens. Kenneth Fraser, William Thomsone, Theasurer.
Alex. Patersone and Geo. Gordone, Key Masters.
Another Minute reads Aberdeine, the twentie‑sext of July 1701, the Honourable Lodge being conveined, hes unanimouslie received, admitted and sworne William Forbes of Tulloch, Mercht in Aberdeine, a brother in our fraternitie and oblieges him to pay to the theasurer yierly twelve shillings (Scots) for the poor, as witness our hands, day and place forsaid, &c.
Signed~Patrick Whyt, Mr. William Forbes.
There are numerous entries of apprentices‑and if bound to their fathers it made no difference in the form‑but as they are so much alike, one example will suffice Aberdeine, the third day November 1701, the Honorable Lodge being conveined, hes unanimouslie Received and admitted, John Kempt‑brother and printise to Alexander Kempt, Younger‑entered printise in our fraternitie and by the points obliedges him during all the days of his lyf tyme (if able) to pay the Theasurer of the Massone Lodge in Aberdeine yierlie, twelve shillings Scots money for behoof of the said Lodge, as witnesseth our hands, day and place forsaid. Signed, John Kempt.
On February i i, 1706, Ensign George Seatone was made a " brother in our fraternitie " and, on July 18, William Thomsone (younger), " a sklaiter, was received a masoune brother." Throughout the records, apart from the " Measson Charter "‑of which the spirit rather than the letter was accepted as a rule of guidance‑there is not a single reference to the " perfect limb " legislation, which, of late years, has been so much insisted upon in American Freemasonry; and we shall vainly search in the records of those early times for a full specification of the twenty‑five " Landmarks," which modern research pronounces to be both ancient and unalterable. C f. Mackey, Encyclopaedia, s.v. ; American Quarterly Review of Freemasonry, vol. ii, p. 230; King‑ SCOTLAND 359 stop Masonic Annual, 1871, p. 2 0 ; and Masonic Review, Cincinnati, Ohio, December '1876. Of the Ancient Landmarks it has been observed, with more or less foundation of truth: " Nobody knows what they comprise or omit; they are of no earthly authority, because everything is a landmark when an opponent desires to silence you, but nothing is a landmark that stands in his own way " (Freemasons' Magazine February 25, i865, p. 139), From entries of December 15, 1715, describing five apprentices as " lawful " sons, it may, perhaps, be inferred that candidates not born in wedlock would have been ineligible, though, as the stigma of illegitimacy was and is, removable in Scot land by subsequent marriage, it seems improbable that the status of a bastard, in that country, entailed the same disabilities as were attached to it in England. Apprentices were sworn not to engage in any work above io Scots money, under the penalty that the Lodge should impose, but they were freed from such a rigid rule on becoming Fellow‑crafts. The annual contributions then were is. sterling for operatives and double that sum for gentlemen, the money being devoted to the use of the poor. Small as these sums were, the early period of their assessment must be considered; but, though insignificant now to English ears, they cannot be so to many of the Scottish Fraternity, as some Lodges declined to impose any annual contributions whatever upon their members.
The following Minute possesses some interesting features Att the Measson Hall of aberdein, zo of December 1709, the honorable lodge thereof being lawfullie called and convened to setle ane compositione upon those who shallbe entered prenteises in our forsaid lodge of aberdeine and all unanimouslie agreed that the meassones prenteises within the said lodge shall pay for the Benefit of the measson word twelfe poundes Scots at ther entrie, yr. to, with all necessarie dewes to the clerke and officer, with speaking pynt and dinner and all those who shall be entered in our Lodge, who hath not served their prenteishipe therein, is to pay sixtein pounds Scots, with all dues conforme as aforesaid and this act is to stand ad uturem re memoriam. In witness whereof wee, the Maister and Warden and Maisters of this honorable Lodge have signed thir presents with our hands, day and dait forsaid.
On November 15, 17 17, " George Gordon, Master of arithmetick in Aberdein, [was] unanimously admitted a member of this Fraternity." The setting and execution of the " Essays " or " masterpieces," as necessary to obtain full membership, are, as may be expected, frequently referred to, the only marvel being that the custom was continued for so many years after the Lodge joined the Grand Lodge of Scotland. Essays or masterpieces were common to all, or nearly all trades, though, in general‑here differing from the later Freemasons‑demanding a knowledge of operative, rather than of speculative science. In the year 15 84 the cutler's essay was " a plain finished quhawzear " (" Observations on the Hammermen of Edinburgh," by W. C. Little of Libberton, Esq. (Arch~eologia Scotica‑Transactions of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, Edinburgh, I79z, vol. i, pp. 170‑5) ). The black‑ 36o SCOTLAND smith's masterpiece consisted of " ane door cruick, ane door band, ane spaid iron, ane schoile iron, ane horse shoe and six nails thereto " ; the locksmith's being, " with consent of the blacksmiths, two lost‑locks." Upon March 21, 1657, Charles Smith, advocate, was admitted a blacksmith and was pleased to produce, by way of essay, " the portrait of a horse's leg, shoed with a silver shoe, fixed with three nails, with a silver staple at the other end thereof, which was found to be a qualified and well‑wrought essay." [Soane observes ; " If Masons and Freemasons were at any time the same thing they are so no longer. Whatever therefore the Freemason retains of the workman's occupation is a mere myth and for any useful or intelligible purpose, he might as well wear the apron of a blacksmith and typify his morals by a horseshoe 1 " (New Curiosities of Literature, 1847, vol. ii, p. 3 8).] The novelty of the examination probably tended to ease the consciences of some of the old school, who were rigid upholders of the " ancient landmark " theory; and, as the prescription of such an essay for an operative blacksmith would have been as useless as demanding the customary masterpiece of the class from a candidate for speculative membership, in this particular instance the trade rivalries were well balanced.
" In 1673," says Little, " James Innes was admitted a Freemason on his application. No essay can be traced on this occasion, neither is there recorded the cause of his admission " (Archaologia Scotica, vol. i, p. 175).
Sir George Mackenzie of Rosehaugh was admitted a freeman on January ii, 1679 and, on March 25, 1746, the freedom was conferred on William, Duke of Cumberland. As H.R.H. was similarly admitted to the freedom of all the corpora tions within the city, Little suggests that the victory at Culloden must be considered as his essay ! ANCIENT LODGE, DUNDEE, NO. 49 On May z, 1745, this Lodge received, what in modern phraseology would be termed a " Warrant of Confirmation " and was numbered 54 on the roll of the Grand Lodge of Scotland. The precise measure of antiquity, however, to which it can lay claim, upon the authority of this instrument, there is some difficulty in accurately defining.
In the petition which led to the Charter the petitioners declare " they [their predecessors], in prosecution of the Art, had probably Charters and were erected into a Lodge of more ancient date than the petitioners knew of but, under the reign of David the First of Scotland and Malcolm the Fourth and William the Lyon, his sons, kings of Scotland. About the year 116o, David, Earl of Huntingdon, a younger son of King David, did arrive in Dundee from the Holy Warr, erected a Lodge there, procured them Charters and was himself their Master. . . . That this Lodge was in virtue of their rights continued down to the fatal storming of the town by General Monk in September 1651, when all the rights and Charters of this Lodge, with many other valuable things, were lost and destroyed ; and that ever SCOTLAND 361 since that time they had been in use of continuing the said Lodge and to enter Apprentices, pass Fellows of Craft and raise Master Masons therein ! " There was a Convention of Lodges called in January 16oo at St. Andrews, apparently by order of the Warden‑general, at which, as the notice appears in the Minutes of the Lodge of Edinburgh, that body was doubtless charged to attend, also the Lodge at St. Andrews and " the Maisteris of Dindie and Perth be alsu warnit to convene." The Lodge of Dundee was, likewise, a party to St. Clair Charter, No. 2 (16z8), which body, in all probability at that time, represented " Our Lady Luge of Dunde," referred to in an indenture of March 23, 15 36. This elaborate document is given in the Kegistrum Episcopus Brechinensis (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 36). The agreement was made between the provost, council, etc., the kirkmaster on the one part and George Boiss, " masoun," on the other part, the latter engaging to " exerceiss the best and maist ingenouss poyntis and prackis of his craft," in working either upon the kirk, or about the town, " at the command of the masteris of werkis," who was to pay him yearly for his lifetime the sum of úz4 " usuale money of Scotland," in half quarterly portions, but should the said George be engaged about the king's work, or " for any uther Lordis or gendlmenis," then the money to cease ad interim, likewise to be paid in the case of illness, should such last for forty consecutive days, but not beyond that time, until work was resumed. The mason was to be allowed an apprentice " fra vi yeris to vii yeris " and, as the time of one wore out, he was to take another, each apprentice to be received " at the sicht of the maisteris of werkis " and " he sall mak thaim fre without any fee the first yer of thair interes." All this was declared to be according to the use of " our lady luge of Dunde," which Lyon points out is the earliest authentic instance of a Scottish Lodge following the name of a saint, viz. " Our Lady‑i.e. St. Mary's‑Luge of Dundee." The hours of work are laid down explicitly and an allowance of " ane half hour to his none schankis," save at certain times, when the shortness of the days rendered the latter undesirable. This indenture was signed and witnessed by several parties and by George Boiss, with his " hand led at the pen " and the document is tolerably conclusive of the fact, that at the period of its execution, in that part of Scotland, to say the least, the term free referred exclusively to the general privileges of the trade.
LODGE OF ST. ANDREW, BANFF, NO. 5 2 It is not possible to decide when or how this Lodge originated. In Hughan's Analysis (Freemasons' Magazine, 1868 and The Freemason, March 13, 186) mention is made of its records extending as far back as 1703 and, traditionally, to a much more remote period. The third Degree was not worked until after 1736. It was an operative Lodge and its records are therefore taken up with matters appertaining to trade wants and customs. Hughan has several facsimiles of its Minutes, ranging from December 27, 17o8, to 1711, with particulars of other entries but, although curiosities in their way, they do not demand reproduction here. The Minute Book, 362. SCOTLAND commencing 1703, consists of one hundred and forty pages, twenty‑three of which only have been written on. Its length is but six inches, its breadth scarcely three inches, so it can be easily imagined that the records contain nothing superfluous. It is, indeed, a Minute Book in miniature. The members of present No. 5 2 called themselves " The Masons belonging to the Lodge of Banff," the chief officer being entitled the Master, the second in rank the warden, the box‑master of course being one of the officials. The members assembled annually on the festival of St. John the Evangelist and, in the early part of the last century, though the reverse of an opulent body, did a great deal to promote the honour and usefulness of the Masonic Craft.
LODGE OF S'r. JOHN KILWINNING, HADDING'roN, No. 57 Although by the Grand Secretary of Scotland this Lodge has been traced back to 1599, it is only numbered 57; but many private Lodges, through withholding, in the first instance, their adhesion and submission to the newly formed governing body, found, on eventually " falling into line," that the positions to which they might have attained by an earlier surrender of their independence, were filled by junior organizations which had exercised greater promptitude in tendering their allegiance. Hence they had to rest satisfied with a position out of all keeping with their real antiquity. Lawrie affirms that the oldest record in possession of this Lodge is of the year 15 99, which sets forth that a Lodge was opened in Gullane Church (now in ruins), but for what purpose cannot be ascertained, the writing being so illegible. The existence of this old record does not appear to have been known to Lyon, as he declares that its earliest Minute is dated December 26, 1713, being an entry of the passing of a Fellow‑craft. He objects to the claim that St. John Kilwinning is an offshoot of the Lodge of Wark in Northumberland, A.D. 1599 and neither can be traced at that period. In 1726, the Masons of Tranent bound themselves to attend the yearly meetings of the Lodge at Haddington. They have still the " band " given by John Anderson, Mason burgess, to the Lodge dated February 2, 1682, in security for C6 Scots and an interesting contract (on paper) of May Z9, 1697. It is an agreement between the " Masson Lodge of Haddingtoun and John Crumbie," the then deacon of the Lodge (viz. Archibald Dauson), acting on behalf of the " remnant massons " thereof. The first condition was that Crumbie " shall not work with, nor in company nor fellowship of any Cowan at any maner of building nor masson work " ; the second recapitulates the usual clauses of an apprentice's indenture of that period, such as the avoidance of contracts, days' wages only being allowed and C6 Scots the maximum value for work that an apprentice could legally undertake. The penalty for violating any or either of the rights and privileges of the Lodge was Coo Scots. The deacon agreed to receive and support the apprentice, Crumbie stipulating to pay the ordinary dues " which is use and wont." The document was to be registered " in any judge's books competent within this kingdom." The Lodge allowed " fees of honour " to be paid on election to office, as with other old Lodges, ios. Scots having been charged a Brother on his appointment as warden in 1723.
SCOTLAND 363 LODGE OF ST. JOHN, KELSO, No. 5 8 For all the known details respecting this Lodge, the Craft is indebted to W. F. Vernon of Kelso (History of the Lodge of Kelso, privately printed, 1878). The Lodge must have been in active existence long before the earliest date of the Minutes which happily have been preserved, for the first opens with an account " of the honourable Lodge of Kelso, under the protection of Saint John, having met and considered all former sederunts " (i.e. previous meetings). The Lodges generally in Scotland assembled on the festival of St. John the Evangelist. The Lodge of Edinburgh only met some six times on June z4, from 15 99 to 175 6 ; and Kilwinning and other Lodges observed their festivals on other days than that of St. John the Baptist. Indeed, so far as Scotland is concerned, the memory of the latter saint was much neglected by the ancient Lodges. The great High Day of Freemasonry in Scotland was at or near December z7. The first Minute of the Lodge at Kelso of December z7, 1701, is, in part, devoted to a recital of the By‑laws which were agreed to at the meeting. Apprentices were to pay ~8 Scots, " with their glovs " and " all the gentlemen lvho are the honorary members of the companie obleidg themselves to pay a crown yearly," to wit, on St. John's Day. It was likewise enacted that when an apprentice is registered " as master or Fellow of the Craft, that he must pay fyv shillins, with new gloves, to the society." The Master, Warden and Treasurer were entrusted with the disposition of the funds. The names of the officers are not mentioned in 1701 but, on June z, 170z, that of the late Master is recorded as George Faa, deceased. This name is well known on the Border, being that of the royal family of the Gipsy tribe, whose headquarters have been for many generations the pleasantly situated village of Yetholm, near Kelso. To lovers of ballads, the name of Johnie Faa, will be familiar.
"The gypsies cam' to our guid Lord's yett." The ballad commemorates the abduction of the Countess of Cassillis by Sir John Faa of Dunbar and his subsequent execution by the enraged Earl. After mature deliberation, the members elected Sir John Pringall of Stichell to be " the honorable master " and the " Laird of Stothrig " to be " the worshipful warden." A sum of money was voted to the widow of the late master, George Faa, while other amounts were presented to her at a later period. On June zo, 1704, the thanks of the Lodge were voted to those officers for their " prudence and good conduct " and " care and diligence " respectively. The Lodge was both operative and speculative, Appren tices being regularly entered and Fellows duly passed. There is a list of members for St. John's Day, 1705, forty in number, the names in the first column were prob ably written by the clerk, those in the second column are autographs. Some have curious marks attached to them ; several of the members were persons of distinction, including Sir John Pringall, Baronet. The " Acks of our Books," referred to in the records, are missing, the earliest kept being those Of 1701. Unfortunately, the box " purged of all unesory papers " in 1716, which may account for the absence of older documents. The Brethren resolved on St. John's Day, 1718, that, according 364 SCOTLAND to the acts of their books, some time was to be spent on that day, in each year, in an examination, preparatory to " passing " and only those were to be accepted who were found qualified. On the celebration of the festival in 1720, members were prohibited from " entering " any persons save in the place where the Lodge was founded. The nomination of " Intenders " is not recorded until 1740. The prefix free is not used until 1741, when the Lodge was called " The Society of Free and Accepted Masons " but, for some time previously, there had been a gradual alteration going on in the ordinary descriptions of the business transacted, the members evidently leaning towards the modern designations and ultimately they united with the Grand Lodge of Scotland in 175 3.
It is quite within the limits of probability that the Lodge was in existence in the seventeenth century, or even earlier and, possibly, it was the source from which a knowledge of the " word " was derived by the Rev. James Ainslie. This Presbyterian clergyman was laureated at the University of Edinburgh, April 17, 1638, called January ii, and admitted and instituted (after being sustained by the General Assembly) December 9, 165 z. Objection having been taken because he was a Freemason and the neighbouring presbytery consulted previous to entering him on trials, the presbytery of Kelso, February 24, 1652, replied ` that to their judgment there is neither sinne nor scandale in that word, because in the purest tymes of this kirke, maisons haveing that word have been ministers ; that maisons and men haveing that word have been and are daylie in our sessions and many professors haveing that word are daylie admitted to the ordinances.' He was deprived by the Acts of Parliament June 1i and of the Privy Council October i, i66z. (Dr. Hew Scott, Fasti Ecclesia Scoticana, p. ii, " Synods of Merse and Teviotdale, Dumfries and Galloway," p. 5 o6. The Rev. A. T. Grant says : " Dr. Scott gives the MS. records as his authority and there can be no doubt that the words he gives are therein contained.") The Rev. A. T. Grant of Rosslyn, Past Grand Chaplain of Scotland, the wellknown archxologist, says, " two remarks may be made in regard to this case. The first is, that Freemasonry was then held by many of the strict Presbyterians as not incompatible with their principles, the fact that Mr. Ainslie was deposed on the restoration of Charles II, showing that he belonged to the covenanting section of the Church. The second is, that by the solemn declaration of a church court in 165z, Freemasonry was practised by men other than operative masons before 16oo, `the purest tymes of this kirke' to a Presbyterian doubtless being the years subsequent to the Reformation of 15 6o, or, at any rate, before the introduction of Episcopacy in 16io." The importance of this expression of opinion will become evident if it is borne in mind that by the generality of Masonic historians it is distinctly laid down that Speculative Freemasonry had its origin in 1717, as the result of a resolution " that the privileges of Masonry should no longer be restricted to operative masons." Cf. Preston, Illustrations of Masonry, 1792, p. 246 ; Findel, History of Freemasonry, SCOTLAND 365 p. 130 ; Fort, The Early History and Antiqaities of Freemasonry, p. 139 ; and Steinbrenner, Origin and Early History of Freemasonry, p. 127.
The following is from the Chronicle of Fife (Diary of John Lamont, 1649‑72, p. 9)‑" There was something (in the Assembly) spoken anent the meason word, which was recommended to the severall presbytries for tryall thereof. This Assembly satt from the 4 of July to the 6 of August " [1649].
The quotations presented above may throw some light on a singular passage which is to be found in Ayrton's Life of Alexander Henderson (Introduction, p. 68).
Traquair is represented by Clarendon as being inferior to no Scotsman in wisdom and dexterity and as one whose integrity to the King and love for the work in hand, was notorious. Baillie also vindicates his character and Hamilton always advised the King to make use of him, notwithstanding his ambition and love of popularity. But Heylin and others paint him in black colours as " a dangerous piece and not to be trusted." Laud complained of Traquair playing fast and loose; the bishops blamed him for giving information to Johnston ; and it was a common saying at the time that he had the mason's word among the Presbyterians.
LODGE OF ST. NINIAN, BRECHIN, No. 66 Although the history of this Lodge has been sketched briefly by Hughan (Voice of Masonry, Chicago, July 1872 ; Masonic Magazine, October 1873), no (detailed review of its ancient records has yet been published. The earliest By‑laws are of the year 1714 and were agreed to on the festival of St. John the Evangelist. (i) " If ane free prentice or handy craftsman," the fee for entry was 40s. Scots, but strangers were charged C3 sterling. (z) None were to be " entered " unless either the Master of the Lodge, Warden, or Treasurer were present, " with'two free masters and two entered prentices." (4) No members were " to witness the entry or passing of any person into any other Lodge, unless the dues be paid into this Lodge." (5) Passing only to take place in the presence of the Master, Warden and seven of the members. (6) " Any man who shall come to work within this Lodge, if not ane free man ye░f shall pay into the box the sum of 40s. Scots mony, with 3s. and 4d. to the officers." (8) Joining members from other Lodges were to pay zos. Scots. (9) " Each measson shall insert his mark in this book and shall pay thirteen shillings moe for booking their mark." (1o) Brethren were to attend on St. John's Day yearly, " for commemorating the said apostle, our patron and tutelar saint." These rules were entered in the Minute Book,, A.D. 1723 We subscribers, measons, members of the honourable fraternity of Measons of the Lodge of Brechine subscribing, hereby bind and oblidge and our successors, duly and strictly, to obey and observe the ordinances and acts . . . in the hail heads, tenor and contents of the same." An " index " is preserved in the Lodge of the " several marks of the handycrafts and members since the 27th December 1714." The Lodge submitted to the Grand Lodge in 1756.
366 SCOTLAND LODGE OF ATCHESON‑HAVEN (Extinct) Lyon states that the records of this Lodge rank next to those of the Lodge of Edinburgh in point of antiquity. That zealous antiquary frequently alludes to its Minutes in his History of No. i ; but, notwithstanding the several excerpts therein presented, it is to be regretted that a thorough examination and reproduction of its records has yet to be made. The Lodge itself met successively at Musselburgh, Prestonpans, Morrison's Haven, Atcheson's Haven and Pinkie and, in conjunction with the Incorporation, regulated the affairs of the mason trade within those boundaries until the middle of the eighteenth century. Lyon says there was a benefit society, into which Protestants only were admissible, under the wing of the Lodge until 185 z, when it was dissolved and its funds amounting to about C40o, divided amongst its members. There is no trace of the third Degree being practised prior to 1769, although the Lodge united in forming the Grand Lodge of Scotland in 1736. The members, however, would not tolerate any interference with their peculiar rules, so they withdrew their allegiance in the following year, but the Lodge was restored to the roll in 1814, continuing thereon until 1866, when, becoming dormant it was finally erased. In its Charter, granted in 1814 by the Grand Lodge of Scotland, it was certified that the Lodge had been in existence from the year 15 S S and, from the circumstance of its being present at the constitution of the Grand Lodge of Scotland in 1736, it was resolved that precedence should be allowed from that date (Lawrie's History of Freemasonry, 1859, p. 186). Sir Anthony Alexander, master of work to Charles I (a member of No. 1), presided in that capacity (and as General Warden) over a meeting of master tradesmen at Falkland, October 31, 163 6. The Minutes of this assembly are duly engrossed in the first few pages of the oldest records of Atcheson‑Haven, the object of the conference being to repress certain abuses in the " airtis and craftis " of masons, wrights, shipwrights, coopers, glaziers, painters, plumbers, slaters, plasterers, etc. The suggestions then made were agreed to by the Lodge on January 14, 1637, which was presided over by Sir Anthony Alexander, who duly attested the Minutes thereof. It is singular, however, that there is no evidence in the Minute Books of any portion of these regulations ever having been actually in operation in the Lodge and the records are not so commonly embellished with the marks of the craftsmen, as in the case of most other Scottish Lodges of a similar antiquity.
It is also noteworthy that neither the Schaw Statutes nor the early records of Kilwinning and Mary's Chapel show any trace of or make any provision for the initiation of the clerks. It is highly probable that the notary elected as clerk had not only to subscribe to the oath of fidelity, but also to pass through the ceremony of admittance as a Free‑mason (whatever that consisted of), before being qualified to act in the Lodge requiring his services. At all events, the clerk of AtchesonHaven Lodge was a Mason in 1636, as the following quaint certificate appended to the statutes before mentioned recites We, Sir Anthony Alexr., general wardin and mr. of work to his Ma'tie and SCOTLAND 367 meassouns of the Ludge of Achieson's Havin undersubscrybeand, haveing experience of the literatour and understanding of George Aytoun, notar publick and ane brother of craft, Thairfor witt ye us to have acceptit and admitit, lyke as we be the termes heirof accept and admitt the said George Aytoun and na other, dureing our pleassour, our onlie clerk for discharging of all writt, indentures and others " (these Actis and Statutis are reproduced in Lawrie's History of Freemasonry, 1859, p. 445)ň Sir Anthony Alexander was made a Mason about two years before the passing of these statutes, which may account for the preference exhibited towards a Brother of the same Craft.
In 1638, the then master of work, Henrie Alexander (brother of his immediate predecessor), met " ane competent number of meassons of the ludge," who approved of the new acts, elected officers, etc., only it was provided that their clerk is to hold office durxj vita vell ad culpam. The " aithe de fidelj " was administered to each‑a custom which is still continued in Scotland, though not in England. The members were much distressed at the number of Brethren who ignored or disobeyed the rules of their " Craft of Masonry, which has been so much honoured in all ages for its excellent and well‑ordered laws " ; so they agreed, at the annual meeting on December 27, 1700, when the foregoing formed part of a long preamble, to have the regulations enforced and respected for the futute. The chief grievances were, that Apprentices did not qualify themselves to undertake work by passing as Fellow‑crafts ; that craftsmen who countenanced such a course virtually admitted them to the privileges which they only obtained by lawful means, hence such conduct brought " all law and order and the mason word to contempt " ; and that those who did " pass " were not accepted at the regular time, viz. the annual meeting. Even after these efforts, the apprentices were not obedient, so that, in 1719, it was enacted that all such must be passed not later than the third St. John's Day after the expiration of their indentures; and, on December z7, i 72z, it was resolved that the Warden shall, on each morning of every St. John's Day, " try every entered prentis that was entered the St. John's Day before, under the penalty of ` on croun ' to the box." LODGE OF HAUGHFOOT (Extinct) The history of the Lodge at Haughfoot has been carefully written by Sanderson, who is also the historian of the old Lodge of Peebles. The records begin in the first decade of the eighteenth century and terminate in 1763 ; throughout they observe a uniform silence as to the third, or Master Mason's Degree. The meetings were generally held once a year, on the festival of St. John the Evangelist, the officers being the " Presses " (or master), clerk and box‑master, until 1759, when a Warden was first appointed. The members were, for the most part, gentlemen and tradesmen in the neighbourhood and not necessarily of the mason's trade; thus, from t7oz, it really had a greater claim to be deemed a Speculative than an Operative Lodge.
368 SCOTLAND On December zz, 1702, Sir James Scott of Gala, his brother Thomas and six others, one being John Pringle, a wright, " were duly admitted apprentices and fellow‑crafts." After which the Brethren resolved with one voice to hold their meetings on St. John's Day. A remarkable entry occurs in the early Minutes (1702)‑" Of entrie as the apprentice did, leaving out (the common judge). They then whisper the word as before and the Master grips his hand in the ordinary way." These words are capable of more than one interpretation but, having regard to the fact, that the postulant was already in possession of the word and that the grip was to be of the ordinary kind, it may be concluded that they were a direction to the " Master " at the " passing " of " Fellows of Craft." The ceremonial was plainly a " common form," but it informs us that the Haughfoot masons were taught a grip as well as a word. There being no similar reference of equal date in the Scottish records, it cannot positively be determined that both grip and word were com municated in the Lodges of the seventeenth century. It is probable, indeed, that they were and the curious entry above cited may indicate that, long prior to the era of Grand Lodges, the " Masonic secret " comprised more than a single method of recognition. The Laird of Torsonce was elected Master in 1705. In this Lodge the youngest apprentice was called to office but, whether to assume the same duties as those filled by the " oldest apprentice " in other Lodges, is not known; as he is termed the " officer," probably it was in part to act as Tyler. In 1707 it was resolved that " except on special considerations, ane year at least should intervene betwixt any being admitted Apprentice and his being entered Fellow‑craft." On St. John's Day, 1708, two persons " were admitted into this Lodge and received the word in common form" (Freemasons' Magazine, October 16, 1869), whatever that may mean.
Edinburgh was again to be Masonically invaded for, on January z4, 1711, several members of the Lodge, some being resident in that city, assembled therein, but in what part is not said and admitted John Mitchelson of Middleton an " appren tice and fellow‑craft in common form." Middleton was half‑way between Edinburgh and Haughfoot. No notice appears to have been taken of such admissions by the Lodges in Edinburgh, one reason probably being that they were not very particular themselves and, evidently, what is now known as the American doctrine of exclusive Masonic jurisdiction did not then prevail.
LODGE OF MELROSE (Independent) Prior to 1880 no history, worthy of the name, of this old Lodge had ever been presented. This was partly owing to the difficulty of obtaining access to its musty records and, in some degree, no doubt, to the fact of the custodians of these docu ments not entertaining a very clear idea of what had been confided to their charge. That there was a Lodge at Melrose of great antiquity, which possessed many curious manuscripts relating to the proceedings of bygone members, who would not join in the formation of a Grand Lodge, whose influence had been sufficient to leave their SCOTLAND 369 mark upon the present generation of Melrose Masons, we all knew, the existence of the Lodge being kept alive in our memories by the annual torchlight processions which still continue to be observed. It is true, moreover, that Buchan of Glasgow visited the ancient town and obtained some little information respecting the Lodge and gave to the Craft, in the Freemasons' Magazine, an interesting sketch of his pilgrimage. Buchan, however, presented no excerpts from the old records which he had been privileged to inspect and was not even aware of there being amongst them a copy of the Old Charges, dating from the seventeenth century. Another visitor, Vernon of Kelso, ten years later, was equally fortunate in the opportunities afforded him and more diligent in the advantages he took of them. He examined the whole of the records, made careful extracts from the Minutes and transcribed with extreme exactitude the Melrose MS., a version of the Masonic Constitutions or Charges, which has already been described. This zealous inquirer must, therefore, be hailed as the first historian of the Lodge of Melrose.
This sketch of the Lodge may be divided into two sections‑the traditional and the historical. Of the former there is but little to say, but that little is not deficient in interest.
If, in the absence of documentary evidence, the dates of the erection of the various abbeys in Scotland are accepted as the periods when Freemasonry was introduced into their respective districts, it is claimed by Vernon that Kelso would stand first, Edinburgh second, while the third place would be occupied by Melrose. According to Fort (p. i 13), " the first reliable account touching masons, historically considered, is to be found engraved, in nearly obliterated characters on the walls of Melrose Abbey Church and establishes the fact that, as early as the year 1136, this portion of the United Kingdom depended on master masons imported from abroad." The inscription in question will be found upon a tablet inserted in the wall of the south transept, and is commonly taken to be (Rev. J. Morton, Monastic Annals of Teviotdale, 1832, pp. 250, 251) ,Io4n : murbo : sum : fgm : raAit was : 3 : anb : born : in : vargsse rerfainlg : aub : flab: inkrVing al : mason: iuerlt : of : sanlan brags: ge : Iigr : kirk : of : glao gu : metros : anb : vaslag : of uMbbUsbaUll : anb : of : galtval prag : to : gob : anb : marl ‑ 4aifll anb : siveiet : sand : io4n : to : lterV : t4is : llaliz : frtt fra : sfail4.
From the evidence of this inscription, Port has deduced some startling conclusions‑(i) that John Morow [Murdo, Mordo, Morow, Morvo, or Meuvroperhaps originally, Moreau or Murdoch‑" The inscription cannot well be older than the sixteenth century; and it is not likely that Murdo, whose name would indicate a Scottish origin, performed any functions beyond repairs and restorations " 370 SCOTLAND (R. W. Billings, Baronial and Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Scotland, vol. iv, p. 6). Leroux de Lancy mentions a Jean Moreau as having been consulted at the rebuilding of the bridge of Notre Dame at Paris, April 8, 15 00 (Dictionary of Architecture‑Arch. Pub. Soc.) ], a Frenchman, was the architect or master mason of the edifice ; (z) that there were Lodges of masons employed, over which Morow presided as the general or Grand Master; and (3)‑as already stated‑that in 1136 Scottish architecture only flourished under the direction of master masons imported from abroad. In the first place, however, the inscription which may, indeed, have been cut at some time after Morow's death, is considered by the best authorities to be not older than the fourteenth century, whilst they incline to the opinion that it is probably of much later date. Secondly, it nowhere appears that Morow was either architect of the building, or that he had charge over all the other workmen employed at the construction of the churches and cathedrals mentioned in his quaint lines. The inscription simply states that he had charge of the mason's work, as the " keeper " or superintendent of the repairs and alterations of buildings already completed. It is, however, a curious fact in medixval operative masonry‑which, being important, has naturally been neglected‑that one man should have been the superintendent of so many buildings ; but the usage was not unknown in England,‑for example, at Salisbury. Above the door leading to a stairway in the abbey is a shield carved in relief, displaying two pairs of compasses interlaced and three fleur‑de‑lys, with an almost obliterated inscription in quaint Gothic letters, which Morton says may be read thus .Sa galls gr rompas rtrUn about sa truth anb laufr bo, but boute. br4aulbr to Re 4rutrr q. io4ur mnrbv.
" As the compass goes round without deviating from the circumference, so, doubtless, truth and loyalty never deviate. Look well to the end, quoth John Murdo "(Morton, Monastic Annals of Teviotdale, p. 251). The inscription does not run in regular lines, but is carved above and beside the shield. John Bower reads the name Morvo and states, that in the town of Melrose, " There is a Lodge of Freemasons belonging to St. John; in the Lodge is an old picture bearing the masons' coat of arms, with an inscription of In deo est omnes fides ; below the arms is John Morvo, first Grand Master of St. John's Lodge, Melrose, anno dom. 113 5 " (The Abbeys of Melrose, 1822, pp. 66, iog). It is probable that Fort's conclusions rest upon no other authority than the evidence supplied by the picture here alluded to. " There are very few Lodges," observed Vernon, " either in England or Scotland, which can produce documentary evidence of having been in existence over two hundred years ; but this the Melrose Lodge can do and, while we regret the position it occupies in, or rather out of, the Masonic world, we cannot but reverence it for its antiquity, when we remember that its records date in almost unbroken succession from the year 1674 down to the present time" (Masonic Magatiine, January‑June 188o, pp. 321, 365, 409, 453)ň F. III‑15 SCOTLAND 371 The place of meeting was not Melrose, but Newstead (" Neusteid "), down to 1743. Newstead is situated about a mile east from Melrose, or mid‑way between the ancient religious houses of Mailros and Melros. The collocation of the Minutes is very confusing, there being an entire absence of chronological sequence; and, from the examples which Vernon gives us, it may safely be concluded that the first book of records must, at some period, have been rebound and the sheets stitched together without any regard being paid either to the pagination or chronology. The first entry in the volume is of 1678, the second 1729, and then there are others of 1679 and 1682 1 The earliest Minute is dated December 28, 1674 and is to the effect that, " be the voyce of the lodge," no master shall take an apprentice under seven years, the latter to pay C8 (Scots) for meit and drink and 40s. (Scots) for " the use of the box, by and allow ym sufficient gloves." It was also " condescendet on yt w░ ever a prentice is mad frie mason, he must pay four pund Scotts, w' h four pund Scotts is to be stowet at the pleasour of the lodge." Neither Apprentices nor Fellow‑crafts were to be received save on St. John's Day.
On December 27, 1679, the contents of the box were duly examined and receipt thereof taken from the " boxe master," Thomas Bunye being the master. At the St. John's Day, 168o, Andrew Mein is described as the " Mr Masone," and Alexander Mein as the " wardine." On December 27, 1681, John Bunye " was entered and received fr[ee] to the tread " [trade], his master being his father ; another entry states that one of the members was obliged to be " cautioner " for the good conduct of an apprentice. It was likewise noted that an apprentice was entered at Dalkeith instead of the regular place of meeting, so the offenders were to be made answerable for the same at next St. John's Day. How the irregularity was explained does not appear in the records. The entry in 1684 runs : " At Neusteid, the ‑ day of december 1684, it is fastlie compted be the meassons in the lodge of melros what the trou expence of the building of the loft and seat in the kirk of Melros is, the wholl soume is 2421b. 13 s. 6d." This Minute deserves particular attention, not only because the members were so interested in a provision being made for them in their kirk, but also from the fact that the entry is one of the earliest of its kind in ascribing a name to a particular Lodge, apart from the house or place in which the meetings were held. Although assembling in Newstead, it is explicitly called the Lodge of Melrose. The festival was celebrated again on December 28, 1685, which was on a Friday, as on December 28, 1674, so it is probable there were local objections to the Thursday being utilised for the purpose, The cash paid out of the box for " meat and drink, etc.," amounted to iii os. iod. (Scots). On the festival of St. John, 1686, eighteen members signed a resolution, that, in consequence of the difficulty experienced by the treasurer in collecting the dues, on and after that day, none are to be " past frie to ye trade," unless for " readie money," or on approved security. On December 27, 1687, is a note of the payment of Ci (Scots) to Thomas Ormiston, " for keeping of ye seat." This expenditure probably had reference to the use of the kirk for the annual service prior to the banquet, but nothing is said there 372 SCOTLAND to enable a decision ; but, in the particulars of the cost of the annual feast in the following year, there is the charge for " the lad for keipein of the set in the kirk." Vernon suggests that the next entry must have been written after dinner and the conclusion at which he arrives, will doubtless remain unchallenged: " 27 Decr 16go P is votted that everie measson that takes the place in the kirk befor his elder broyr is a grait ase." There are lists of Fellow‑crafts and Entered Apprentices of the seventeenth and others in the succeeding century, having distinctive marks attached. The fines and other sums owing to the Lodge read as heavy amounts ; evidently, the arrears then, as in modern times, were the subject of very painful contemplation. In 1695 (December 27) it was enacted that neither Apprentice nor Fellow‑craft be received, unless they have the gloves for those entitled thereto, or be mulcted in ,Cio penalty.
Before dismissing the seventeenth‑century records, there is an agreement of January 29, 1675, " betwixt the Maisones of the Lodge of Melros," that deserves examination. It was written by " Andro Mein, Meason, portioner [a small pro prietor] of Neustied," who was, in all probability, the " A. M." who transcribed the Old Charges of the preceding year. The document is a. mutual bond by the masons and apprentices " in ye lodge of Melrois " and is signed by no fewer than eighty of its members, several of whom append their designations, such as maltman, weaver, vintner and hostler, thereby proving that, at the period mentioned (1675), many of the Brethren were not operative masons, though connected with the Lodge as free‑masons. The apprentices had hitherto only been bound by their indentures for for some three or four years, which was found to act prejudiciously to the trade, so the Brethren agreed that the period should thereafter be extended to seven years, the sum of C20 (Scots) being payable for each year by which the term was shortened. Apprentices were to be received on St. John's Day save when it falls " on ye Sabbath Day," when the day following was to be observed. Should the master mason, warden, box‑masters and others consent, stranger apprentices may be entered on other days, so long as the requisite fees are paid and such receptions regularly reported. Other clauses are inserted and the whole were to be " insert and registrat in ye book of counsall and sescion books of ye regalitie of Melrois." The rule which required an examination as to the skill of the craftsmen was not to be infringed with impunity, for, in 1707, those " persons " who had absented themselves from the required scrutiny were there and then " denuded from aine benifite " until due submission was made. On the Festival of St. John, 1739, " the Companie of the Ancent Lodge of Melros," on finding that three of their number (two being masons and one a wright), on their own confession, had been guilty of " Entring " a certain person on an irregular day, fined them C8 (Scots) and they were also to provide a pair of gloves for every member! There were several fines imposed about this period for the non‑presentation of gloves at the proper time, which were promptly levied.
The St. John's Day, 1745, was specially entered in the Minutes, for it was SCOTLAND 373 proposed " that all the members doe atend the Grand Mr. to walk in procession from their meeting to their generall place of Randevouz." The proposition was carried by a great majority and it was then agreed that " each in the company walk with the Grand Mr. with clean aprons and gloves." The same meeting resolved to accept five shillings sterling from apprentices and craftsmen " in Leu of Gloves " in all " time comeing." There are numerous Minutes transcribed by Vernon, which it would be foreign to the present purpose to present in detail, though they are of considerable value as portions of his general history of the Lodge. His remark, however, that the third Degree does not appear in the records until a few years since, is too important to pass over ‑without being specially emphasized.
The members continue to keep the festival of St. John the Evangelist as did their ancient forefathers, proceeding in procession by torchlight through Melrose to the ruins of the abbey, " which they illuminate with coloured fire, having special permission from the superior the Duke of Buccleuch, so to do and, afterwards, they dine together." Even should the weather prove unfavourable (as it did on December 27, 1879, when more than one hundred members mustered in honour of the occasion), there is no lack in the attendance and enthusiasm of the Brethren and, as the Lodge owns a " fine hall and shop," has ú3oo deposited at interest and its income approaches úzoo annually, it is gratifying to reflect that the representatives of this ancient body have proved so worthy of the trust reposed in them.
For more than a century and a half the Lodge of Melrose held aloof from the Grand Lodge of Scotland, right from the time of its refusal to co‑operate with the other Lodges in the formation and foundation of that body. The result was that, during the whole of that long period its members were unable to visit other Lodges in Scotland or in other jurisdictions in communion with the northern Grand Lodge, nor could members of other Lodges visit Melrose. The sole reason for this ostracism was that Melrose refused to surrender its independency. As far back as 1812 the members resolved unanimously that the antiquity of the Melrose Lodge is attested both by uniform tradition and documents of a very remote date. That our predecessors have ever maintained and asserted the Independence and Superiority of this Lodge. That they have paid no attention to repeated applications from the Grand Lodge to come under their wing. That it would be highly improper and blameworthy in us to give up that independence which our Ancestors have preserved for us many Ages‑and that no notice be taken of the present application.
In 1891, however, wiser counsels prevailed and the Lodge of Melrose became, on its own petition, a unit of the Grand Lodge, receiving the number of i bis, paying one guinea for the Charter, each member paying half a crown for his Grand Lodge diploma. The Grand Lodge undertook not to interfere with the funds or property of the Lodge of Melrose.
374 SCOTLAND The Acts of the Scottish Parliament are referred to by Lyon as " strengthening the presumption that the Grand Master Mason of James I is a purely fabulous personage " [Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. z. " While Free‑Masonry was flourishing in England under the auspices of Henry VI, it was at the same time patronised in the sister kingdom by King James I. By the authority of this monarch, every Grand Master who was chosen by the Brethren, either from the nobility or clergy and approved of by the crown, was entitled to an annual revenue of four pounds Scots from each master mason, and likewise to a fee at the initiation of every new member " (Lawrie's History of Freemasonry, 1804, p. 99)], but except in this particular and as illustrating the character of the appointment of Master of Work, they present few features that would interest the reader.
None of the statutes enacted during the reigns of James II and III which have been preserved, have any special relation to the Mason Craft; not does it appear from any municipal records of the same period that it enjoyed a pre‑eminence of position over other trades (Lyon, op. cit., p. 4). The privileges of the Craft in general are, indeed, alternately enlarged and curtailed, as was the case in the southern kingdom and the Parliament of Scotland, like that of England, was constantly occupied in repressing by legislative measures the exorbitant demands made by ,i associated bodies of workmen.
The Laws of the Burghs (Leges.Quatuor Burgorum), the earliest collected body of the laws of Scotland of which there is any mention (Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, 1844, vol. i, Preface, p. 3 z), allow the son of a burgess " the fredome to by and sell " whilst with his father, yet on setting up for himself he is not to use the freedom of the burgh, " bot gif he by it and be maid freman." In 1424, each trade, with the officers of the town, was empowered to choose a " Dekyn or Maisterman " to " assay and govern " the works of that craft; but, in 1426, the powers of the deacons were restricted to examining " every fifteen days that the workmen are cunning and their work sufficient," the wages of wrights and masons and the price of materials were to be determined by the town council and workmen were ordered not to take more work in hand than they could finish within the stipulated time. In the following year the privilege of electing deacons was withdrawn, that they might no longer " hold meetings, which are often conspiracies " and the government of all crafts was entrusted to wardens, who were to be appointed " by the council of the Burgh, or the Baron in landward districts," whose duties comprised the fixing of wages and the punishment of offenders. Laws against combinations of workmen and extortionate charges were passed in 1493, 1496, 1540, 15 51, and 15 5 5. In the last‑named year the office of deacon was once more suppressed and it was declared that no one shall have power to convene or assemble any craftsmen in a private " conuention " for the purpose of making any acts or statutes. Combinations to enhance prices were not, however, so readily put down, as we find, in 15 84, the craftsmen of Edinburgh, under renewed pressure, undertaking not to continue this offence‑making private laws or statutes‑but to submit to the award of the magistrates, though it was provided that each craft SCOTLAND 375 !eight " convene " for the election of a deacon, " the making of masters," or " the trying of their handie work." Foremost among the noticeable features of early Scottish Masonry is the evident simplicity of the ceremony of reception. " Until about the middle of the last century," says Lyon, " initiations effected without the Lodge were freely homologated by Mother Kilwinning ; it was only when the fees for such intrants failed to be forthcoming that abhorrence of the system was formally expressed, and its perpetuation forbidden" (Freemasons' 111aga!Zine, July 1, 1865, p. 1).
By the rules of at least one of her daughter Lodges, framed in 1765, ordinary members resident at a distance oú " more than three miles from the place where the box is kept," were permitted " to enter persons to the Lodge," a custom‑" in the observance of which one Mason could, unaided, make another‑indicating either the presence of a ritual of less elaborate proportions than that now in use, or a total indifference to uniformity in imparting to novitiates the secrets of the Craft." In his larger work, the same authority speaks of the MASON Worn as constituting the only secret that is ever alluded to in the Minutes of Mary's Chapel, Kilwinning, Atcheson's Haven, Dunblane, or any others that he has examined, of earlier date than 1736 ; this he believes to have been at times " imparted by individual Brethren in a ceremony extemporised according to the ability of the initiator " (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. zz).
To many the fact will be new, that in Scotland in the seventeenth century, the members of Masons' Lodges were not exclusively operatives ; but the precise bearing of this circumstance upon the Masonic system of three Degrees‑of which there is no positive evidence before 1717‑will more fitly claim attention at a later period.
Between the earliest record in Scotland and England respectively‑‑of the admission or reception of a candidate for the Lodge‑there is a wide interval; and influences unknown in the former country, may not have been without weight, in determining the form which English Masonry assumed, on passing from the obscurity of tradition into the full light of history.
CHAPTER IX HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND BY the year 1727, within a decade of the formation of the Grand Lodge of England, southern ideas had permeated to the northern capital and were quickly engrafted on the Masonry of Scotland.
The innovations are known to have taken firm root in Edinburgh as early as 17zcg and their general diffusion throughout the Scottish kingdom was a natural consequence of the erection of the Grand Lodge of Scotland.
From causes which can hardly be realized with the distinctness that might seem desirable, the circumstances immediately preceding the formation of governing bodies in the two territorial divisions of Great Britain were wholly dissimilar. In the South, apart from York, we hear only of four Lodges, either as connected with the movement of 1717 or as being in existence at the time. Whereas, in the North, at the Grand Election of 1736, fully one hundred Lodges were in actual being, of which no fewer than thirty‑three were represented on the occasion. As suggested, these early Scottish Lodges appear to have existed for certain trade‑or operativepurposes, of which the necessity may have passed away or, at least, has been unrecorded in the South. It is possible that the course of legislation ending with the Statute of Apprentices‑S Eliz., c. iv‑enacted before the union of the kingdoms, may have contributed to this divergency by modifying the relations between the several classes in the (operative) Lodge.
The proceedings of the English legislature were, of course, of limited application; whilst, therefore, the possibility of the bonds being, in some degree, loosened which in the South connected the Brethren of the Lodge may be conceded, no similar result could have followed in the North. Indeed, long prior to the Union, at a convocation of master‑tradesmen held at Falkland‑October 26, 1636‑under the presidency of Sir Anthony Alexander, General Warden and Master of Work to Charles I, the establishment of " Companies " of not fewer than twenty personswhich must often have been identical with and never very unlike, Lodges‑in those parts of Scotland where no similar trade society already existed, was recommended as a means of putting an end to certain grievances, of which the members present at the meeting complained. The regulations passed on this occasion were accepted by the Lodge of Atcheson's Haven, January 4, 1637 (Lyon, History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, p. 87). Even in later years, though at a period still anterior to the formation of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, the principle of association or combination met with much favour in that kingdom. Two or three years after 1717‑according to Lecky‑clubs in Scotland began to multiply.
376 SCOTLAND CLOTHING AND REGALIA OF THE GRAND MASTER OF THE GRAND LODGE As to the early records of Scottish Masonic Clothing, D. Murray Lyon's monumental History of Freemasonry in Scotland gives some very interesting particulars. In the " Regulations for the Grand Lodge " in 1736, Rule 7 provides that " the jewels of the Grand Master and Wardens shall be worn at a green ribbon." Embroidered aprons with officers' emblems were introduced in 176o ; and, in 1767, the garters (which in the days of knee‑breeches formed part of the clothing) and the " ribbonds for the jewels " were to be renewed. The sash of office‑bearers was introduced in 1744. and jewels began to be worn in 176o. The Lodge of Dundee used white aprons in 1733 and the Lodge of Edinburgh in 1739 ordered " a new blew ribbond for the whole fyve jewalls." Murray Lyon states that the custom of varying the colours in the clothing of Lodges was in vogue prior to the formation of Grand Lodge in 1736 ; and, as before shown, from 1733 to 1739 there are records of blue, green and white, at any rate, variously used in the clothing. The Grand Lodge of Scotland recognizes as full Masonic costume, black clothing with white tie and white gloves ; but at Quarterly Communications of Grand Lodge and at meetings of Provincial Grand Lodges and subordinate Lodges, Brethren are permitted to wear dark clothes and black ties. " No clothing purporting to be Masonic shall be worn in Grand Lodge, or any subordinate Lodge, except that appertaining to St. John's Masonry, which alone is recognized and acknowledged " (Rule 238) ; and St. John's Masonry is expressly defined in Rule 3 as follows : " Grand Lodge recognizes no degrees of Masonry but those of Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft (including the Mark) and Master Mason, denominated Saint John's Masonry." It, therefore, necessarily follows that although emblems of Higher Degrees are frequently worn in Scotland, even in Grand Lodge and by high officials, the custom is by the letter of the Book of Constitutions entirely illegal. " The square and compasses, level and plumb rule are the Masonic jewels proper. The others are honorary jewels " (Rule 239).
This Plate shows the beautiful regalia worn by the Grand Master Mason of Scotland. The apron (No. 3) is of lambskin trimmed with two‑inch gold lace (acorn pattern) and has embroidered in gold on the fall (which is semicircular and of green satin) the compasses and square, the sun, moon and seven stars, an all‑seeing eye within a triangle and a mallet, with a wreath of thistles. The usual tassels are of gold, attached to green ribbons ; two heavy gold tassels and cords also hang from the top of the apron whilst the fall is fringed with rich bullion.
The collar of the Grand Master Mason (No. 1) is a magnificent specimen of the goldsmith's art and has been made to supersede the former simpler design. It is composed of thirteen links, with a thistle enamelled in correct colouring between each. The central link is composed of the Royal Arms of Scotland, with supporters ; from this is suspended the Grand Master's jewel (No. 2), consisting of an oval enamel of St. Andrew, set around with rays of brilliants ; beneath this the sun, square and compasses and segment of a circle, all of gold. The other links are shields and commencing from the left, bear (i) the arms of Scotland and of the Grand Lodge, quartered, which are repeated on the fifth and eleventh links ; (2) the arms of Scotland, without supporters, repeated on the eighth and twelfth links ; (3) the sun, repeated on the tenth link ; (4) the moon and stars, repeated on the ninth link ; (6) the monogram 1736 (the date of the formation of the Grand Lodge) ; and (7) the monogram 1893, being the date of the new chain.
His sash is worn over the right shoulder and under the left arm. It is of thistlegreen ribbon four inches broad, edged with gold lace, having rich bullion tassels at the ends. At the fastening is a gold‑edged circular medallion, on which is embroidered a thistle ; on the shoulder a similar medallion, with a St. Andrew's Cross in gold, on a red ground, within a green circle, gold‑edged (No. 4.).
His gauntlets are of green satin, trimmed with gold lace, embroidered with a thistle, beneath a circle which encloses the emblem of his office and a smaller thistle (No. 5)‑ HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 377 The abuses in the " airtis and craftis " of the Scottish building trades, which the formation of " Companies " was designed to repress, had their counterparts in the " intolerable hardships " so feelingly complained of by the London apprentices in 1641. The latter‑whose grievances were not abated, on becoming free of their trade‑formed in many cases journeymen societies, which must have flourished to a far greater extent than has been commonly supposed. In the Scottish " Companies " is found an organization closely analogous to that of the English craft guild, as it existed prior to the uprooting of these institutions by the summary legislation under the Tudor Sovereigns. The journeymen fraternities in this country were doubtless established on a very different basis, but, possibly, their influence, could it be traced, would be found to have left its mark on the character of our English Freemasonry. The " Companies," however, may reasonably be supposed to have done more than merely affix a tinge or colouring to the Masonry of Scotland; it is highly probable that the principle they embodied‑that of combination or association‑was a very potent factor in the preservation of the machinery of the Lodge for the purposes of the building trades.
In proceeding with the history of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, the remark may be expressed, that if any surprise is permissible at the establishment of that body in 1736, it can only legitimately arise from the circumstance that the Masons of Edinburgh allowed the Brethren in York, Munster and Dublin to precede them in following the example set at London in 1717. If any one influence more than another conduced to the eventual erection of a governing Masonic body for Scotland, it may be found in the fact that, within the comparatively short space of thirteen years, six prominent noblemen, all of whom were connected with the northern kingdom had filled the chair of the Grand Lodge of England. One of these, the Earl of Crawford, would probably have been elected the first Grand Master of Scotland, but declined the honour, as he was leaving for England and " was sensible that nothing could be a greater loss to the first Grand Lodge than the absence of the Grand Master" (A. Ross, Freemasonry in Inverness, 1877, p. 2). The Earl of Home, Master of the Lodge of Kilwinning, at the Scots Arms, Edinburgh, appears after this to have stepped into the place of Lord Crawford as the candidate whose election would have been most acceptable to the Lodges, though, in the result and at the conclusion of a prearranged drama, William St. Clair, of Roslin, was chosen as Grand Master.
Although the preliminaries of the Grand Election were represented to have been taken by " the four Lodges in and about Edinburgh," there were at that time six Lodges in the metropolitan district, two of which‑one bearing the double title of Canongate and Leith, Leith and Canongate, the other the journeymenwere ignored in these proceedings.
D. Murray Lyon in his History of the Lodge of Edinburgh (igoo ed., p. 137) makes it perfectly clear why these Lodges were not included. The first named was formed by a secession in 1677 of a number of members of Canongate Kilwinning. They had formed themselves into a separate body without the authority or approval of 378 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND the King or his Warden‑General, which was an understood principle of the Craft. Despite the refusal of the Lodge of Edinburgh to accord them recognition they still persisted as a separate unit. There is no record of the matter, but there can be little doubt that the claims to recognition as such unit were rejected by the delegates assembled to bring the Grand Lodge of Scotland into being, for upon the commissioners from Canongate and Leith, Leith and Canongate presenting themselves for enrolment it was objected in the name of the Lodge of Edinburgh that the Brethren in question could not be recognized as members of Grand Lodge as they did not represent a regularly constituted Lodge. E. Macbean, writing in Ars Ouatuor Coronatorum, vol. iii, p. 17z, says It might have been expected that the asperities which had been engendered by the disruption of 1688 would not, after the lapse of half a century, have been revived by an ungenerous attempt to ignore a Lodge whose claim to be recognized as a unit in the Masonic confederation was, at least, as good as those of other Lodges which had been accepted without challenge. To the credit of Grand Lodge, however, the objections to the Canongate and Leith, Leith and Canongate were repelled and thus the Lodge of Edinburgh had forced upon her the odd distinction of involuntary maternity.
The other unit ‑Lodge journeymen, originally No. i i‑in existence in Edinburgh at the institution of Grand Lodge, dates from 1709. The membership was composed of operatives who seceded from Mary's Chapel, an act which led to the parent putting into operation a number of tyrannical measures for the humiliation of the members, which resulted in the imprisonment of two of their number. The journeymen, however, have a splendid record to their credit. Towards the erection of the Edinburgh Orphan Hospital in 1734 they, as a body, contributed gratis 8zi days' free labour in that year. In 1738 they again assisted with time and money in the building of the Royal Infirmary. In return for their generosity the management of the Orphan Hospital granted the journeymen free use of a ward for their Lodge meetings, a privilege availed of for many years. Until 1844 this Lodge retained the office of " Oldest Entered Apprentice " which was invariably held by an operative. In 1794 it was able to produce evidence before Grand Lodge which proved conclusively that the officers were justified in their practice of holding temporary Lodges at whatever place they might have any considerable work on hand and, in virtue of this prerogative, they opened a Lodge at Biggar as late as 1888. The Lodge is celebrated for its ritual of the Mark Degree and it was largely owing to its persistent demands, fortified by its custom so long in use, that Grand Lodge, after repeated refusals, at length resolved to recognize the Mark as a portion of the Fellow‑craft Degree, though only to be conferred upon Master Masons.
The other Lodges acting in concert were Mary's Chapel, Canongate Kilwinning, Kilwinning Scots Arms and Leith Kilwinning, the last‑named an offshoot from Canongate Kilwinning.
HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 379 With regard to the first of these E. Macbean, writing on the " Formation of the Grand Lodge of Scotland " in Ars.Quatuor Coronatorum (vol. iii, p. 172), says A novel incident occurred in Mary's Chapel soon after Desaguliers visited it August 24‑25, 1721. The Incorporation had chosen as their Deacon, or president, a master glazier who was not a Freemason and, consequently, could not sit in the chair of the Lodge which, for the first time in its history, at any rate, since 1598, was not ruled by the Preses of the trade. This event may be deemed the real starting‑point of the struggle for supremacy between the operatives and nonoperatives, which had been brewing since the formation of the journeymen Lodge in the first decade of the eighteenth century and went on with varying success until 1727, when the Speculative element scored a decided victory by the election (not without wrangling) as Master (formerly styled Warden) of a lawyer named William Brown, since which time she has peacefully pursued the even tenor of her Speculative career without further disturbance of any great moment.
Canongate Kilwinning (No. 2) was the oldest daughter of Mother Kilwinning and worked under a Charter alleged to date from 1677, subsequently renewed in 1736 by the assistance of a little well‑timed flattery and filial generosity in the shape of a set of sonnets presented to their mother with the request for a fresh Warrant in place of the original which had been lost. She has on her Minutes the earliest Scottish mention of the third Degree, conferred March 31, 1735, on three Brethren, including George Frazer, who was, for very many years, one of the most assiduous members of the Craft in Edinburgh. Reading between the lines, however, it seems clear that this was not the first time the third Degree had been worked by them or others. The Minute is dated only one day prior to the formation of Glasgow Kilwinning, No. 4‑April 1, 173 5‑at which, among other Masters present, were two substantial merchants, whose descendants are still of considerable importance in the western metropolis.
Lodge Kilwinning Scots Arms was founded February 14, 1729. With a solitary exception, her benefits were confined to the professional classes, with a sprinkling of landed gentry and nobility, lawyers being predominant. In the opinion of Lyon, the formation of this Lodge was, in all probability, the result of the Masonic communication that had been opened up between the Southern and Northern capitals by Desaguliers. On November 30, 1736, its roll was largely augmented by the accession of several members of distinction from other Lodges, these including the Earls of Crawford and Kilmarnock and Lord Garlies. The roll contained the name of only one practical Mason‑‑ex‑Deacon James Mack, the leader of the anti‑operative party in Mary's Chapel in the dispute regarding the admission of honorary members. The Earls of Cromarty and Home, Lords Erskine and Colville and Sir Alexander Hope of Kerse were also on the roll at the date mentioned.
Lodge Leith Kilwinning was also instituted early in the eighteenth century, but the actual date is unknown, as is the date of its extinction. The name appears 38o HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND in the list appended to Auld's Pocket Companion, 1761, but is not mentioned in Lawrie's History, 1804. It was an offshoot of Canongate Kilwinning and its exclusion from the caucus was probably owing to trade jealousy, for it rapidly became a Speculative Society.
The entire evidence, however, as marshalled by Lyon makes it tolerably clear that in the agitation for a Scottish Grand Lodge the initiative was taken by Canongate Kilwinning. On September z9, 1735, as appears from the Minutes of that body, the duty of " framing proposals to be laid before the several Lodges in order to the choosing of a Grand Master for Scotland," was remitted to a committee, whilst there is no recorded meeting of the four (subsequently) associated Lodges, at which the same subject was considered, until October 15, 1736, when delegates from the Lodges in question‑Mary's Chapel, Canongate Kilwinning, Kilwinning Scots Arms and Leith Kilwinning‑met and agreed upon a form of circular to be sent to all the Scottish Lodges inviting their attendance either in person or by proxy for the purpose of electing a Grand Master.
It was eventually decided that the election should take place in Mary's Chapel on Tuesday, November 30, 1736, at half‑past two in the afternoon ; and, at the appointed time, thirty‑three of the hundred or more Lodges that had been invited, were found to be represented, each by a Master and two Wardens. These were (according to Lyon, p. 17z) Mary's Chappell. Selkirg. Biggar. Kilwining. Innverness. Sanquhar. Canongate Kilwining. Lessmahaggow. Peebles.
Killwining Scots Arms. Saint Brides at Douglass. Glasgow St. Mungo's.
Killwining Leith. Lanark. Greenock.
Kilwining Glasgow. Strathaven. Falkirk.
Coupar of Fyfe. Hamilton. Aberdeen.
Linlithgow. Dunse. Mariaburgh.
Dumfermling. Kirkcaldie. Canongate and Leith, Dundee. Journeymen Massons of et e contra.
Dalkeith. Edinburgh. Monross.
Aitcheson's Haven. Kirkintilloch.
To obviate jealousies in the matter of precedency, each Lodge was placed on the roll in the order in which it entered the hall.
No amendments were offered to the form of procedure, or to the draft of the Constitutions, which had been submitted to the Lodges and, the roll having been finally adjusted, the following resignation of the office of hereditary Grand Master was tendered by the Laird of Roslin and read to the meeting I, William St. Clair of Rossline, Esquire, taking into my consideration that the Massons in Scotland did, by several deeds, constitute and appoint William and Sir William St. Clairs of Rossline, my ancestors and their heirs, to be their patrons, HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 381 protectors, judges, or masters ; and that my holding or claiming any such jurisdiction, right, or privilege, might be prejudiciall to the Craft and vocation of Massonrie, whereof I am a member and I, being desireous to advance and promote the good and utility of the said Craft of Massonrie to the utmost of my power, doe therefore hereby, for me and my heirs, renounce, quit, claim, overgive, and discharge all right, claim, or pretence that I, or my heirs, had, have, or any ways may have, pretend to, or claim, to be patron, protector, judge, or master of the Massons in Scotland, in virtue of any deed or deeds made and granted by the said Massons, or of any grant or charter made by any of the Kings of Scotland, to and in favours of the said William and Sir William St. Clairs of Rosshne, or any others of my predecessors, or any other manner of way whatsomever, for now and ever : And I bind and oblige me and my heirs, to warrand this present renounciation and discharge at all hands ; and I consent to the registration hereof in the Books of Councill and Session, or any other judge's books competent, therein to remain for preservation ; and thereto I constitute my procurators, &c. In witness whereof I have subscribed these presents (written by David Maul, Writer to the Signet), at Edinburgh, the twenty‑fourth day of November one thousand seven hundred and thirty‑six years, before these witnesses, George Fraser, Deputy Auditor of the Excise in Scotland, Master of the Canongate Lodge; and William Montgomerie, Merchant in Leith, Master of the Leith Lodge.
Sic Subscribitilr WM. ST. CLAIR.
Geo. Fraser, Canongate Kilwinning, witness. Wm. Montgozllerie, Leith Kilwinning, witness.
Several, at least and, possibly, a majority of the representatives present, had been instructed to vote for the Earl of Home, while none of the Lodges, with the exception of Canongate Kilwinning‑of which St. Clair was a member‑up till the period of election, appear to have been aware upon what grounds the latter's claims were to be urged. Nevertheless, the Brethren were so fascinated with the apparent magnanimity, disinterestedness and zeal displayed in his " Resignation," that the Deed was accepted with a unanimity that must have been very gratifying to the Lodge at whose instance it had been drawn and the abdication of an obsolete office in Operative Masonry was made the ground of St. Clair being chosen to fill the post of first Grand Master in the Scottish Grand Lodge of Speculative Masons.
William St. Clair, who had arrogated to himself the title of hereditary protector, patron and Grand Master of the Freeman Masons of Scotland, was initiated, without ballot, according to custom in Canongate Kilwinning (No. 2) on May 18, 1736, nearly eight months after the " chusing of a Grand Master " had first been discussed in that Lodge, " advanced to the Degree of Fellow Craft " after being voted for, on June 2 following, " paying into the box as usual " and raised to the Degree of Master Mason on November 22 of the same year. On November 3, nineteen days previously, his fellow members had resolved to put St. Clair into nomination for the chief seat in the body they were rigorously exerting themselves to make un fait accompli. John Douglas, a surgeon and a member of the Lodge of Kirkcaldy, next appears on the scene. This Brother was‑August 4, 1736‑in consideration 382 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND of " proofs done and to be done," affiliated by Canongate Kilwinning and, on the same occasion appointed " Secretary for the time, with power to appoint his own Deputy, in order to his making out a scheme for bringing about a Grand Master for Scotland." Two days after St. Clair was made a Master Mason, he signed the document that was to facilitate the election of a Grand Master, which was written and attested by three leading members of his Mother‑Lodge.
In the words of the highest authority on the subject of Scottish Masonrythe circumstances connected with the affiliation of Dr. Douglas, render it probable that he had been introduced for the purpose of perfecting a previously concocted plan, whereby the election of a Grand Master might be made to contribute to the aggrandisement of the Lodge receiving him. His subsequent advancement and frequent re‑election to the chair of Substitute Grand Master would indicate the possession of high Masonic qualifications and to these the Craft may have been indebted for the resuscitation of the St. Clair Charters and the dramatic effect which their identification with the successful aspirant to the Grand Mastership gave to the institution of the Grand Lodge of Scotland. Whatever may have been the immediate motive of the originators of the scheme, the setting up a Grand Lodge ostensibly upon the ruins of an institution that had ceased to be of practical benefit, but which, in former times, had been closely allied to the Guilds of the Mason Craft, gave to the new organization an air of antiquity as the lineal representative of the ancient courts of Operative Masonry; while the opportune resignation of St. Clair was, if not too closely criticized, calculated to give the whole affair a sort of legal aspect which was wanting at the institution of the Grand Lodge of England (see D. Murray Lyon's History of the Lodge of Edinburgh, i goo, p. 18g).
The other Grand Officers elected on November 30, 1736, were Captain John Young, D.G.M. ; Sir William Baillie, S.G.W. ; Sir Alexander Hope, J.G.W. ; Dr. John Moncrief, G. Treasurer; John Macdougall, G. Secretary; and Robert Alison, G. Clerk.
The first Quarterly Communication was held January i 2, 1737, when the Minutes and proceedings of the Four Associated Lodges and the Minutes of the Grand Election were read and unanimously approved.
The Lodge of Kilwinning had not only been a consenting party to the election of a Grand Master, but issued its proxy in favour of " Sinclair of Rossland, Esquire." This was sent, together with some objections to the proposed " General Regula tions," to George Fraser, Master of Canongate Kilwinning, who, whilst using the former, delayed presentation of the latter, until the meeting of Grand Lodge last referred to. The Kilwinning Masons chiefly protested against the Grand Lodge being always held at Edinburgh, alleging that the Masters and Wardens of Lodges " in and about " that city might go or send their proxies to other places, as well as the Masters and Wardens of other Lodges might go or send their proxies to Edin burgh. They also represented that the registration fee of half a crown, to be paid for each intrant, in order to support the dignity of the Grand Lodge, should be HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 383 rendered optional in the case of working Masons, who, especially in country places, were generally unable to do more than pay the dues to their respective Lodges. Although the observations of the Lodge of Kilwinning, with regard to the inexpediency of establishing a fixed governing body in the metropolis, might seriously have hampered the action of the junto by whom the Grand Election was controlled, if the use of the proxy had been clogged by the proviso, that it was only granted contingently upon the representations of the Kilwinning Masons being acceded toit is scarcely likely, that in the circumstances of the case, it was even seriously regarded. The appeal on behalf of the working Masons was rejected and the Grand Lodge decreed that those who refused or neglected to pay the entry money should receive no aid from the charity fund.
The first Grand Election took place, as has been seen, on St. Andrew's Day (November 30) ; but, though the original General Regulations provided that future elections should be held‑conformably, it may be supposed, with the practice in the South‑on the Day of St. John the Baptist, it was resolved‑April ‑13, ‑1737that the Annual Election should always be celebrated on November 30, the birthday of St. Andrew, the tutelar saint of Scotland.
William St. Clair of Roslin was succeeded as Grand Master‑November 30, ‑1737‑by George, third and last Earl of Cromarty. At this meeting it was resolved, that the Grand Secretary and Grand Clerk should not be elected annually with the other Grand Officers, but continue to hold their offices during good behaviour (Lyon, p. z‑16) ; also, that all the Lodges holding of the Grand Lodge should be enrolled according to their seniority, which should be determined from the authentic documents they produced‑those producing none to be put at the end of the roll, though the Lodges thus postponed were to have their precedency readjusted, on adducing subsequent proof " of their being elder " (Lyon, p. 245) ; and that the four Quarterly Communications of the Grand Lodge should be held in Mary's Chapel, Edinburgh, on the first Wednesday of each of the four Scottish quarterly terms, viz. Candlemas, Whitsunday, Lammas and Martinmas, when these terms should fall upon a Wednesday, in other cases on the first Wednesday next following.
The foundation‑stone of the New Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh was laid by the Grand Master‑August z, ‑173 8 ‑with Masonic honours.
From this time until the year ‑1754 a new Grand Master was chosen annually ; but as the Deputy (or Depute) G.M.‑Captain John Young‑continued to hold his office uninterruptedly from ‑173 6 to 1752 and the Substitute G.M.‑John Douglas‑ for nearly the same period, little, if any inconvenience, can have resulted from the short terms for which the Grand Master Masons of Scotland were elected. Indeed, it may rather be supposed that from the fact of the virtual government of the Society being left in the hands of a permanent Deputy and a Substitute Grand Mastex, the affairs of the Craft were regulated with a due regard both to order and precedent ; whilst the brief occupancy of the Masonic throne by more persons of distinction than would have been possible under the later system of election, must greatly have 384 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND conduced to the general favour with which Masonry was regarded by people of every rank and position in the Scottish kingdom.
Lord Cromarty was succeeded by John, third Earl of Kintore, during whose presidency a Grand Visitation was made‑December 27, 1738‑to the Lodge of Edinburgh and a new office, that of Provincial Grand Master, established by the appointment‑February 7, 1739‑of Alexander Drummond, Master of Greenock Kilwinning to the supervision of the West Country Lodges. Two months laterApril 2o‑Drummond visited St. John's Old Kilwinning Lodge, at Inverness, in the Minutes of which body he is described as the Provincial Grand Master for Scotland and, on being " entreated," took the chair and " lectured the Brethren for their instruction." On November 30, 1739, the Commission was renewed and Drummond styled therein " Provincial Grand Master of the several Lodges in the Western Shires of Scotland " and, again, in the same terms in 1740, 1741 and 1742. This worthy subsequently went to reside at Alexandretta, in Turkey, where he erected several Lodges ; when, having petitioned for another provincial commission, his request was granted‑November 30, 1747‑full power being given to him and to any other whom he might nominate, to constitute Lodges in any part of Europe or Asia bordering on the Mediterranean Sea and to superintend the same, or any others already erected in those parts of the world.
It is probable that a Lodge, long since extinct, but which is described in the official records as " from Greenock, held at Alleppo, in Turkey, [constituted] Feb. 3,1748," was formed either by, or under the auspices of, Alexander Drummond ; and, as the first foreign Lodge on the roll of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, it takes precedence of the St. Andrew's, Boston (U.S.A.).
From 1739 to 1743 there is little to chronicle. In the former year, the foundation‑stone of the western wing of the infirmary was laid, with the usual solemnities, by the Earl of Morton, Grand Master. New jewels were purchased for the Grand Officers and a full set of Mason tools and six copies of Smith's Constitutions anent Masonry were ordered for the use of Grand Lodge. Three " examinators " were appointed for trying visitors who were strangers to the Grand Lodge. Also, for the encouragement of Operative Lodges in the country, they were granted the privilege of merely paying the fees of a confirmation for their patents of erection and constitution.
In 1740, under the Earl of Strathmore, it was proposed and unanimously agreed to, that a correspondence should be openedwith the GrandLodge of England; also that no proxy or commission (unless renewed) should remain in force above one year.
The Earl of Leven‑Grand Master, 1741‑was succeeded by the Earl of Kilmarnock, at the time of his election the Master of the Lodge of Kilwinning. It was at the recommendation of this nobleman that, in 1743, the first Military Lodge (under the Grand Lodge) was erected, the petitioners being " some sergeants and sentinels belonging to Colonel Lees' regiment oú foot " (44th). This, however, appears at no time to have had a place accorded it on the Scottish roll, where the SCOTLAND CLOTHING OF THE GRAND OFFICERS OF THE GRAND LODGE THIS plate shows the various designs of aprons, &c. of the Grand Officers, which are not exactly uniform as are those of the other British Grand Lodges.
No. r, the apron of the Grand Secretary, is more elaborate than that of any other Grand Officer, save the Grand Master Mason only ; and it is highly fitting that this should be so at this time, as David Murray Lyon, a former Grand Secretary, was not only the principal factor in the greatly increased prosperity and prestige of the Grand Lodge of Scotland after his appointment, but also held a leading position in the very front rank of Masonic historians, and has thus won the esteem of all his Brethren in both capacities, literary and administrative. The apron has a double edging of gold braid, with massive gold fringe around the fall of green satin ; and, on the latter, is embroidered the pen and key in saltire, tied with a ribbon and surrounded with a wreath of palm and acacia, all in gold. To the right and left respectively are, the sun in splendour and a circular irradiated badge of a St. Andrew, also in gold, whilst beneath all these is a semicircular wreath of gold thistle leaves, with a thistle flower in natural colours in the centre.
No. z is the apron of the Grand Chaplain. It has gold braid around the inner edging of the apron only and two green rosettes on the bottom corners of the skin. On the upper part of the flap is embroidered in gold an All‑Seeing Eye within a triangle, beneath this a circular badge of St. Andrew in gold on a red ground and, on each side, a spray of gold thistle leaves, with a flower in natural colours.
No. 3 is similar to No. 2, but displays the level of the Grand Senior Warden, the thistles being rather less massive.
No. 4 is the apron of a Grand Steward and bears on the upper part of the fall a cornucopia and cup saltirewise, embroidered in gold and colours.
The remaining Grand Officers wear aprons of the pattern of No. 5.
The collars from which the jewels of the Grand Officers are suspended are of thistle green, similar to No. 7 and they wear over the right shoulder and under the left arm cordons or sashes of thistle‑green ribbon, not exceeding four inches in breadth. The sash is as No. 6, without gold braid on the edges as in the case of the Grand Master, but having similar badges on the shoulder and at the join. All the Grand Officers also wear gauntlets of green satin, with gold lace and fringe, having the proper emblem embroidered on the centre, as No. 8.
HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 385 Duke of Norfolk's Lodge, No. 5 8, in the i 2th Foot (1747), is shown as the earliest Military or Regimental Lodge chartered by the Grand Lodge of Scotland. The latter, indeed, though placed on the Scottish roll in 1747, was of alien descent, having existed in the 12th Foot‑though without a Warrant for several years, until the date in question, when it applied to the Grand Lodge of Scotland for a Charter. The petition averred, that the Duke of Norfolk's Mason Lodge had been " erected into a Mason body, bearing the title aforesaid, as far back as 1685," indeed, no higher antiquity could well have been asserted, as the 12th Foot was only raised in that year. The fact, however, remains, that, at the close of the first half of the eighteenth century, a Lodge in an English Regiment claimed to have been in existence more than thirty years before the formation of the earliest of Grand Lodges.
The 12th Foot, before proceeding to Scotland in 1746, had been stationed in Germany and Flanders (1743‑5), being present at the battles of Dettingen and Fontenoy. In the autumn of 1747, it returned to England from Scotland, was in Holland 1748, at Minorca 1749 and back again in England 1752. Serving once more in Germany‑1758‑63‑it was constantly on the move, but it is interesting to find, that both the 8th and 12th Regiments were at Fritzlar in Lower Hesse‑with the army under Ferdinand of Brunswick‑in 176o ; also, that in the following year, the 5th, 12th, 24th and 37th Regiments formed a Brigade of the Marquess of Granby's Division and were employed in Hesse, Hanover and Osnaburg (Richard Cannon, Historical Records of the British Army‑8th and 12th Regiments). All these regiments, with the exception of the 24th Foot‑which, however, obtained an English Warrant (No. 426) in 1768‑are known to have had Lodges attached to them. The 5th Foot received an Irish Charter in 1738‑No. 86‑under which a Lodge was still active in 1773. The 8th and 37th Regiments‑in which Lodges were constituted respectively in 175 5 and 1756‑derived their Warrants, the former from the older (or original) Grand Lodge of England (No. 25 5) and the latter from its rival (No. 52). About the same time (1747) there was also a Lodge in the 2nd Dragoons, or Scots Greys‑the 'date of whose constitution is uncertainworking under a Charter which, through the interest of the Earl of Eglinton, had been procured from Kilwinning (Lyon, p. 162). The Scots Greys Kilwinning shifted its allegiance in 1770). The Earl of Crawford, it may be observed, was appointed Colonel of the Scots Greys on the death of the Earl of Stair in 1747. It is probable that regimental Lodges, though not of an indigenous character, had penetrated into Scotland before 1743. Warrants of Constitution had been granted by the Grand Lodge of Ireland to many regiments prior to that year. Two of these, bearing the Nos. 1i (or 12) and 33 (or 34), and dated (circa) 1732 and 1734, were issued to the 1st‑[said to be the lineal descendants of the Scottish Archers in attendance upon the Kings of France. Military legend, however, supplies a still longer pedigree, the nickname of the " Old Royals " being " Pontius Pilate's BodyGuard! "] and 21st Foot (Royal Scots and Royal North British Fusiliers) respectively‑both Scottish regiments, not unlikely to have been quartered in their native 386 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND country during the decade immediately following their acquisition of Masonic Charters. However this may be, we hear of other Military Lodges in Scotland besides those already noticed as existing under the Grand Lodge and Mother Kilwinning, as early as 1744, in which year‑December i4‑the Minutes of the Lodge St. John's Old Kilwinning, contain the following curious entry (Ross, Freemasonry in Inverness, 1877, p. 41) N.B.‑David Holland, present Master of the Lodge of Free Masons in the Honble. Brigadier Guise's Regt. [6th Foot], now lying at Inverness, Fort‑George, visited us this day and had his proper place assigned him in our procession; he appears to be No. 45, Mrs. of this Lodge.
Regiments were not then distinguished by numerical titles, but the records of the 6th Foot‑of which John Guise was the Colonel from 1738 to 1765‑show that, returning from Jamaica, December 1742, it shortly after proceeded to Scotland, where in 1745 it was still stationed, with the headquarters at Aberdeen and two companies at Inverness. The Lodge possessed no Warrant but as tending to prove that many Regimental Lodges, chartered‑soon after its formation‑by the Grand Lodge of Ireland, must have visited Scotland, it may be observed, that on the occasion of a foundation‑stone being laid with Masonic honours at Edinburgh in 1753, a Lodge in the 33rd Regiment‑No. 12‑ (or 13) on the Irish registry, constituted (circa) 173 z‑took part in the solemnities of the day.
During the administration of the Earl of Wemyss, who was the next Grand Master, the Lodge of Kilwinning first gave official expression to its dissatisfaction with the position assigned to it. Under the regulation of November 30, 1737, the earliest records produced, were those of the Lodge of Edinburgh and the most ancient Minute they contained bore date " Ultimo Julij 15 99." This was fortythree years older than any documentary evidence adduced by the Lodge of Kilwinning, which did not extend any farther back than December zo, 1642. In accordance, therefore, with the principle laid down, by which the precedency of Lodges was to be determined, the first place on the roll was assigned to Mary's Chapel, the second to Kilwinning. However unsatisfactory this decision may have appeared to the Lodge of Kilwinning [in estimating the pretensions of the Lodge of Kilwinning, dates become material and we must not lose sight of the fact that, in 1743, many influences were at work, e.g. Scots Degrees and Ramsay's Orationwhich, without any stretch of the imagination, may have afforded the Ayrshire Masons, at least, a reasonable excuse in claiming a pre‑eminence for the old court of Operative Masonry at Kilwinning, that must have been absent from their thoughts ‑as being in the womb of futurity‑in 1736], its validity was not at first openly challenged by that body, which for several years afterwards continued to be represented (by proxy) at Edinburgh. But the discontent and heart‑burning produced at Kilwinning by the preferment of the Lodge of Mary's Chapel, led, December 1743, when replying to a " dutyful and affectionate letter from its daughter of the CanonF. 111‑16 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 387 gate," to a deliverance of the parent Lodge, which, in the February ensuing, was brought to the notice of the Grand Lodge, with the following result The Substitute Grand Master produced a letter from the Lodge of Kilwinning addressed to the . . . . Masters, Wardens and other members of the Lodge of Canongate, .‑. .‑. complaining that in the Rules of the Grand Lodge they are only called second in order and another Lodge prmferred befor them. The Grand Lodge considering that the Lodge of Kilwinning having never hitherto shown them any document for vouching and instructing them to be the First and Mother‑Lodge in Scotland and that the Lodge of Maries Chapell, from the records and documents showen to the Grand Lodge, appear (for aught yet seen) to be the Oldest Lodge in Scotland.‑Therefore, as the letter is only addressed to the Master of the Lodge of Canongate St. John, they recommend to the . . . . Substitute Grand Master [John Douglas] to return a proper answer thereto, being present Master of that Lodge (Lyon, p. z45 ut supra).
Finding itself thus permanently placed in a secondary rank, the Lodge of Kilwinning, without entering upon any disputation or formal vindication of its claims, resumed its independence which, in the matter of granting Charters it had in reality never renounced and, for well‑nigh seventy years, continued to exist as an independent Grand Body, dividing with that at Edinburgh, the honour of forming branches in Scotland as well as in the North American Colonies and other British possessions beyond the seas (Lyon and Freemasons' Magazine, N. S., vol. ix, p. 333) The Earl of Moray was elected Grand Master in 1744 and, in the following year, the Associate Synod attempted to disturb the peace of the Fraternity. On March 7 an overture concerning the MASON OATH was laid before the Synod of Stirling, which they remitted‑September z6‑to the different kirk sessions, allowing them to act as they thought proper. The practice was condemned, of taking an oath to keep a secret, before it was known what that secret was, but, according to Burton, " they easily got over this." " The sessions or ministers dealt with the Masons they were concerned in, few of whom were obstinate in defending the oath in all respects and so refrained from having a hand in any farther approbation thereof " (History of Scotland, vol, ii, p. 3z3). Ten years later, however‑March 6, 1755‑the kirk sessions were directed to be more searching in their inquiries and they apparently discovered for the first time, that men, who were not Masons by trade, were admitted into the Society. This led‑August 25, 1757‑[" An Impartial Examination of the Act of the Associate Synod against the FREE MASONS, August z 5, 1757 "‑dated Alloa, October 25, and signed " A Freemason "‑appeared in the Edinburgh Magazine for 1757. The " Act" thus criticised, was published in the Scots A,1agaZine for the same year (vol. xix, p. 432), in which will also be found some extracts from the " Impartial Examination " (p. 5 83)]‑to the adoption of even stricter measures and the Synod ordered " all persons in their congregations who are of the Mason Craft and others they have a particular suspicion of," to be interrogated with regard to the nature of the Mason Oath and the " superstitious cere‑ 388 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND monies " accompanying its administration. Those who refused to answer the questions put to them were debarred from the ordinances of religion, whilst a confession of being involved in the Mason Oath required not only a profession of sorrow for the same, but was to be followed by a sessional rebuke and admonition. The being " involved in the said Oath with special aggravation, as taking or relapsing into the same in opposition to warnings against doing so," was punished by excommunication (Lyon, p. 3 z 5 ut supra).
The Grand Lodge of Scotland did not deign to take the smallest notice of these proceedings‑in which a Synod of Scotch Dissenters outstripped both the Church of Rome and the Council of Berne in the measures resorted to for the extirpation of Freemasonry. They attempted to compel the Freemasons of their congregations to give them an account of those mysteries and ceremonies which their avarice or fear hindered them from obtaining by regular initiation (Lawrie, 1804, p. 133). " And what, pray," it has been asked, " was to become of those perjured men from whom such information was obtained ? They were promised admission into the ordinances of religion, as if they were now purified beings, from whom something worse than a demoniac had been ejected! A repudiation of Freemasonry still retains its place in the creed of the Original Seceders from the Church of Scotland.
The Earl of Buchan succeeded Lord Moray in 1745, from which date down to 1751 there is little to chronicle except the succession of Grand Masters, of whom it may be said, as of the Roman Consuls in uneventful eras, " They served to mark the year." William Nisbet of Dirleton was placed at the head of the Scottish Craft in 1746, after him came the Honourable Francis Charteris [another Francis Charteris, son of the above, was elected Grand Master November 30, 1786 ; a third, then Lord Elcho, afterwards eighth Earl of Wemyss, filled the same position in i 8z7]‑afterwards sixth Earl of Wemyss‑in 1747; Hugh Seton of Touch, in 1748 ; Lord Erskine‑only surviving son of John, eleventh Earl of Marr, attainted 1715‑in 1749 ; Alexander, tenth Earl of Eglinton‑a former Master of the Lodge of Kilwinning, whose election has been held to show that the Kilwinning Secession had not yet been viewed with any very strong feeling of jealousy by the Grand Lodge (Lyon, p. z45), in 1750 ; and James, Lord Boyd‑eldest son of the last Earl of Kilmarnock, afterwards thirteenth Earl of Erroll‑in 1751. Both father and son were present at the battle of Culloden, though the former fought on the Stuart side and the latter held a commission in the 3rd Foot Guards.
Hitherto it had been customary for the Grand Master to nominate his successor at the Communication immediately preceding the Grand Election. This duty, however, not having been performed by Lord Boyd, it devolved upon a committee to propose a suitable candidate, by whom a very judicious choice was made in the person of George Drummond.
The new Grand Master‑the first Brother who was raised (Lyon, p. ziz) in Mary's Chapel‑received the two earlier Degrees on August 28, 1721, in the same Lodge, at one of the meetings, held, apparently, in connexion with Dr. Desaguliers's visit to Scotland in that year. During his term of office he laid the foundation‑stone HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 389 of the Royal Exchange, September 13, 175 3 ; and, as Acting Grand Master‑being at the time Lord Provost of Edinburgh‑that of the North Bridge, October 13, 1763. A firm supporter of the Government, he did much, by raising volunteers and serving with them, to defeat the designs of the Pretender in 1715, as well as those of Prince Charles Edward in 1745 (Lyon, p. 217).
Lord Boyd's omission to nominate his successor, requires, however, a few explanatory words. At the election of this nobleman on November 30, 1751, Major John Young and John Douglas, Deputy and Substitute Grand Masters respectively; John Macdougall, Grand Secretary; and Robert Alison, Grand Clerk, all of whom had held their offices from the original dates at which they were created, were continued in their several positions. But in the following yearNovember 30, 175z‑only one of the four, Macdougall, the Grand Secretary, appears in the list of Grand Officers.
Major Young's place was taken by Charles Hamilton Gordon, Advocate, to whom the office of Deputy proved a stepping‑stone to the Masonic throne, whilst John Douglas‑who died December 1751‑was succeeded both as Substitute Grand Master and Master of Lodge Canongate Kilwinning, by George Fraser, also a member and Old Master of that famous Lodge.
James Alison was elected Grand Clerk in the room of his father Robert, deceased, whom he also followed as Lodge Clerk in Mary's Chapel, where he had been " admitted and receaved ane entered apprentice in the useuall forme " (Lyon, P. 43)‑December 27, 1737‑nearly a year before the introduction of the third Degree into that Lodge.
It is not a little remarkable that the Grand Lodge of Scotland should have lost the services of three of its most trusted officers in a single year.
The retiring Deputy Grand Master‑John Young‑held a Captain's commission in 1736 and was probably on the half‑pay list throughout the greater part of the twenty‑six years during which he retained his high Masonic position. In 1745 October 4‑he became a Major and, ten years later‑December 25, 1755‑was posted to the Loyal American Provincials, or 62nd Foot, on the roll of which his name appears as the senior of four Majors in the Army List of 1756. The Colonel‑inChief of the regiment was the Earl of Loudoun (Grand Master of England, 1736) ; Sir John St. Clair, Bart., commanded one of the four battalions of which it was composed, while the fourth or junior Major was Augustine Prevost. In the Army List of 175 5 the words "late Boltons" are placed after Young's name. The Duke of Bolton raised a battalion in 1745‑to resist the Young Pretender‑which was afterwards disbanded and as, in those days, regiments were distinguished by the names of their colonels, this was probably the one to which Young had belonged, a supposition which is strengthened by the coincidence that he became a major in the same memorable year. The 62nd Regiment became the Goth, or " Royal Americans," in 1757. In the same year‑April 26‑Young got his Lieutenant‑Colonelcy and, on January z6, 175 8, he was given the rank of full Colonel in America. As the regiment was raised in America, where for several years all four battalions were stationed, it is 390 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND probable that Young embarked for that country early in 1756. In the following year, as will again be referred to, he was appointed Provincial Grand Master over all the (Scottish) Lodges in America and the West Indies. Rebold (Hilt. Gen. sub anno 175 8) tells us that he was also vested with full authority to introduce the high Degrees then known to Scottish Masonry into these countries, an observation recorded, not for its historic value, but as affording a good illustration of the uncritical manner in which Masonic history has been written.
Young was transferred to the 46th Foot, also in America‑March zo, 1761 ‑ Major Augustine Prevost taking his place (as Lieut.‑Colonel) in the Goth. Now, for reasons presently to be adduced, the connexion of the Scottish Deputy Grand Master, 1736‑5z, with the regiment in which Prevost succeeded him as Lieut.Colonel, is not a little remarkable; but the appointment of Young to the command of the 46th is also a circumstance that will suggest many reflections.
The 46th Foot, when stationed in Ireland, 175 z, received a Lodge WarrantNo. zz7‑from the Grand Lodge of that country. In 1757 it embarked at Cork for Nova Scotia, remained in North America until October 1761, when it sailed for Barbados and took part in the capture of Martinique, Grenada, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Havannah. Young's name is given in the Army List for the year 176z, as Lieut.‑Colonel commanding the regiment, but disappears in that for 1763.
The coincidence is, of itself, somewhat singular that the military duties of Colonel Young should take him to the West Indies, the Masonic supervision of which had been confided to him by patent; but the most curious feature of his connexion with the 46th Foot is suggested by the Masonic associations of that distinguished corps. For a long time it was believed that Washington had been initiated in No. zz7 and, though this popular error has long since been refuted, it, at.least, passes as history that he frequently visited the Lodge; while the Bible on which he is said to have been obligated‑in respect of some Degree or regulation that has served as a curious subject for speculation‑is still in existence. Twice, whilst engaged in active operations against the enemy, the Lodge lost its Masonic chest, which was on both occasions courteously returned. Young, as already mentioned, was succeeded as Lieut.‑Colonel in the Goth Regiment‑March zo, 1761 ‑by Augustine Prevost, who, probably owing to the reduction from a war to a peace establishment, is no longer shown on the roll of that corps in 1763, but resumes his old position, November 9, 1769 and again drops out of the list in 1776. He was subsequently promoted to the rank of Major‑General, February ig, 1779 and died in May 1786.
These dates are adduced, because Stephen Morin after his arrival in the West Indies (1761) is stated to have appointed a Bro. Franklin, Deputy Inspector General for Jamaica and the British Leeward Islands and a Colonel Prevost for the Windward Islands and the British Army (Dalcho, Masonic Orations, p. 61 ; Rebold, Hist. de Trois Grandes Loges, p. 45 z). Morin, it is said, went first to San Domingo, then to Jamaica, afterwards to Charleston ; whilst the latest account of him is given in the Handbucb, which states that he was alive in 1790. But it is a point fairly well settled‑ SCOTLAND JEWELS OF THE GRAND OFFICERS OF THE GRAND LODGE Tms plate contains drawings of the jewels of the Grand Officers of the Grand Lodge of Scotland and Provincial Grand Lodges.
The jewel of a Past Grand Master is similar to that of the Grand Master but rather smaller and consists of a brilliant star, having on a field azure an irradiated figure of St. Andrew with his cross ; and, pendent below, the compasses, square and segment of a circle ; the whole hanging from a smaller star attached to the collar (No. I).
The jewel of the Grand Master Depute is the compasses and square united, pendent morf a small brilliant star (No. 2).
The jewel of the Substitute Grand Master is the square pendent from a star (No. 3). The jewel of the Senior Grand Warden is the level pendent from a star (No. q.). The jewel of the junior Grand Warden is the plumb pendent from a star (No. 5). The jewel of the Grand Secretary is a key and pen crossed, with a tie (No. 6). The jewel of the Grand Treasurer is a chased key (No. 7).
The jewel of the Grand Chaplain is an irradiated eye in a triangle (No. 8). The jewel of the Senior Grand Deacon is a mallet within a wreath (No. g). The jewel of the junior Grand Deacon is a trowel within a wreath (No. I o).
The jewel of the Grand Architect is a Corinthian column based on a segment of go' (No. II).
The jewel of the Grand jeweller is a goldsmith's hammer within a wreath (No. I2). The jewel of the Grand Bible‑Bearer is a Bible, encircled with branches of acacia and palm (No. I3).
The jewel of a Grand Representative of the Grand Lodge of Scotland at sister Grand Lodges is a figure of St. Andrew on an oval field azure, surrounded by a garter inscribed REPRESENTATIVE FRQM GRAND LODGE SCOTLAND, with a thistle at the base (No. 25).
HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 391 indeed, the contrary has never even been asserted‑that all the Inspectors nominated by Morin himself were appointed within a few years of his arrival from France. The Prevosts were a very military family, indeed no fewer than four of them held commissions in the Goth Regiment in 1779, again in 1781, besides others dispersed throughout the army. But if the Prevost appointed by Morin was a Colonel, there is only a choice between Augustine and George‑‑afterwards Sir George‑who died a Lieutenant‑General in 1816. The latter, however, was a Captain in the 25th Regiment in 179o and, though promoted to a majority in the Goth on November 18 of that year, only became a Lieut.‑Colonel August 6, 1794.
But a new element of confusion must here be introduced. In 1776 the 1st Battalion of the Goth was employed in quelling a rebellion in Jamaica (Wallace, op. cit.). In the same year a commission was granted by " Augustus Prevost, Captain 6oth Rifles [as the only Captain Prevost at that time in the Goth Footwhich by the way was not denominated a " Rifle " Corps until 1824‑was named Augustine, there appears to have been sbme mistake in the docketing], to J. P. Rochat, to establish the Rite of Perfection in Scotland, which was afterwards to form the basis of its constitution." At the period this occurred, another Augustine Prevost was " Captain Lieutenant and Captain "‑a. singular rank, of which there is now no equivalent‑in the Goth Foot. This officer joined the regiment as Adjutant, June 25, 1771, became Captain Lieutenant, September Zo, 1775, Captain November 12, 1776, retiring in 1784. There was also in 1776 a Lieutenant J. P. Rochat in the Goth, whose commission bore date September 30, 1775. It is possible that documents may be in existence, which would demonstrate whether the Inspector appointed by Morin was Colonel or Captain Prevost.
This point must be left undecided, though it seems a reasonable deduction from the evidence, that the elder Prevost received the dignity at the hands of Morin, afterwards passing it on to the younger Augustine‑in all probability his son‑in the same way as the " Bro. Franklin of Jamaica " is said to have done in the case of Moses Hayes. But even without the participation in these events of Captain Prevost, it is a curious coincidence that Young, Provincial Grand Master under Scotland, should have been succeeded, as Lieut.‑Colonel Goth Foot, by a person who was to hold subsequently almost an equivalent position in a rite of alleged Scottish origin.
Lawrie states that in 175 3‑4 " a petition was received from the Scottish Lodge in Copenhagen, Le Petit Nombre, requesting a Charter of Confirmation from the Grand Lodge of Scotland, also the liberty of electing a Grand Master." In reply to which the Grand Lodge " resolved to grant a patent of constitution and erection in the usual form, as well as a Provincial commission to a qualified person, empowering him to erect new Lodges in the kingdom of Denmark and Norway and to superintend those already erected" (edit., i8o4, p. 184). This passage is omitted in the second edition of the same work (1859, p. 116), though some statistics given by the earlier compiler (1804, p. 134), with regard to the progress of the Craft in Scandinavia, are reproduced with all their inaccuracies in the edition of 1859 (p. 68). We are there told that in " 1743 [Freemasonry] was exported from Scotland to 392 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND Denmark and the Lodge which was then instituted is now the Grand Lodge of that kingdom. The same prosperity has attended the first Lodge in Sweden, which was erected at Stockholm in 1754, under a patent from Scotland." These loose statements rest upon sources of very questionable authority.
Gordon, in 1754, made way for the Master of Forbes, after whose election there was a procession by torchlight, in which above four hundred Brethren took part, among them Colonel Oughton‑subsequently Grand Master of ScotlandEnglish Provincial Grand Master for Minorca.
In the course of the year it was resolved that the Quarterly Communications should be held for the future on the first Mondays of February, May, August and November: also, that the precedency of Lodges should be regulated by the dates of their entry on the roll of the Grand Lodge.
Alexander succeeded John Macdougall as Grand Secretary, November 30, 11754, and, in the following year‑December 1‑under Lord Aberdour, Grand Master, George Fraser was advanced from Substitute to Deputy Grand Master, an office he retained until 1761. The new Substitute Grand Master was Richard Tod, Master of Lodge Leith Kilwinning, who was continued in the appointment until 1767 and filled it once again in 1773.
In 1756, Sholto, Lord Aberdour‑afterwards sixteenth Earl of Morton‑was again chosen Grand Master, which is the first instance of a re‑election to that high station since the institution of the Grand Lodge. During this nobleman's first term of office, " it was unanimously resolved that the Grand Master for the time being be affiliated and recorded as a member of every Daughter Lodge in Scotland." Also, it having been represented that a further subdivision of Scotland into Masonic districts was expedient, the suggestion was adopted and five additional Provincial Grand Masters were appointed.
This was followed‑the next year‑by the grant of a similar patent to Colonel Young, whose Province comprised America and the West Indies. Under the same Grand Master‑Lord Aberdour‑two Lodges were warranted within this district, at Blandford, Virginia, No. 82 [or 83], March 9 ; and the St. Andrew's, Boston, No. 81 [or 8z], November 30, 1756.
From this time until the year 18 z7 it became the custom for the Grand Master to continue in office for a second year. At the end of the first year, however, he nominated his successor, who received the appellation of Grand Master Elect. The first person so nominated was the Earl of Elgin, December 1, 176o. This usage was only interrupted by the death of the Duke of Atholl, which occurred shortly before St. Andrew's Day, 1774. The occupants of the Masonic throne from the Grand Election of 175 7 down to that of 1773 were successively the Earls of Galloway, Leven (1759), Elgin (1761) and Kellie (1763) ; James Stewart, Lord Provost of Edinburgh (1765) ; the Earl of Dalhousie (1767) ; Lieut‑General Oughton (1769) ; and the Earl of Dumfries (1771).
Throughout this period there are few events to chronicle. The Grand Chap lain was made an officer of Grand Lodge in 175 8. In the following year, the use, HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 393 by Lodges, of Painted Floor Cloths was forbidden and, in 1760‑March ii‑the Grand Lodge " having taken into consideration the prevailing practice of giving vails or drink money to servants, did unanimously resolve to do everything in their power to remove the same." In that year Charters were issued to the Union Kilwinning and St. Andrew Lodges at Charlestown, South Carolina and Jamaica respectively.
In 1762 the Grand Lodge declined to grant a Charter to some petitioners in London, who were desirous of establishing a Lodge there, under the Scottish Sanction. Lodges were constituted in Virginia, 1763 ; East Florida, 1768 ; at St. Christopher, '1769; and at Namur, 1770. The last‑named appears as No. 160 in recent and as No. 161 in early lists. On November 21, 1764‑a military Lodge I ‑the Union‑was erected in General Marjoribank's regiment, at that time in the service of the States‑General of the United Provinces.
On November 30, 1765, it was ordered that proper clothing and jewels should !, be procured for the use of the Grand Officers. In 1768, at the instance of Joseph Gavin, of the Lodge of Edinburgh, the practice of issuing diplomas was adopted by the Grand Lodge (Lyon, p. zo6). In the same year Governor James Grant was appointed Provincial Grand Master for North America, Southern District and, in 1769, Dr. Joseph Warren received a similar commission as Prov. Grand Master for " the Lodges in Boston." In 1770 the Grand Lodge, by advertisement, called upon the different Lodges throughout the country to pay their dues to the Grand Secretary, under threat of calling in their Charters (Ross, Freevzasonry ill Inverness, p. 9z). In that year Lodge Scots Greys Kilwinning, in the 2nd or Royal North British Dragoons, having lost, not only their Charter, but their whole records, petitioned for a Warrant from the Grand Lodge, which was granted and the Lodge reconstituted‑March 1 z‑as the St. Andrew's Royal Arch, by the Grand Master in person. Colonel (afterwards Lord) Napier was the Master; Captain Baird Heron, Deputy Master; Sir John 3 Nesbit of Dean, Senior Warden (Free)viasons' Quarterly Review, 1842, p. 35) Major‑General James Adolphus Oughton, who, shortly after the occurrence last related, became a Lieutenant‑General and, in 1773, a K.B., was a very popular ruler of the Craft.
The constitution of a regimental Lodge by a Grand Master who was also at the time Commander‑in‑Chief in Scotland [Lord Adam Gordon, in 1759, whilst holding the same high military command, served the office of Master in the Lodge of Aberdeen], points out the estimation in which military Masonry was then regarded and the significance of the event is heightened by the circumstance that the Master of St. Andrew's Royal Arch was in command of the znd Dragoons. The Hon. Col. Napier was Deputy Grand Master in 1771‑z.
General Oughton was entertained by the two Lodges at Inverness in 1770 and 1771 and, in the latter year, signed the following Minute, which is still in existence " The Master, Wardens and Brethren being present, several instructive charges and directions were given with regard to Masonry and the proper tosses [toasts] drunk, 394 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND and songs sung " (Ross, p. 98). He was admitted an honorary member of the Lodge of Edinburgh in 1774. During the Seven Years' War he served in Germany under Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick and, at the time of his death, held the colonelcy of the 31st Foot.
John, third Duke of Atholl, who became Grand Master on November 30,1773, but died without completing his year of office, was followed in succession by David Dalrymple, advocate‑under whom William Mason was elected Grand Secretary and Sir William Forbes. The latter‑whose Depute was James Boswell of Auchinleck‑laid the foundation‑stone of the High School of Edinburgh, June 24, 1777 ; and, in the following year, presided and delivered the oration, at the Funeral Grand Lodge held‑February 14, 1778‑in honour of William St. Clair of Roslin.
In the same month, a circular was issued to the Lodges, forbidding the practice of offering bounties to military recruits, together " with the freedom of Masonry " (Lyon, p. 83). In the Lodge of Kelso, the spirit of patriotism thus awakened, reached a great height and‑February i z, 1778‑the Brethren unanimously resolved to testify their zeal for their Sovereign and their respect for their noble Grand Master by marching with Lieut.‑Colonel Brown (who was then at Kelso " levying men for service in the corps being raised by the Duke of Atholl, Grand Master of England and Grand Master Elect of Scotland‑Vernon, P. 58) at the head of his recruiting party, beating up for volunteers for the Atholl Highlanders (77th Foot, raised 1778, disbanded 1783) and, accordingly, marched from the Lodge in procession through the town and, at the same time, offered a bounty of three guineas " to every man enlisting in that corps " (Vernon).
On August 7, 1786, it was ordained, that no Master should be addressed by the style or title of Grand, except the Grand Master of Scotland and, in the same year, a correspondence was opened between the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Berlin.
Lodges under the Scottish Constitution were not distinguished by numbers until about 1790. The custom became an acknowledged one in 18oz and, in 1816, a renumbering took place.
In 1794‑August 4‑the right of the journeymen Lodge, " to grant dispensations to open a Lodge at any place where a number of their Brethren were stationed, particularly if the Master was present," was considered, and‑September i‑a power or Warrant for the practice having been produced and examined, " the Grand Lodge were clearly of opinion that the journeymen should be allowed to act as they had formerly done " (Hunter, p. 73).
A fraternal correspondence was opened with the Grand Lodge of Ireland in 1796 and the next event of any consequence was the passing of the Secret Societies Act in 1799. In the same year it was resolved " to prohibit and discharge all Lodges having Charters from the Grand Lodge from holding any other meetings than those of the Three Great Orders of Masonry, of Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason, being the Ancient Order of Saint John " (Lawrie, 1859, p. i6z ; Vernon, p. 64). To such an extent, however, had the work of Lodges at this period become associated with that of the Royal Arch and Templar Degrees that, in HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 395 October i8oo, a circular was issued by the Grand Lodge, again " prohibiting and discharging its daughters to hold any meetings above the degree of Master Mason " (Lyon, p. 293 ut supra).
On October 29, 1804, a form of oath was transmitted by the Grand Secretary to all the Lodges, with directions that the same should be engrossed on a parchment roll, which every visiting stranger was to subscribe in presence of two or more office‑bearers, who were also to " subscribe alongst with him as witnesses." In the following year, at the annual festival, H.R.H. the Prince of Wales was elected Grand Master and Patron. This title‑for in reality it was nothing more, the Prince being ineligible for election to the Grand Mastership from not being a member of a Scottish Lodge‑was conferred upon him annually by Grand Lodge until his succession to the Crown in 1820, when the title was changed to that of Patron of the Most Ancient Order of St. John's Masonry for Scotland (Lyon, p. 388 ut supra). The Earl of Moira, at that time Commander‑in‑Chief in Scotland, was elected Acting Grand Master Elect at the same meeting. This nobleman was present at the Grand Feast, held at the King's Arms Tavern, on St. Andrew's Day 1803, on which occasion he delivered a very impressive address ; and, from that period, may be dated the origin of the fraternal union which has since subsisted between the Grand Lodges of England and Scotland. Lord Moira, who was Acting (or virtual) Grand Master in i 806 and 1807, twice discharged the ceremonial duties incidental to that office in i 8og. On October 25 he laid the foundation‑stone of George the Third's Bastion at Leith and‑‑November 21‑the Freemasons' Hall of Scotland was consecrated by him and, in a solemn manner, dedicated to Masonry. On each of these occasions the Earl delivered one of those eloquent addresses for ,vhich he was so justly famed.
During Lord Moira's second year of office as Grand Master, a reconciliation was happily effected between the Grand Lodge and the Lodge of Kilwinning. Negotiations for a union had been secretly opened between certain officials of the two bodies in i 8o6 and, after a preliminary correspondence, commissioners appointed by each of the parties held a conference at Glasgow on October 14, 1807. At this meeting the Records of the Lodge of Kilwinning and a copy of the Charter of the Lodge of.Scoon and Perth were produced in support of the " great antiquity of Kilwinning " (Lyon, p. 247). Ultimately it was agreed reciprocally: That the Mother Lodge Kilwinning should renounce all right of granting Charters and come in, along with all the Lodges holding under her, to the bosom of the Grand Lodge; that the Mother Kilwinning should be placed at the head of the roll of the Grand Lodge, her daughter Lodges at the end of the said roll, but so soon as the roll should be arranged and corrected the Lodges holding of Mother Kilwinning should be ranked according to the dates of their original Charters and of those granted by the Grand Lodge; that the Master of the Mother Lodge Kilwinning for the time being should be ipso facto Provincial Grand Master for the Ayrshire district, a provision which lasts to the present day.
396 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND This provisional agreement approved by the Grand Lodge, November 2, 1807, was shortly afterwards ratified and confirmed by the Lodge of Kilwinning. Between, however, the Glasgow Conference of October 14 and the Grand Lodge held November 2, an interview took place‑October 26‑between Sir John Stuart, Bart., one of the Commissioners for the Grand Lodge, with Alexander Deuchar, Treasurer of the Lodge of Edinburgh. The latter urged the injustice of proceeding so far without allowing Mary's Chapel at least the satisfaction of proving her claims to seniority, or seeing the vouchers upon authority of which her seniority was thus forcibly to be wrested from her; also, that Mary's Chapel had already received various decisions in her favour seventy years back, besides having in her possession a Charter from the Grand Lodge, wherein her right to stand first on the roll was expressly set forth. The further documentary evidence relating to the subject consists of a Minute of the Lodge of Edinburgh, October 29 ; a letter from Sir J. Stuart to Deuchar, October 30 ; and the reply of the latter, October 31 (Lyon, p. 248 et seq.). The Lodge of Edinburgh consented," if the Kilwining Lodge could produce any additional satisfactory proof of their being the identical Lodge of Kilwining by whom Masonry was originally introduced into Scotland," that their rivals should stand first on the roll without a number; but the members of the metropolitan Lodge urged with great force " that they did not see how Mother Kilwinning could expect Mary's Chapel to resign the exalted position she held upon mere presumptive proof, or act otherwise upon true Masonic principles, than consent to come down a little in her demands as well as Mary's Chapel." But this appeal was unheeded, the Treaty and Settlement between the Grand Lodge and Mother Kilwinning was forthwith approved of, though, it must be recorded, " under protest," by the Acting Master of Mary's Chapel, who threatened " to call a meeting of the Lodge to consider whether they should not secede " (Lyon, p. 2 S 1). The Lodge of Edinburgh followed up its protest by constituting its office‑bearers a committee to defend its privileges. A final attempt to regain its original place was made by the Lodge, May 8, 1815, when " it seemed to be the general sense of the Grand Lodge that after the solemn agreement entered into with Mother Kilwinning in 1807 and ratified, approved of and acted upon by all parties ever since that period, the petition and remonstrance by Mary's Chapel Lodge could not be received and entertained." Although the summary displacement of the Lodge of Edinburgh from the position which had been assigned to it in 173 7 did not actually " lead to the formation of a new Grand Lodge," as had been prophesied by Alexander Deuchar, in his letter of October 31, 1807, to Sir J. Stuart, the bitterness thereby engendered was not without influence in the proceedings which resulted in the temporary secession of several Lodges and, at one time, threatened to afflict the Scottish Craft with a schism of even graver character than that which was still running its course in the South.
On May 4, 1807, Dr. John Mitchell, Master of Lodge Caledonian, moved in Grand Lodge that " an address be presented to his Majesty " thanking him (inter HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 397 alia) for " supporting the established religion of the country." The motion was negatived by a majority of one vote, the numbers being z8 to z7. A scrutiny was demanded and refused and, at a special Grand Lodge, held June icg, this ruling was upheld, 95 members voting in the majority and 47 in the minority.
In the following year‑January zi Dr. Mitchell was arraigned on several charges and found guilty‑by a majority of 159 to chi‑‑of having at one of the Caledonian Lodge meetings proposed that " it should secede from the Grand Lodge." Sentence of Suspension, sine die, from his Masonic privileges was forthwith pronounced and, three days later, the Doctor was re‑installed in the chair of the Caledonian Lodge, by which body it was resolved " to discontinue their connexion with the Grand Lodge." These proceedings having been communicated to the Grand Lodge of England, the Earl of Moira, Acting Grand Master‑under the Heir‑Apparent‑of both Grand Lodges, expressed in a letter to the Substitute Grand Master‑April z5, i8o8‑his own and the Prince of Wales's opinion, that the Grand Lodge of Scotland " should consider of a sentence of expulsion from Masonry of Dr. Mitchell for his contumacy, to be followed by a similar sentence against every individual attending what is called a Lodge under him." Accordingly‑May z, i 8o8‑Dr. Mitchell and some members of his Lodge were expelled, while certain members of Mary's Chapel and other alleged abettors of the Schism, were suspended. This led‑May z4‑to an extraordinary meeting of the Lodge of Edinburgh, at which nearly one hundred Brethren attended. A series of resolutions was passed, expressing " surprise, astonishment and regret at the proceedings taken in Dr. Mitchell's case," winding up with the old grievance of the Lodge in reference to its position on the roll. These resolutions having been transmitted to the Grand Lodge, by a unanimous decision of that body, the greater part of the office‑bearers of Mary's Chapel and St. Andrew‑from which Lodge a similar remonstrance had been received‑were suspended, the Brethren of these two Lodges directed to choose other office‑bearers and it was remitted to certain members of the Grand Lodge to preside at such elections.
The Lodge of Edinburgh‑June Zi‑resolved to discontinue connexion with the Grand Lodge, until reinstated in its proper place on the roll and the sentence on its office‑bearers recalled. Other resolutions of a more general character followed and similar ones were adopted by the Lodges‑Canongate Kilwinning, St. David and St. Andrew; whilst counter‑resolutions were passed by those Lodges in Edinburgh which remained firm in their allegiance to the Grand Lodge.
The dispute now took a wider range, it being alleged that Dr. Mitchell and his associates fell under the prohibition of the Act of Parliament (1799) for suppressing societies which administer secret oaths, whilst, on the other hand, the Seceders, following up the resolutions under which they had left the Grand Lodge, metJuly A ‑in the Lodge room of Canongate Kilwinning and organized themselves into a separate body, under the designation of " The Associated Lodges seceding from the present Grand Lodge of Scotland." From this time‑during the pendency of the Schism‑the Masters of the Seceding Lodges occupied the chair by rotation 398 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND at the annual festivals and the Minutes of the meeting were engrossed in the books of the Lodge whose Master presided on the occasion.
The litigation which ensued has been narrated by Lyon; it will suffice in this place to remark that the Grand Lodge was thoroughly worsted in the legal struggle, from which the Associated Lodges emerged victorious. Happily, a conciliatory spirit prevailed, or the result might have been the erection of a multiplicity of Grand Lodges. Some idea of the dimensions of the Schism may be gathered from the fact that to celebrate one of their legal victories, the Associated Lodges held a General Communication‑February 17, 18og‑at which upwards of three hundred Brethren were present. The Master of Lodge St. David presided as " Grand Master." Overtures for a reunion were made on behalf of the Seceders, February 3, 1812 ; and, by the appointment of a special committee, to consider the proposals for a reconciliation, the Grand Lodge met them more than half‑way. But, although this led to the appointment of a similar committee by the Associated Lodges, the breach was not healed until 18I3‑On March 31 of which year, the sentences of suspension and expulsion (excepting in the case of Dr. Mitchell) were removed and the Seceding Lodges returned to their former allegiance. It is worthy of note that it was in this year that the union of the two rival Grand Lodges of England was effected.
In 181 o, " it was unanimously decided that the Master of a Lodge had the right of appointing his own Depute, unless the practice of his particular Lodge, or any by‑law thereof, ruled the contrary." In the same year, after consultation with the sister Grand Lodges of England and Ireland, the Grand Lodge declined to grant a Charter for the Naval Kilwinning Lodge, which it was proposed to hold on board H.M.S. Ardent.
On September ig, 1815, the foundation‑stones of the Regent Bridge and the New Gaol were laid with the usual Masonic solemnities and certain Knights Templar, headed by Alexander Deuchar, not only joined in the procession, but took prece dence of the regular Lodges and Brethren. The subject was brought before the Grand Lodge in the ensuing November and, after a committee had reported, resolutions were passed‑August 4, A17‑that the Grand Lodge recognized only the three Degrees of Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason of St. John's Masonry; and that any Lodges admitting persons to their meetings or processions belonging to other Orders, with regalia, insignia, badges, or crosses other than those belonging to St. John's Masonry, would be proceeded against for infringement of the regulations (Lawrie, p. 18q ;Lyon, p. 295). A few weeks later‑August 28‑the Supreme Grand Royal Arch Chapter of Scotland was instituted by the representatives of thirty‑four Chapters, at a General Convocation of the Order, held in St. John's Chapel, Edinburgh.
At the next Grand Lodge, held November 3, it was enacted‑by an overwhelming majority of votes‑that, from and after December 27 then ensuing, no person holding an official situation in any Masonic body which sanctions Degrees higher than those of St. John's Masonry, shall be entitled to sit, act, or vote in the Grand HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 399 Lodge of Scotland. This produced a dignified protest from the Grand Chapter ‑July 2o, 1818‑in which the Royal Arch is styled " a real and intrinsic part of Master Masonry " and a union was proposed between the Grand Lodge and the Grand Chapter, on the same principles as those established between the same bodies in England. But, although couched in courteous terms and signed by two Past Grand Masters‑the Earls of Moray and Aboyne‑the letter, on the motion of the Proxy Master of Mother Kilwinning, was not even allowed to be read. An attempt was made‑August 182o‑to rescind the resolution of November 3, 1817 ; but the motion was negatived by 5 z votes to 22. " Though still withholding its recognition of other than Craft Masonry," observes Lyon, " the Grand Lodge has long since set aside its prohibitory enactments against wearing in Lodge Communications the insignia of, or holding office under, the High Degrees." The Grand Chapter " did not assume a distinct recognition of several of the Degrees which it now superintends, until 1845, when it intimated that its Chapters were entitled to grant the following degrees :‑Mark, Past, Excellent and Royal Arch, as also the Royal Ark Mariners and the Babylonish Pass, which last is commonly but erroneously called the Red Cross and is composed of three points‑Knights of the Sword, Knights of the East and Knights of the East and West " (Lawrie, 1859, P. 430)ň Many foundation‑stones were laid according to the formalities of the Craft between 182o and 183 o, but no events occurred during that period which are worthy of specific mention. In the latter year King William IV became the patron of the Grand Lodge of Scotland and, in 1831‑March icg‑William Alexander (Assistant Grand Secretary) succeeded his father Alexander Laurie, as Grand Secretary.
On August 3, 1829, a committee was appointed to revise the Laws of the Grand Lodge, which had never previously been embodied into a code. These were sanctioned November z, 1835 and printed in 1836. Editions were subsequently published in 1848, 1852, 1863, 1874, 1879 and 1881.
The Grand Lodge celebrated the completion of the Centenary of its existence on St. Andrew's Day, 1836, under the presidency of Lord Ramsay, afterwards tenth Earl and first Marquess of Dalhousie. Gold medals were struck in honour of the event and one was presented to each of the sister Grand Lodges of England and Ireland.
A patent bearing the same date‑November 30, 1836‑was granted to the Chevalier‑afterwards Sir James‑Burnes, appointing him Provincial Grand Master over Western India and its dependencies, but his jurisdiction was extended August 24, 1846‑over the three Presidencies, with the title of Grand Master of Scottish Freemasons in India. After a brilliant career in the Indian Medical Service, extending over a period of nearly thirty years, Dr. Burnes returned to his native country in 1849 and died in 1862 (Lyon, p. 341 ; Lawrie, 1859, p. 396 et seq.). Sir James Burnes, it may be briefly added, was the author of A Sketch of the History of the Knights Templar, 1840 ; and in 1845 he founded a new Order or Brotherhood " of the Olive‑Branch of the East." It consisted of three classes 400 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND ‑Novice, Companion, and Officer (Freemasons' Quarterly Review, 1845, p. 377)The reputation of its founder caused it to be received with much enthusiasm by Indian Freemasons, but it never took root.
In 18 3 8‑November i z‑an application from the Provincial Grand Master for the West Indies, requesting a dispensation to work the Mark Mason Degree, was considered, but refused, on the grounds that according to the Constitutions, " the Grand Lodge of Scotland practises and recognizes no degrees of Masonry but those of Apprentice, Fellow‑Craft and Master Mason, denominated St. John's Masonry," and that " All Lodges holding of the Grand Lodge of Scotland are strictly prohibited and discharged from giving any countenance, as a body, to any other Order of Masonry." Lord Glenlyon‑afterwards sixth Duke of Atholl‑was elected Grand Master in 1843 and this high office he continued to hold until his death in January 1864.
In 1844 a select committee was appointed to inquire how far Benefit Societies in connexion with Lodges were conducive or otherwise to the prosperity of Masonry in Scotland. The facts generally, as ascertained by the committee, may be thus summarized In some Lodges with Benefit Societies it is explained to the candidates that a Benefit Society is connected with the Lodge with which he offers himself for initiation ; that the fee for becoming a member of the Lodge is a stated sum, say úi ios., and for becoming a member both of the Lodge and the Society is so much more, say ~2 in whole, besides an annual contribution to the Society funds ; and that unless the candidate become a member both of the Lodge and the Society, he can neither elect for, nor be elected to any of the offices of the Lodge, the Office‑bearers being generally the Managers ex offrciis of the Society funds. In other cases, members of the Lodge, but not of the Society, may vote at the election of Office‑bearers of the Lodge, but are not eligible for office themselves. And lastly, that the Societies in question are in many instances managed with great care, and are very beneficial to the parties concerned.
The report of the Committee having been duly considered and approvedMay 6‑it was resolved That all Lodges who may hereafter form Benefit Societies are hereby prohibited from depriving any of the members of their Lodges of the right of voting at the election of Office‑bearers, or being chosen Office‑bearers ; and those Lodges who already have Benefit Societies connected therewith, are instructed to make such alterations upon their bye‑laws and practice as will admit every duly constituted Member of the Lodge, not lying under any Masonic disability, to vote, or to be eligible for office, at the election of Office‑bearers. The Grand Lodge also recommends all Lodges having Benefit Societies to be very careful in keeping the funds of the Lodge perfectly separate and distinct from those of the Society.
In the same year‑August 5‑it was ordained by the Grand Lodge that an SCOTLAND TYPICAL EXAMPLES OF SCOTTISH LODGE APRONS THIS plate shows a few of the numerous varieties of colouring used in the clothing of private Lodges under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Scotland. The only laws laid down in the Book of Constitutions are as follow Grand Lodge, with a view to uniformity, recommends the following patterns of aprons for adoption by subordinate Lodges Apprentice.‑A plain white lambskin, with semicircular fall or flap, sixteen inches wide and fourteen inches deep ; square at bottom, and without ornament‑white strings (see No. i).
Fellow Craft.‑Same as above, with the addition of two rosettes, of the colour worn by the Lodge, at the bottom (see No. 2).
Master Mason.‑Dimensions as above, edged with the colour of the Lodge, and an additional rosette on the fall or flap.
Masters and Past Masters wear in place of rosettes the emblems embroidered on the flap of the apron, which is of satin of the colour of the Lodge, having on the body of the apron tassels and rude levels (see No. 3) Mourning.‑Masters, Past Masters, Wardens and other officers of Lodges, jewels covered with crape. Three black crape rosettes to be worn upon the aprons of officers and other Master Masons. Two black crape rosettes to be worn by Fellow Crafts and Entered Apprentices on lower part of the apron. The whole to wear white gloves.
No. 3 is the Master's apron of the Lodge of Edinburgh (Mary's Chapel) and No. ó exhibits the gauntlets of the same officer.
The office‑bearers. of Lodges may wear sashes of the colour adopted by the Lodge, not exceeding four inches broad ; and, in front, may have embroidered, or otherwise distinctly marked thereon, the name or number of the Lodge (see No. 5).
There is one point in connexion with Scottish Masonry which strikes Brethren of most other jurisdictions as curious, that is the great variety of colours used in the aprons. In England and as far as researches have gone, in every other country but Holland, the colour used by all subordinate Lodges is the same ; but in Scotland, not only may every Lodge use its own colour, but even when chosen, the Brethren appear to be able to change it at pleasure. In four lists of Lodges on the roll of the Grand Lodge of Scotland, in which the colours are named, i.e. the 184.8 and 1879 editions of the Constitutions ; the list of 186o, included in Mackey's Lexicon, as revised by Donald Campbell and published in 1867 ; and the Scottish Freemasons' Calendar of 1895 ; and in numerous cases the colour is twice, or even thrice, varied in the four lists. Even this record is evidently incomplete, for an impression on wax in a tin box of the handsome old seal of the Canongate Kilwinning Lodge, No. 2, is attached by two ribbons to a fragment of parchment cut from some old document and these ribbons are pink and pale blue ; whereas the only colour named in any one of the four lists for this Lodge 1s crimson. The following is a list of a few of the most striking changes of colour recorded Lodge Canongate and Leith, No. 5, has in the 18ó8 list, Crimson; in 186o, White and Pink ; and, in 1879, Crimson.
Hamilton Kilwinning, No. 7‑184.8, Crimson; 186o, Crimson and Blue ; 1879, Crimson and Blue; 1895, Blue.
Dunblane, No. 9‑184.8, Dark Blue and White; 186o, Green; 1879, Dark Blue and White; 1895, Blue.
Torphichen Kilwinning, No. 13‑184.8, Crimson; i 86o, Crimson with Mazarine Blue Edge; 1879, Crimson and Blue ; 1895, Crimson.
St. John's Kilwinning, Dumbarton, No. 18‑184.8, Purple; 186o, Crimson ; 1879, Crimson.
SCOTLAND TYPICAL EXAMPLES OF SCOTTISH LODGE APRONS)‑Continued.
Ancient Stirling, No. 30‑1848, Light Blue and White ; 186o, Light Blue ; 1879, Dark Blue; 1895, Blue.
Loudon Kilwinning, No. 51‑1848, Light Blue, Red Edge; I86o, Red; I87g, Light Blue and Red ; 1895, Crimson and Blue.
Dumfries Kilwinning, No. 53‑1848, Light Blue; I 86o (not given) ; 1879, Crimson and Gold; 1895, Maroon and Gold.
Thistle, Dumfries, No. 62‑1848, Dark Blue, White Edge ; I86o, Blue and White ; 1879, Green and White ; 1895, Green and Gold.
St. Andrew, Annan, No. 79‑1848, Green, Pink Edge ; 186o, Green and Pink ; 1879, Blue.
Morton, Lerwick, No. 89‑1848, Black ; 186o, Green ; 1879, Green.
St. Andrew, Aberdeen, No. I Io‑1848, Royal Stuart Tartan ; I86o, Royal Stuart Tartan ; 1879, Blue ; 1895, Light Blue.
St. Cyre, No. 121‑1848 (not given) ; 186o, Green ; 1879, Magenta.
Operative, Dumfries, No. 140‑‑1848, Dark Blue and Light Blue ; I 86o (not given) ; 1879, Blue and Red ; 1895, Red, Black, and Green.
Cadder Argyle, Glasgow, No. 147‑1848, Red ; I86o, Red, Yellow, and Blue ; 1879, Blue ; 1895, Red, Yellow, and Blue.
Thistle Operative, Dundee, No. 158‑1848, Green and Yellow ; 186o, Green and Gold ; 1879, Crimson and Yellow ; 1895, Green.
Scotia, Glasgow, No. 178‑1848, Black with Black, Red, and Blue Edge ; I86o, Black, Red and Blue Edge ; 1879, Dark Blue.
Incorporated Kilwinning, Montrose, No. 182‑1848, Crimson ; I86o, Red ; 1879, Mauve ; 1895, Crimson.
St. John Caledonian, Campsie, No. 195‑1848 (not given) ; I86o, Caledonian Tartan; 1879, Blue.
St. Andrew, Cumbernauld, No. 199‑1848, Black; 1.86o, Black; 1879, Crimson and Yellow; 1895, Blue.
St. Barnabas, Old Cumnock, No. 230‑1848, Blue and White ; 186o, Blue and White ; 1879, Green and Crimson.
St. John, Wilsontown, No. 236‑1848, Green, Yellow Edge ; 186o, Blue and White ; 1879, Blue, Scarlet, and Yellow; 1895, Blue, White, and Red Border.
Thistle, West Calder, No. 270‑1848, Blue, White Edge; I86o, Blue; 1879, Blue and Yellow.
St. John, Mid Calder, No. 272‑1848 (not given) ; 186o, Crimson, Blue, and Yellow; 1879, Purple ; 1895, Crimson.
St. John, Crofthead, No. 374‑1848 (not given) ; 186o, Dark Blue ; 1879, Blue, Red, and White; 1895, Red, White, and Blue.
St. Andrew, Drybridge, No. 380‑1848 (not given) ; 186o, Scarlet and White ; 1879, Red, White, and Blue.
The remainder of the illustrations on this plate give a good representative idea of the various designs of Scottish Private Lodge aprons.
ňesssx..aarrss HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 401 interval of two weeks should elapse between the degrees of Apprentice and FellowCraft; Fellow‑Craft and Master Mason respectively, but the enactment, though aimed at the custom of conferring all three Degrees on the same night, became a dead letter, owing to its being qualified by a proviso, that the regulation might be dispensed with " in any particular case of emergency, to be allowed by the Master and Wardens of the Lodge." The Fund of Scottish Masonic Benevolence was established‑at the instance of J. Whyte‑Melville‑August z, 1846.
In the following year the Grand Lodge agreed to an interchange of representatives with the Grand Lodge of England; the fees on Charters were reduced from úz1 to ~IO IOS. ; and on May 3 the Grand Lodge‑in relation to the installation of R.W. Masters‑pronounced the following deliverance The Grand Lodge of Scotland has never acknowledged, as connected with St. John's Masonry, any Degree, or secrets of any Degree, but those imparted to every Master Mason, Fellow‑Craft and Entered Apprentice. The Grand Lodge farther considers every Master Mason qualified to be elected to and fill the Chair as R.W. Master, without receiving any additional degree or secrets whatever.
The rare collection of Masonic books and manuscripts amassed by Dr. Charles Morison of Greenfield, was, at his death, presented by his widow‑August 24,1849 ‑to the Grand Lodge of Scotland; this library was catalogued by the indefatigable Secretary of that body‑D. Murray Lyon‑who, in disposing of the arrears bequeathed to him by his official predecessors, found his chief recreation in a change of employment‑which in this case was of a congenial character, to a Grand Secretary, whose administrative talent‑great as it was‑did not eclipse his earlier fame as an historian of the Craft.
Masonic Clubs were prohibited in 1851, but the Grand Lodge, in order to promote the objects which they professed to have in view, consented to grant temporary Warrants, without fee, for holding Lodges of Instruction in any District or Province, when a majority of the Masters therein should petition for them.
In the same year, a new class of Members was introduced into the Grand Lodge, the rank of Honorary Member being conferred, in the first instance, upon the King of Sweden and Prince Frederick of the Netherlands ; subsequently, upon George V, King of Hanover and William I, King of Prussia (afterwards German Emperor). At a Quarterly Communication, held February 18 5 3, a reduction‑from six shillings and sixpence to four shillings and sixpence‑in the fees for Grand Lodge Diplomas, was agreed to unanimously.
The want of a suitable Hall for the Grand Lodge having been long felt, a committee was appointed‑May 4, 1857‑to consider the propriety and practicability of " purchasing or erecting a Building for Grand Lodge purposes and the means whereby it might be accomplished." Reports were made by the Hall Committee and Grand Architect and the scheme was sanctioned by Grand Lodge, February i, 402 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 1858. The excavations were commenced April 26, the foundation‑stone being laid, with great ceremony, by the Duke of Atholl, Grand Master, June 24. In the following year, February z4, the New Freemasons' Hall, 98 George Street, Edinburgh, was consecrated and inaugurated.
In January 1864 the Masonic throne became vacant through the death of the Duke of Atholl, who had occupied it since 1843. John Whyte‑Melville of Bennochy and Strathkinness was the next Grand Master‑under whose administration it was that gross irregularities in the management of the financial and other affairs of Grand Lodge were discovered as having existed for years, though little benefit resulted from the investigation which followed.
The Earl of Dalhousie was elected Grand Master in 1867 and retired in November 1870. It was during his tenure of office that H.R.H. the Prince of Wales became Patron of the Scottish Craft and an affiliated member of the Lodge of Edinburgh (Mary's Chapel), No. i. The Prince appeared in Grand Lodge, was installed as Patron, October 16, 187o and, on the following day, laid the foundation‑stone of the New Royal Infirmary.
The Earl of Rosslyn was elected Grand Master, November 1870. This nobleman made an unsuccessful attempt to raise the status of the Craft, in securing from all members of Lodges an annual payment to Grand Lodge as a test of membership. It was during the administration of Lord Rosslyn that Grand Lodge recognized and adopted the Installed Master's Degree.
Sir Michael Robert Shaw‑Stewart of Greenock and Blackhall, Baronet, was elected Grand Master in November 1873 and held the post till his retirement in November 1881. It was during this period that H.R.H. the Prince of Wales laid the foundation‑stone of the new Post Office at Glasgow, October 17, 1876. In the same year, the Grand Master instituted a searching inquiry into the gigantic mismanagement of Grand Lodge business, by which, for a very long period, the Scottish Craft had been scandalized. He succeeded in having matters placed on a satisfactory footing.
The Earl of Mar and Kellie succeeded to the Masonic throne in November 1881 and retired in 1884. A scheme for raising Cio,ooo for the extension of the Fund of Scottish Masonic Benevolence was adopted by Grand Lodge during his presidency.
Colonel Sir Archibald C. Campbell of Blythswood, Baronet, M.P., elected in November 1884, was again called to the Grand Mastership in 1885. It fell to Sir Archibald to give the strongest popular expression of disapprobation to an undis guised attempt to place a semi‑official stamp upon a pretended ritual of Freemasonry ‑manufactured for publication by unauthorized and irresponsible parties connected with the Craft.
The Lodge of Kilwinning resumed its independency in 1745 and, from that time until i 8o8, exercised all the attributes of a Grand Lodge. It was rarely brought into conflict with the governing body from which it had seceded and, on the few occasions in which this occurred, neither side can be said to have emerged victorious F. III‑17 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 403 from the dispute. The rivalry existing did not therefore disturb the fraternal relations subsisting between the Brethren under the two jurisdictions.
In 175 8 two Edinburgh Masons sought to be admitted members of "the Venerable Gray‑hair'd Mother Kilwinning," supporting their application by a promise to present a " set of new ribbons " to the Lodge (Lyon, p. 379). The Earl of Eglinton was elected Grand Master of the Mother Lodge ad vitam in 1778 and the concluding years of the eighteenth century were marked by the admission of many distinguished Brethren, e.g. the Earl of Crawford, Sir Walter M. Cunningham, Bart., the Earl of Cassillis, Lord Lyle and others. Down, indeed, to the close of its separate and independent existence, its roll continued to be graced by the names of many Brethren who have been famous in history.
It is, however, a somewhat curious circumstance that the Lodge of Kilwinning, which almost alone amongst Scottish Lodges, evinced an unconquerable repugnance to either working or recognizing more than the three Degrees of the Craft, should have been regarded, both at home and abroad, as a centre of the Hauls Grades. Yet, as a simple matter of fact, it has never practised, but has always repudiated any connexion with the legion of foreign novelties, which, under one name or another, have been adopted in many influential quarters as Masonic.
When, at the close of the eighteenth century, the Arch and the Templar Degrees were practised to such an extent among the Scottish Lodges, as to call forth the censure of the Grand Lodge, they were never introduced into, or even countenanced by Mother Kilwinning. " Of course, as long as she continued to preserve anything of an operative character, the Mark was conferred by the Mother Lodge upon those qualified to receive it, though, even at the present day, the Mark Degree is unknown to her as a Lodge " (Lyon, Freemasons' Magazine, N.S., vol, vii, p. 426).
A passage in Ramsay's famous speech doubtless served as the original basis on which so many fanciful conjectures with regard to the mission of the Lodge of Kilwinning have arisen. The belief, indeed, in her connexion with Templary was fairly justified, from the grant of a Warrant in 1779 to a Lodge with the singular title of " High Knights Templar of Ireland." By this body a correspondence was opened with the Mother Lodge, October 25, 18o6, in order to obtain such documents as would establish, beyond doubt, the authority and regularity of their Warrant as Knights Templar. The nature of the reply that this must have elicited, may be inferred from the fact that in 1779, Mother Kilwinning, in a circular to her daughter Lodges, repudiated all connexion with any Masonic rites beyond the three Degrees of the Craft.
In 1817, on the formation of the Supreme Grand Royal Arch Chapter for Scotland, the Grand Recorder fell into the error of supposing that Mother Kilwinning was also a Royal Arch Chapter and urged the propriety of an immediate union with the newly constituted Grand Chapter, which would secure to it that rank to which it was entitled. Indeed, so tenaciously did the high grade Masons cling to the idea, that the Lodge of Kilwinning was at one time in the habit of conferring the Arch and Templar degrees and even granted Warrants for the purpose, that Alexander Deuchar, 404 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND as Grand Master of the Templars of Scotland was found (1827) putting the following questions to the Master of the Mother Lodge: " Has the Lodge of Kilwinning any and how many Lodges holding under her whom she has empowered to make Templars and how long is it since she granted any such Warrant ? How far back do your minutes of the Order of Knights Templar go ? " To these queries the Mother Lodge replied that " the Brethren of Kilwinning have never gone farther in practice than Three Step Masons " (Lyon, in Freemasons' Magazine, N. S., vol. ix, P‑ 354). The inveteracy of this error becomes apparent by a publication edited by the Grand Secretary of Scotland in 18 5 9, where it was positively affirmed " that the Ancient Mother Kilwinning Lodge certainly possessed in former times other degrees of Masonry than those of St. John " (W. A. Lawrie, History of Freemasonry and the Grand Lodge of Scotland, 2nd ed., p. 93).
The degree of Knight Templar doubtless had its origin in some form of the Scots Degree, whence (in all probability) it penetrated into the British Military Lodges during (or before) the Seven Years' War. Whether derived from the Cler mont or the Strict Observance systems is immaterial, though the traditions of both may be referred to as possessing attractions which, at least to Scotsmen, may have been irresistible. Thus, passing over the alleged reception of von Hund by a former Grand Master of Scotland‑Lord Kilmarnock‑the sixth of the Clermont Degrees and the whole fabric of the Strict Observance was based on the legend that Pierre d'Aumont was elected Grand Master of the Templars in Scotland, 1313 and that, to avoid persecution, the Knights became Freemasons. In 1361 the Grand Master is said to have removed his seat to Old Aberdeen, whither (in the time of von Hund) a deputation was sent to search its mysterious caverns for the sublime doctrine and the treasures of the Templars and found to their surprise, that the worthy and astonished Brethren there, were not only unconscious of possessing either secrets or treasures, but that their stock of Masonry did not extend beyond the three ordinary Degrees (Clavel, Hist. pittoresque, p. 187 ; Lawrie, 18 5 9, p. 84 ; Acta Latomorum, vol, i, p. 329 ; Findel, p. 215).
In Scotland the additional Degrees were, in the first instance, wrought by the Lodges, afterwards more often in Encampments. A pamphlet, published at Edinburgh in 1788, informs us, that of the " real Higher Degrees, there are two regular Chapters in the Kingdom of Scotland‑one in the north, the other in the west, who hold their convents in Aberdeen and Glasgow." When, in 1817, the Supreme Grand Chapter was formed, these Degrees naturally subdivided themselves into two groups ; and Alexander Deuchar, the head of the Grand Conclave‑established in 1811‑held strongly the opinion that all these Degrees (whatever number might be introduced into Scotland) should be arranged thus : the non‑Christian degrees under the charge of Chapters, and the Christian degrees under the charge of Encampments. The Degrees practised in the St. George Aboyne Encampment ‑[Chartered in the Aberdeenshire Militia by the Grand Conclave of Scotland, July 6, 181 z. The Encampment moved with the regiment, being at Dover 181 z, Liverpool 1813, Tower of London 1814 and in Aberdeen‑where it has since SCOTLAND PRIVATE LODGE JEWELS (BEING THOSE OF THE LODGE OF EDINBURGH‑MARY'S CHAPEL‑THE OLDEST LODGE IN THE WORLD) THE jewels of subordinate Lodges are of silver and, by the regulations, are similar in design to those of Grand Lodge, being as follows Master, the compasses, square, segment of circle and sun. Past Master, the compasses, square and segment. Depute Master, the compasses and square.
Substitute Master, the square. Senior Warden, the level. Junior Warden, the plumb. Treasurer, the. key, or crossed keys. Secretary, cross pens.
Chaplain, irradiated eye in a triangle. Deacons, the mallet and trowel. Steward, cornucopia and cup.
Architect, Corinthian column on segment of go'. Jeweller, goldsmith's hammer.
Bible‑Bearer, Bible.
Inner Guard, cross swords. Tyler, a sword.
Many of the older Lodges, however, use jewels of somewhat more ancient patterns and, therefore, the jewels in use in the Lodge of Edinburgh (Mary's Chapel) have been selected, firstly, as 'being representative of such, secondly, because this Lodge is undoubtedly the oldest Lodge in the world. It has records from 1598 and, in a code discovered some years since in the old charter chest of Eglinton Castle, published in 1861 in Memorials of the Montgomeries, Earls of Eglinton, it is stated, under date " xxviii December 1599," that " it is thocht neidful and expedient be my Lord Warden Generall, that Edinburgh salbe in all tyme cuming as of befoir, the first and principal Lodge in Scotland; and that Kilwynning be the secund Ludge, as of befoir is notourlie manifest in our awld antient writtis." The authenticity of this document is beyond dispute and, therefore, there can be no doubt that the question is settled once and for ever, that the Lodge of Edinburgh is the premier of all existing Lodges.
No. i shows the beautiful old jewel and brooch worn by the Master. The jewel consists of the compasses, square, segment, a curiously shaped level, sun and crescent moon. The brooch contains the letter G, square, compasses, all‑seeing eye, sun, moon, level, trowel and scroll, within an irradiated circle.
No. 2 is the Depute Master's jewel, consisting of compasses and level. No. 3 is the Substitute Master's jewel, consisting of the square.
No. 4 is the Senior Warden's jewel, consisting of the level. No. 5 is the junior Warden's jewel, consisting of the plumb. No. 6 is the Treasurer's jewel, consisting of a key.
No. 7 is the Secretary's jewel, consisting of crossed pens.
No. 8 is the Chaplain's jewel, consisting of the crossed keys of St. Peter (a very unusual jewel for this officer).
No. 8a is the Deacon's jewel, consisting of a dove with olive branch.
No. g is the Bible‑Bearer's jewel, consisting of an open book within a triangle.
No. io is the Architect's jewel, consisting of a Corinthian column, with segment, square and compasses.
No. 11 is the Director of Music's jewel, consisting. of a lyre within a wreath. No. 12 is the Standard‑Bearer's jewel, consisting of crossed flags with a thistle. No. 13 is the jeweller's jewel, consisting of a goldsmith's hammer within a wreath. No. 14 is the Inner Guard's jewel, consisting of crossed swords.
SCOTLAND PRIVATE LODGE JEWELS‑continued.
No. 15 is the Tyler's jewel, consisting of a sword.
No. 16 is the Steward's jewel, consisting of a cup, square and compasses.
No. 17 is the President of Stewards' jewel, consisting of a cornucopia, square and compasses.
No. 18 is the Past Master's jewel, consisting of square and compasses.
HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 405 remained‑‑1815. The Aboyne Lodge was formed in the same corps in 1799]in 1815, were the following ,E J. d.
I. Master past the chair ; Excellent and Super‑Excellent ; Royal Arch Fee, 0 7 6 II. Ark; Black Mark; Link and Chain . . ä o z 11 III. Knight Templar ; Knight of St. John of Jerusalem; Mediterranean Pass ; Knight of Malta . ä o Io 6 .IV. Jordan Pass ; Babylon Pass ä o a o V. Knight of the Red Cross . ä 0 3 0 VI. High Priest ä 0 5 0 VII. Prussian Blue . ä o 0 0 úI IO IJ Both Master Masons and Royal Arch Masons were received indiscriminately as candidates : if the former, they received first the Group I of Royal Arch Degrees ; if the latter, they began with Group II. When the Royal Arch Degrees were con ferred, the meeting was called a Chapter; for all the others an Encampment. When the Supreme Chapter was formed in 1817‑18, the Encampment did not cease conferring the Royal Arch Degrees, although, after a year or two, the practice seems to have been gradually dropped, apparently more from the circumstance that only Royal Arch Masons came forward as candidates, than from any idea that the power to do so had been surrendered.
Of Group II, the Ark and Black Mark were uniformly conferred as preliminary to the Templar Degrees proper, down to about the year 1840, when the former at least seems to have become optional. A Minute, dated April 28, 1848, informs us " The following members of the Encampment, being Black Mark Masons, unanimously resolved that the said Degree be conjoined to the Knight Templars and that the payment for it in the meantime be made voluntary." Of Group III, the Knight Templar, Mediterranean Pass and Knight of Malta have invariably been conferred and, since 1850, these have been the only Degrees communicated openly in the Encampment.
Of Group IV, the last distinct mention is in 1837, after which they seem to have become optional. As in 1851 the Chapters began to practise these as well as the Ark, there arose after that date no further necessity for their being conferred in the Encampment.
No. V is the same As the Rosy Cross or Rose Croix and, down to the year 1845, was regularly given with the Templar Degrees. After that date it also became optional and was seldom conferred.
Nos. VI and VII are never mentioned in the Minutes and were not conferred at any of the ordinary meetings of the Encampment, but separately, in presence only of the few to whom they were known.
Dr. Beveridge, who identifies Prussian Masonry with the Rite of Perfection, pronounces the Degree mentioned in the list as No. VII to have been the 25' of the latter, or the 3 2░ of the Ancient and Accepted Rite.
4o6 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND It will be observed that among the Degrees enumerated, the Mark Degrees (Mark Man and Mark Master) do not occur. These, when practised, were wrought by the Craft Lodges. This no doubt was in opposition to the Grand Lodge Regulations but, nevertheless, in many parts of Scotland, even to the present day, the old usage has been followed. When the Supreme Chapter, in the edition of its laws issued in 1845, made it imperative on Chapters to confer the Mark Degree, the Aberdeen Chapters, regarding this as a violation of the ancient landmarks, absolutely refused to comply.
But, in the result, an understanding was come to, that the Chapters were not to be interfered with if they chose to continue the old practice. Ten years later, as the old members gradually died out, the Chapters, although with hesitation and reluctance, began to confer the Mark Degree ; but since the Grand Lodge, in i 86o, allowed the Degree to be conferred in Craft Lodges, advantage has been taken of this to resort, in part at least, to the old usage (see Aberdeenshire Alasonic Reporter, 1879, p. 5 3 et seq.).
It is important to note‑having regard to the similarity of name‑that there is no connexion whatever between the ancient custom and the modern Degree. " The taking of a Mark in pre‑eighteenth century Lodges was not a Degree and the ceremony lay in paying for the Mark and having it booked." The Degree of the same name is first met with in Scotland in 1778, and was taken up with much earnestness by the journeymen Lodge in 1789, to whose persistent exertions in later years must be ascribed the qualified recognition of the Degree by the Grand Lodge of Scotland.
The Grand Master Masons of Scotland since the constitution of the Grand Lodge of Scotland have been as follows 1736. William St. Clair of Roslin.
1737. George, third Earl of Cromarty.
1738. John, third Earl of Kintore.
1739, James, fifteenth Earl of Morton.
1740. Thomas, seventh Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorn.
1741. Alexander, fifth Earl of Leven.
1742. William, fourth and last Earl of Kilmarnock.
1743‑ James, fifth Earl of Wemyss.
1744. James, seventh Earl of Moray.
1745. Henry David, sixth Earl of Buchan.
1746. William Nisbet of Dirleton.
1747. Hon. Francis Charteris of Amisfield, afterwards sixth Earl of Wemyss. 1748. Hugh Seton of Touch.
1749. Thomas, Lord Erskine (only surviving son of John, eleventh Earl of Mar, attainted in 17 ).
175o. Alexander, tenth Earl of Eglinton.
1751. James, Lord Boyd (eldest son of the last Earl of Kilmarnock. He became thirteenth Earl of Erroll).
?tii..L`ili3"~ HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 407 1752‑ George Drummond, Lord Provost of Edinburgh.
1753‑ Charles Hamilton Gordon, Advocate.
1754. James, Master of Forbes, afterwards sixteenth Baron Forbes.
1755‑56. Sholto Charles, Lord Aberdour, afterwards sixteenth Earl of Morton.
1757‑58. Alexander, sixth Earl of Galloway.
1759‑6o. David, sixth Earl of Leven.
1761‑62. Charles, fifth Earl of Elgin and fourteenth of Kincardine.
1763‑64. John, seventh Earl of Kellie.
1765‑66. James Stewart, Lord Provost of Edinburgh.
1767‑68. George, eighth Earl of Dalhousie.
1769‑70. Lieutenant‑General James Adolphus Oughton.
1771‑72. Patrick, fifth Earl of Dumfries.
1773. John, third Duke of Atholl.
1774‑75. David Dalrymple, afterwards Lord Westhall.
1776‑77. Sir William Forbes of Pitsligo, Baronet.
1778‑79. John, fourth Duke of Atholl.
1780‑81. Alexander, sixth Earl of Balcarres.
1782‑83. David, sixth Earl of Buchan.
1784‑85. George, Lord Haddo.
1786‑87. Francis Charteris, younger of Amisfield, Lord Elcho.
1788‑89. Francis, seventh Lord Napier.
1790‑91. George, seventeenth Earl of Morton.
1792‑93. George, Marquess of Huntly, afterwards fourth Duke of Gordon.
1794‑95. William, Earl of Ancrum, afterwards sixth Marquess of Lothian. 1796‑97. Francis, Lord Doune, afterwards ninth Earl of Moray. 1798‑99. Sir James Stirling, Baronet, Lord Provost of Edinburgh. 18oo‑oi. Charles William, Earl of Dalkeith, afterwards fourth Duke of Buccleuch. 1802‑03. George, fifth Earl of Aboyne.
1804‑05. George, fifth Earl of Dalhousie.
1806‑07. Francis, Earl of Moira, afterwards first Marquess of Hastings. 1808‑o9. Hon. William Ramsay Maule of Panmure, M.P., afterwards first Lord Panmure.
1810‑11. James, second Earl of Rosslyn.
1812‑13. Robert, Viscount Duncan, afterwards second Earl of Camperdown. 181Q.‑15. James, fourth Earl of Fife.
1816‑17. Sir John Marjoribanks of Lees, Baronet, M.P.
1818‑i 9. George, eighth Marquess of Tweeddale.
1820‑21. Alexander, tenth Duke of Hamilton and Brandon.
1822‑23. George William, seventh Duke of Argyle.
1824‑25. John, Viscount Glenorchy, afterwards second Marquess of Bredalbane.
1826. Thomas Robert, tenth Earl of Kinnoul.
1827‑29. Francis, Lord Elcho, afterwards eighth Earl of Wemyss and March. 1830‑31. George William, ninth Baron Kinnaird and Rossie.
408 HISTORY OF THE GRAND LODGE OF SCOTLAND 1832. Henry David, twelfth Earl of Buchan.
1833‑34. William Alexander, Marquess of Douglas and Clydesdale, afterwards eleventh Duke of Hamilton and Brandon.
1835. Alexander Edward, Viscount Fincastle, afterwards sixth Earl of Dunmore.
1836‑37. James Andrew, Lord Ramsay, afterwards tenth Earl and first Marquess of Dalhousie.
1838‑39. Sir James Forrest of Comiston, Baronet, Lord Provost of Edinburgh.
1840. George William, eleventh Earl of Rothes.
1841‑42. Lord Frederick FitzClarence.
1843‑63. George Augustus Frederick John, Lord Glenlyon, afterwards sixth Duke of Atholl.
1864‑66. John Whyte‑Melville of Bennochy and Strathkinness. 1867‑69. Fox Maule, eleventh Earl of Dalhousie.
1870‑72. Francis Robert, fourth Earl of Rosslyn.
1873‑81. Sir Michael Robert Shaw‑Stewart of Greenock and Blackhall, Baronet.
1882‑84. Walter Henry, Earl of Mar and Kellie.
1885‑91. Sir Archibald C. Campbell of Blythswood, Baronet, M.P., afterwards Lord Blythswood.
1892‑93. George Arden, eleventh Earl of Haddington.
1894‑96. Sir Charles Dalrymple of Newhailes, Baronet, M.P.
1897‑99. Alexander, Lord Saltoun.
1900‑03. The Hon. James Hozier, M.P.
19o4‑o6. The Hon. Charles Maule Ramsay.
1907‑09. Sir Thomas D. Gibson Carmichael of Stirling, Baronet.
1910‑I4. The Marquess of Tullibardine.
1915‑20. Brigadier‑General R. G. Gordon‑Gilmour of Craigmillar, C.V.O., C.B., D.S.O.
1921. The Earl of Eglinton and Winton.
1922‑24. The Earl of Elgin, C.M.G.
1925‑26. The Earl of Stair, D.S.O.
1927‑29. Lord Blythswood, K.C.V.O., D.L., J.P.
1930‑33. A. A. Hagart Spiers of Elderslie, D.L., J.P.
1933‑ The Lord Bdlhaven and Stenton.
408
