
The Builder Magazine
May 1925 - Volume XI - Number 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword - By R. W. BRO. SIR ALFRED ROBBINS, P. G. W.
The
United Grand Lodge of England: A Retrospect, 1717-1813 - BY BRO. GILBERT W.
DAYNES, Associate Editor, England
The
Constitutions of 1723 - By W. BRO. LIONEL VIBERT
Royalty and Their Patronage of the Craft - By W. BRO. J. WALTER HOBBS, P.M.,
L.R., P. Z., ETC.
“Adhuc
Stat" - A Sketch of the History of the Grand Lodge of Ireland - By BRO. JOHN
HERON LEPPER, W.M., Quatuor Coronati Lodge, No. 2076, England
Masonic Benevolence Between 1717 and 1813 - By W.BRO. MAURICE BEACHCROFT,
M.A., O.B.E., P.G.D. (England)
AN OLD
MASONIC APRON
AN
EARLY MASONIC PRAYER
Prince
Charles Edward Stuart, G. M. - BY W.BRO. J. E. SHUM TUCKETT, P.M. QUATUOR
CORONATI LODGE
The
Grand Lodge of Scotland, and Its History to 1813 - By W. BRO. F.J.W. CROWE, F.
R. Hist. Soc.
The
Evolution of English Lodge-Boards - By W.BRO. REV. W. W. COVEY-CRUMP, P.M.,
P.Z.,
Royal
Arch Masonry Prior to the Union of 1813 - By BRO.JOHN STOKES, M.A., M.D.
WAS
NELSON A FREEMASON?
THE
GREAT AIM OF MASONRY
EDITORIAL
Concerning the Plan and Purpose of This Special Issue - By BRO. GILBERT W.
DAYNES, Associate Editor for England
MASONIC CLOTHING, 1717 TO 1731
THE
ENTERED APPRENTICE'S CHARGE IN 1735
DR. J.
T. DESAGULIERS AND THE DUKE OF MONTAGU, 1734
A
CORRECTION
----o----
Foreword
By R.
W. BRO. SIR ALFRED ROBBINS, P. G. W.
PBESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF GENERAL PURPOSES, UNITED GRAND LODGE OF ENGLAND
IT is
a keen pleasure to be asked to give an introductory word to a Masonic literary
experiment, which should do much to promote among American and English
Freemasons a more complete comprehension of each other's point of View. The
pleasure is the keener when the effort to be thus foreworded--and thereby
forwarded--is the product of some of the most skilled and alert of English
living students of Masonry. In these times, among the ripest of our thinkers,
Masonic study is no longer a matter of phantasm and fantasy, of vague
imaginings with vain embroidery. It is a systematic endeavor to find what are
the true origins of the wonderful system which today is world-wide in
influence and enthusiasm, and to trace its development from small beginnings
to the vast organization we now see.
Masonry, we have been assured from our earliest moments within thc Craft, is a
progressive science; and this is a truth accustomed to be lost sight of by
those who act as if, at some undefined moment in its history, its growth was
suddenly arrested, its development sharply checked, and certain new Tables of
the Law were enacted which it were heretical to doubt and iniquitous to
disobey. Those who read the series of articles here brought together by
Masonic authors of differing powers and points of view, but all at one in the
simple design of seeking the true inwardness of things, will perceive why the
best instructed English Mason of today does not accept a claim for
infallibility coming from whatever quarter it may. They will see why that
Mason declines to accept as infallible the statements of James Anderson, of
William Preston, or of George Oliver, to take the three most prominent among
early English Masonic authorities. They will realize how much more we know of
what Freemasonry truly is if we allow our minds the same freedom of judgment,
based upon constantly increasing knowledge, we claim in other relations of
life.
"Wisdom is before him that hath understanding." So says the sage in Holy Writ;
and it enjoins that we shall seek not only to gather knowledge but to exercise
our intellect towards its fullest comprehension. The descendants of Hiram
should resemble that early Grand Master himself in being "filled with wisdom
and understanding"--not alone possessed of facts but the facility to apply
them. The cardinal weakness of some of the earliest popular Masonic writers
was that, when unpossessed of facts, they were fullest of facility. At the
time they were most precise, they were often most erroneous; and, if Masonry
is to hold an unchallenged position among the learned and the thoughtful, it
must resolutely set its face against continuing to accept fancies, however
venerable, when it can rest on a sure basis of fact. Our Craft, so far from
standing to lose by stripping itself of the accretions derived from an
uncritical age, will be the stronger and the purer for depending on clearly
revealed and attested truth.
"Understanding !" This is the word to be given to every brother, wherever
dispersed over the face of earth and water, as his guide in Masonic work. And
it should be given in its varied meaning, as applied to intellectual and
fraternal conditions alike. In the first variant, it enjoins an effort to
derive lasting wisdom from acquired knowledge. In the second, it implies an
endeavor to secure a closer comprehension of the point of view of brethren
other than ourselves. The series of papers now presented will materially
assist in both directions. They furnish in small compass and effective form a
striking body of information concerning the development of the Craft, its
ideals, and its ideas during the opening century of its organization as a
great social power. In the very process lines of divergence were initiated
acquaintance with which clears the path for comprehension of the others'
viewpoint.
The
latter is the main phase on which I desire at the moment to dwell. It has been
my great good fortune to be the bearer from the Masons of England to their
brethren of the United States the expression not only of heartfelt wish for a
continuance and growth of the friendly spirit that has always prevailed
between them, but of keen desire for the promotion by more full, free, and
frequent intercourse of a thorough understanding. This, I am convinced, will
best be secured by a closer study of each other's problems, unfettered by
prepossessions, and unshackled by humble submission to traditional observance.
The American Mason, visiting an English lodge for the first time, is apt to
criticize what to him appears a lack of the ornate and the oratorical. The
English Mason, in his earliest experience of American working, is as prone to
condemn the presence of drama in a developed degree. Neither realizes that
both phases have sprung from the same stock, deriving their original nurture
from the like root, and branching in somewhat divergent, but never entirely
different, directions because, at the outset, of local and sometimes national
conditions. It should be the object of the studious Mason to show what these
were, and to insist on the great and lasting truth that what in Freemasonry,
as in daily life, we must always insist on is, "In essentials, unity; in
non-essentials, variety; in all things, charity." Given an open mind and a
good heart, we shall all come with closeness together. Let American and
English brethren alike, be like Hiram, "filled with wisdom and understanding,"
and they will carry with them the whole Masonic world.
----o----
The
United Grand Lodge of England: A Retrospect, 1717-1813
BY
BRO. GILBERT W. DAYNES, Associate Editor, England
FROM
June 24, 1723, when William Cowper--Clerk of the Parliaments, and a member of
the Horn Lodge, Westminster--was appointed Secretary, we have the records of
the Grand Lodge of England in unbroken sequence to the present day. These
records give no hint of any earlier minutes, now missing. Except for some
contemporary newspaper notices we are entirely dependent upon Dr. James
Anderson for an account of the first six years of the premier Grand Lodge of
the World, an account published in the Second Edition of the Book of
Constitutions in 1738. Unfortunately Dr. Anderson's capacity as an historian
has been impugned frequently, and, where independent evidence has been
forthcoming, many statements made by him have been proved to be inaccurate.
However, it must also be remembered that some of the Grand Officers, who
participated in these early events, must have perused and passed the account.
Dr.
Anderson tells us that the members of four lodges, then existing in London,
"and some old Brothers," constituted themselves into a Grand Lodge, at an
unknown date, prior to June 24, 1717, when, at an Assembly and Feast held at
the Goose and Gridiron Alehouse, St. Paul's Churchyard, the brethren then
present "by a Majority of Hands elected Mr. Anthony Sayer, Gentleman, Grand
Master of Masons."
The
first Grand Master was succeeded by George Payne in 1718, who in turn was
replaced by Dr. J.T. Desaguliers in 1719. The latter is said to have revived
"the old regular and peculiar Toasts or Healths of the Free Masons." On June
24, 1720, George Payne, who was responsible for framing early Regulations for
the Craft, was elected Grand Master for a second time. On June 24, 1721, John,
Duke of Montagu, became Grand Master, and, for the first time, a Deputy Grand
Master was appointed in addition to the two Grand Wardens. Ever since this
election either nobility or royalty have reigned over the premier Grand Lodge,
and, later, the United Grand Lodge of England. In 1723, James Anderson
published the First Edition of the Book of Constitutions; but not a word
appeared therein as to the formation, and the first six years' working, of the
Grand Lodge. In June, 1722, Philip, Duke of Wharton, was elected Grand Master
Anderson would have us believe that the election was whoily irregular, and
that no Deputy Grand Master was appointed, until the Duke of Montagu called a
special meeting of Grand Lodge, in January, 1723, to put matters right.
Contemporary newspaper paragraphs, however, negative these assertions, and one
paper states that Dr. Desaguliers was appointed D.G.M. at the June meeting.
From
the MS. list of "Regular Constituted Lodges," in the first Minute Book of
Grand Lodge, commenced on Nov. 25, 1723, we know that there were, early in
1724, fifty-two lodges on the roll. The names of 731 brethren are given in
respect of thirty-six of these lodges; so we may, perhaps, assume that there
were then about one thousand members in the lodges owning allegiance to Grand
Lodge. On Feb. 19, 1724, a Regulation was passed, "that no Brother belong to
more than one Lodge at one time within the Bills of Mortality." This
resolution., however, soon became a dead letter. The new Grand Lodge, at its
inception, certainly never intended to exercise authority over lodges outside
London, and, in the 1723 Book of Constitutions, there are also indications
that its scope had not, at that date, been enlarged. However, in the list of
lodges of 1723, we find that lodges had been constituted at Edgware, Acton,
and Richmond. During 1724 the process of extension is in active operation, and
nine lodges in different parts of England a constituted under the authority of
Grand Lodge Bristol, Bath, and Norwich leading the way. By April, 1729, this
extension is still further developed, and lodges at Madrid, Gibraltar, and
Fort William, Calcutta have been constituted. During the next decade lodges
are being planted in the New World, and in many parts of Europe not under the
British Crown.
LODGE
LISTS ARE DESCRIBED
To
enable brethren to know where the regular, constituted lodges met, and when,
Engraved Lists of the Lodges, giving the necessary details, were published
from time to time. The earliest known list was issued in 1724. On Dec. 27,
1727, Grand Lodge ordered "that it be referr'd to the succeeding Grand Master,
Deputy Grand Master, and Grand Wardens, to inquire 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 ent'red accordingly." In the
Engraved List for 1729, the lodges, for the first time, appeared numbered, and
in order of seniority. Re-numbering the lodges took place on five further
occasions during the eighteenth century. For many years the Engraved Lists
were published annually, and even oftener, but in 1775 they were replaced by
The Freemasons' Calendar, which has been published yearly ever since, being
now known as The Masonic Year Book.
THE
GENERAL CHARITY IS ORGANIZED
The
first act of charity mentioned in Grand Lodge minutes was a collection of
28-17-6 pounds on Feb. 19, 1724, on behalf of Henry Prichard, "that he should
not be a sufferer." On Nov. 21, 1724, the Earl of Dalkeith recommended the
creation of "a Generall Charity." In due course a treasurer was appointed, and
also a committee to regulate such charity. It was not, however, until Nov. 25,
1729, that the first contributions-9-8-6 pounds in all--were received. To
augment the "General Charity" it was resolved by Grand Lodge on Dec. 27, 1729,
"that for the future every Lodge of Masons, that shall be Constituted by the
Grand Master or by his Authority shall pay the Sum of two Guineas towards the
Charity upon their being Constituted." Previously no fee had, apparently, been
charged. This fee has been retained ever since, but the amount of it has been
altered from time to time.
The
Committee of Charity--now known as the Board of Benevolence--was enlarged in
1730, and again in 1733, when it was agreed by Grand Lodge "that all such
Business which cannot conveniently be despatched by the Quarterly
Communication shall be referred to the Committee of Charity." It thus became
in effect a Committee of General Purposes.
THE
ANNUAL FEAST WAS MAINTAINED
The
Annual Feast and Assembly seems to have been a recognized function, in
connection with the Grand Lodge, from its formation. At first held in one of
the taverns it was, in 1721, removed to the hall of one of the city companies.
This change necessitated stewards, but we learn from Dr. Anderson that "the
Grand Officers not finding a proper Number of Stewards, our Brother Mr. Josiah
Villeneau, Upholder in the Burrough of Southwark, generously undertook the
whole himself, attended by some Waiters." We next hear of stewards at the
Feast on June 24, 1723, Anderson naming six brethren as having served in that
capacity. In 1724 Anderson says that there were twelve stewards, but the Grand
Lodge Minutes do not state the number. On Dec. 27, 1725, the arrangements were
in the hands of John James Heidegger, and at the two following Feasts, Edward
Lambert--a celebrated confectioner--acted in the same capacity. On Nov. 26,
1728, on the motion of Dr. J.T. Desaguliers, the office of steward was
revived, and twelve brethren offered their services. By 1732 the twelve
serving stewards had acquired the right to nominate their successors. They
were also permitted to have their jewels pendant to red ribbons, and their
Aprons lined with red silk. In 1735 Grand Lodge resolved that all the Grand
Officers, except the G. M., should from thenceforth be selected from the
stewards and the stewards also received further privileges in connection with
attendance at Grand Lodge. The stewards were given permission to have a lodge,
composed of those who were serving, or had served, the office of Grand
Steward, and this lodge was constituted on June 25, 1735, at The Shakespeare's
Head, Covent Garden, London. On April 18, 1792, the Steward's Lodge was placed
at the head of the roll, by order of Grand Lodge, without a number.
As the
popularity of the Craft grew, so did the curiosity of the uninitiated. In
1724, to gratify this curiosity, the so-called "exposures" begin to appear,
both in newspaper and in book form. In 1730, two exposures were published,
which attracted the attention of Grand Lodge. On Aug. 28, Dr. Desaguliers,
referring to the Mystery of Free Masonry, printed in the Daily Journal for
Aug. 15, "recommended several things to the Consideration of the Grand Lodge .
. . for preventing any false Brethren being admitted into regular Lodges and
such as call themselves Honorary Masons." Nathaniel Blackerby, D. G. M., also,
"proposed several Rules to the Grand Lodge to be observed in their respective
Lodges for their Security against all open and Secret Enemies of the Craft."
On Dec. 15, the D. G. M. referred to Masonry Dissected, published by Samuel
Prichard, the previous October, and characterized it as "a foolish thing not
to be regarded." But the Grand Lodge minutes further state, that "in order to
prevent the Lodges being imposed upon by false Brethren or Imposters: Proposed
till otherwise ordered by the Grand Lodge, that no Person whatsoever should be
admitted into Lodges unless some Member of the Lodge then present would vouch
for such visiting Brother being a regular Mason." In the opinion of many
Masons some of the recommendations, which were adopted this year, had relation
to the Ritual, and being of an esoteric character, were not committed to
writing. Four years later, William Smith published The Free-Mason's Pocket
Companion, first in London, and, shortly afterwards, in Dublin. In his Preface
he has this rather significant passage:
"I
need not say more in relation to the Book itself, but must here beg leave to
exhort the Brotherhood, that avoiding all Innovations they adhere strictly to
the antient Practices of the Order."
Was
this merely a warning, or did it refer to something, which was then happening,
or, perhaps, had happened, within the Craft? William Smith was certainly not
the spokesman of the Grand Lodge, because we are told by Grand Lodge minutes,
that, on Feb. 24, 1735, Dr. Anderson having "represented that one William
Smith said to be a Mason, had without his privity or Consent pyrated a
considerable part of the Constitution of Masonry aforesaid to the prejudice of
the said Br. Anderson it being his Sole Property," Grand Lodge resolved, "that
every Master and Warden present shall do all in their Power to discountenance
so unfair a Practice, and prevent the said Smith's Books being bought by any
Members of their respective Lodges." It may be mentioned that Dr. Anderson
brought out a Second Edition of the Book of Constitutions in 1738, and that
further editions of the work were published in 1756, 1767, and 1784.
THE "ANTIENT"
GRAND LODGE WAS FORMED
Between 1730 and 1740 we perceive indications of the beginning of what turned
out to be, perhaps, the most important event of the century, viz., the rise of
the Grand Lodge of the Antients. From Anderson's Constitutions, and the
records of Grand Lodge, we have evidence from which we may gather that, from
the first days of the Grand Lodge there were in existence lodges quite
independent of the new organization, and on that account considered irregular,
because they never would accept a constitution from their hands. Many reasons
would keep these lodges from joining the Grand Lodge, the influx of society
into Freemasonry, and the extension of the ceremonies being probably not the
least important.
As
time went on these old brethren, finding the breach widening, doubtless
continued their own independent lodges, and made their friends and relations
Masons in them. The references to irregular lodges, appearing in the Grand
Lodge minutes, may relate to lodges such as these. It is also apparent that
Irishmen --mostly of the artizan class--coming over to England during this
period, would find the atmosphere of these independent lodges far more
congenial than the more refined lodges, constituted by Grand Lodge, especially
if they found altered ceremonies being practiced in these latter lodges. It
only wanted some such circumstance as happened on Dec. 11, 1735, to
consolidate this position. On this date we learn, from Grand Lodge minutes,
that,
"Notice being given to the Grand Lodge that the Master and Wardens of a Lodge
from Ireland attended without, desiring to be admitted, by virtue of a
Deputation from the Lord Kingston present G. Master of Ireland. But it
appearing there was no particular Recommendation from his Lord'p in this
affair their Request could not be comply'd with, unless they would accept of a
new Constitution here."
At
this meeting, it is interesting to note, George Payne was acting as G. M. in
the absence of Lord Weymouth, while Dr. Anderson and Jacob Lamball were Grand
Wardens, pro tempore. There were also present the Masters and Wardens of
fifty-seven lodges, of which all but one met in London. Anderson was no lover
of Irish Masons; the Irish Grand Lodge had copied extensively from his
Constitutions in 1730, and William Smith--probably an Irish Mason--had also
pirated portions. Jacob Lamball was one of the old Masons who had, in 1717,
thrown in his lot with the Grand Lodge. Hence the Irishmen received little
consideration. The offer of an English Constitution does, I think, show that
the Irishmen were no mere visitors to London, but had come to stay. Given the
cold shoulder by their English brethren, it is at least probable that this
lodge became the center of union of Irish Masons coming to London.
In
course of time other independent lodges would naturally come into existence in
London with a strong Irish membership. In 1745 Ireland actually warranted a
lodge at Norwich but, beyond the names of the seven founders, nothing is known
concerning it. Thanks to the researches of Bro. Henry Sadler, we can now state
with confidence that it was from these independent lodges that the Grand Lodge
of Antients emerged.
The
beginnings of this Grand Lodge were small indeed. From their records it would
appear that in July, 1751, when the decision to form a Grand Lodge was
reached, there were not more than six lodges, with a total membership not
exceeding eighty to come under its authority. In February, 1752, Laurence
Dermott was appointed Grand Secretary, and to his enthusiasm and great
organizing capacity is mainly due the success of that body.
This
Grand Lodge gathered weight as the years rolled on. It was responsible for the
warrants of the majority of the Military Lodges, and, consequently, sent
Freemasonry into many different parts of the world. This Grand Lodge was in
fraternal communication with the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland. By the
skill and ability of its rulers it became, in course of time a power equal to
that of the premier Grand Lodge, and was thus enabled, when the opportune time
arose, to negotiate a union on equal, if not advantageous, terms.
During
the eighteenth century there were, in addition to the two Grand Lodges already
dealt with, three other Grand Lodges in England, viz., The Grand Lodge of All
England, with its headquarters at York; The Grand Lodge of All England South
of the River Trent, the effort of William Preston; and The Supreme Grand Lodge
of Scottish Masons in London, discovered by Bro. Sadler. None of these Grand
Lodges gave any great uneasiness to the premier Grand Lodge, nor did they in
any way affect the Masonic events of the period. They had all disappeared by
the end of the eighteenth century, and we may therefore pass them by.
ATTEMPTS WERE MADE TO INCORPORATE GRAND LODGE
We
must now return to the doings of the premier Grand Lodge. It was fully alive
to the growing power of the Grand Lodge of the Antients, and did its utmost to
organize and increase the power of its own Body. In October, 1768, the Duke of
Beaufort, G. M., formed a plan to have the Society incorporated. This appears
to have been a blow aimed at the rival body, and was so regarded by them. As
we shall see it miscarried as did most efforts in that direction.
In
1769, the Grand Lodge agreed to the project of its G. M. and, the proposed
Charter of Incorporation being drawn up, copies were circulated in favor of
incorporation, only forty three being opposed to it, amongst which were to be
numbered the Stewards, Royal, and Caledonian Lodges. The two former
memorialized Grand Lodge to discontinue its project, but the Caledonian Lodge
went further, and actually entered a caveat against it in the office of the
Attorney General. Only a public apology prevented this lodge from being erased
for this offense. Eventually, however, the minority won for in 1741, in
consequence of the vigorous opposition in Parliament, in which "Antient"
brethren participated, the consideration of the bill was postponed sine die
upon the motion of the D. G. M., the Hon. Charles Dillon.
GRAND
LODGE ACQUIRES A HOME
Contemporaneously with the attempted incorporation anotherand more successful
effort was launched. The desire for a public hall resulted in Grand Lodge
considering, in October 1768, "the most effectual means to raise a fund for
defraying the expenses of building a Hall." By the end of 1774 premises in
Great Queen Street were purchased, and the foundation stone of the new hall
was laid on May 1, 1775. On May 23, 1776, the hall being completed, it was
duly opened and dedicated in solemn form to Masonry, Virtue, Universal
Charity, and Benevolence. In 1788, it was resolved to pull down and rebuild
Freemason's Tavern, and as a consequence the Grand I.odge became heavily in
debt. Many methods were adopted to raise funds, and inducements were offered
to those who either gave to Grand Lodge, or forgave loans made to them. At the
end of the century a special annual fee of 2/per member, throughout the Craft,
was levied, and remained in force until 1810.
At the
December meeting in 1797 of the Grand Lodge of the Antients, a motion was
proposed unsuccessfully "that a Committee be appointed by the 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." The beginning of the nineteenth century saw
further, but unsuccessful, negotiations.
In
1804 an address to his Grace the Duke of Atholl, on the subject of a union
between the two rival bodies, was printed, but nothing came of it at that
time. Negotiations then languished, but were resumed in 1809. On April 12, of
that year, the premier Grand Lodge resolved that the necessity no longer
existing, the several lodges be enjoined "to revert to the ancient Land Marks
of the Society." The next important step was the issue of a warrant, dated
Oct. 26, 1809, by the Earl of Moira, Acting Grand Master, to the seven Grand
Officers of the year, and eight other brethren forming them into a
lodge-afterwards known as the Special Lodge of Promulgation--"for the purpose
of Promulgating the Ancient Land Marks of the Society, and instructing the
Craft in all such matters and forms as may be necessary to be known by them."
The warrant was only to continue in force until Dec. 31, 1810, a date
subsequently twice extended, and finally fixed at March 31, 1811.
This
lodge commenced its deliberations on Nov. 21, 1809. They held it to be their
duty "first to ascertain what were the Ancient Land Marks and the Ancient
practice, and then to communicate them to the Craft at large." All the forms
and ceremonies of the Three Degrees, and the Installation Ceremony, were
carefully gone through and approved; and it is clear that the outcome of their
deliberations was largely in favor of the so-called Antient Masons. Amongst
other things, the lodge resolved, on Oct. 18, 1810, that, "the Ceremony of the
Installation of Masters of Lodges is one of the two Landmarks of the Craft and
ought to be preserved." Bro. W. B. Hextall has pointed out that the word "two"
in the minutes must have been sheer blundering. Either the scribe added this
word to the original resolution, or wrote that word for the word "true." The
lodge also decided that, "Deacons (being proved on due investigation to be not
only Ancient but useful and necessary Officers) be recommended."
A
UNION IS CONSUMMATED
Concurrently with the deliberations of the Special Lodge of Promulgation, the
Grand Lodge of the Antients appointed, in December, 1809 a committee to
consider and adopt measures for accomplishing a Masonic Union. This committee
duly reported to its Grand Lodge and, in March, 1810, that Body resolved "that
a Masonic Union on principles equal and honorable to both Grand Lodges and
preserving inviolate the landmarks of the antient Craft would in the opinion
of this Grand Lodge be expedient and advantageous to both."
This
was forwarded to the premier Grand Lodge and, on April 10, 1810, they passed a
resolution, "that this Grand Lodge welcomes with unfeigned cordiality the
desire expressed by the Grand Lodge under his Grace the Duke of Atholl for a
Union." They also appointed the original members of the Special Lodge of
Promulgation to be a "Committee to negotiate the desirable arrangement." A
committee of the Grand Lodge of the Antients was also appointed to confer with
that committee, and the Articles of Union signed at Kensington Palace on Nov.
25, 1813, and duly ratified on the first of December following, was the
result. These articles provided (inter alia) for the union of the two Grand
Lodges, for the re-numbering of the lodges; the degrees to be recognized; that
Past Masters should become members of Grand Lodge; and that a Lodge of
Reconciliation should be warranted to deal with the forms and ceremonies to be
used.
The
Lodge of Reconciliation was to be formed by each Grand Master appointing "nine
worthy and expert Master Masons, or Past Masters, of their respective
Fraternities." The Grand Master of the premier Grand Lodge issued a warrant
for the nine brethren to form a lodge under the name of the Lodge of
Reconciliation. There was, apparently, no warrant issued by the Grand Lodge of
the Antients to their nine brethren, who were brought into being by special
dispensation. The first meeting, a joint one, took place on Dec. 10, 1813, and
further meetings were held by each body prior to the 27th. Their work
consisted in re-obligating brethren in preparation for the Union. The work of
the Lodge of Reconciliation subsequent to the Union lies outside the scope of
this article. The lodge continued in existence until 1816, and it well known
that their labors contributed, very largely, to developing the ritual into the
form we now use in our lodges in England today.
On
Dec. 27, 1813, both Grand Lodges met at Freemasons' Hall, Great Queen Street,
London. In this solemn Act of Union the members of the two Grand Lodges were
intermingled. so as to show the Union into one single society. The Grand
Master of both Grand Lodges were present, and on the proposition of H. R. H.
the Duke of Sussex was unanimously, and with great acclamation, elected Grand
Master of the
UNITED
GRAND LODGE OF ANCIENT FREEMASONS OF ENGLAND.
----o----
The
Constitutions of 1723
By W.
BRO. LIONEL VIBERT
P.M.
QUATUOR CORONATI LODGE, NO. 2076; EDITOR "MISCELLANEA LATOMORUM, England
It
was evident very early in the career of the first Grand Lodge that there would
have to be something in the nature of Regulations to deal with such matters as
the election of the Grand Master and the conduct of the Annual Grand Feast;
and it appears also to be the case that, as early as 1721, Grand Lodge
proposed to retain in its own hands the privilege of conferring the degree
known as the Master's Part, which was at that time the only degree practiced
beyond that of Acceptance, or Admission. It being the recognized custom, at
the time, that no one could be Master of a lodge who had not taken this
degree, that conferred the rank of both Fellow and Master, it is obvious that
this restriction operated to give Grand Lodge a large measure of control over
the mastership of the lodges. Further, in 1721, it became apparent that
another new departure was inevitable. The Four Old Lodges, that alone
constituted Grand Lodge, were quite insufficient to cope with the numbers that
now came into the Order, and some provision was clearly necessary to meet the
requirements of the new brethren. What seems to have happened is that Grand
Lodge formally took power to constitute new lodges, and ordered that all such
lodges, to be regular, must have themselves constituted in accordance with the
form prescribed by the central authority, the essential feature of which would
seem to have been that they were enrolled in a list maintained in London, and
their names were notified to all existing lodges. There is good reason to
believe that the rules on this subject were first promulgated by Grand Master
Payne, in 1721.
THIS
HISTORY OF MASONRY IS RE-WRITTEN
It was
in harmony with the spirit that animated the new body, that it now began to be
felt that the old documents of the Craft were no longer suited to the of
laws--the Old Charges--which had for a long time been in great measure
obsolete, and had accordingly been ignored by the Masons, whenever they had
occasion to frame regulations in their trade corporations. They had also
preserved an elaborate legendary history, that could no longer be seriously
maintained as a satisfactory account of the origin of the Craft. Accordingly
when the suggestion was made that the new authority should have a new history
written for it, it was readily adopted, and the offer of Mr. James Anderson-he
became Dr. Anderson at a later date-to write this history appears to have been
accepted by Grand Lodge in September, 1721.
The
period was unfortunate. The history of the Craft, as we now recognize, is
bound up with the development of Gothic architecture, and with the trade gild
system of mediaeval England. The first quarter of the eighteenth century was a
time when it was fashionable to despise the indigenous Gothic as barbarous,
and to exalt the Renascence art of Bramante and Palladio at its expense.
Anderson was not of that robust order of intellects that maintains opinions
running counter to those generally held, and accordingly his attitude was that
England, under the stuarts and Hanoverians, had at last returned to the right
way and the true Art of Masonry.
The
Traditional History traced Masonry, or Geometry, back to the children of
Lamech, and brought it down from them to David and Solomon; curious craftsmen
then disseminated the knowledge and brought it to France and England. In
France, Charles Martel was the patron and protector of the Masons; in England,
it was established by St. Alban first, and after by Athelstan and Edwin. No
attempt had as yet been made to fill in the gaps in this narrative, which
remained as it had been written some time early in the sixteenth century, that
text itself being a revision of a much earlier account. Anderson adopted an
entirely different scheme. He traced the art to Cain, who first built a city,
having been instructed in Geometry by Adam. Then, after Grand Master Noah, we
come to the Temple, which is described at great length, and from it all
civilized architecture is derived. He traces the progress of the science,
through Greece and Italy, to its culmination in Rome, in what he calls the
Glorious Augustan Style. In Britain, after the Romans, all knowledge of the
true art is lost, for Gothic is merely a barbarous substitute for it, and it
is reserved for the House of stuart to restore the knowledge of it, which was
done when James I introduced Renascence architecture into this country.
Subsequent monarchs have encouraged the art by their bright example, in
building Hampton Court, and so on, until the days of his Majesty King George,
who laid the foundation of the church of St. Martin's in the existing
conditions. They had furnished it with a code Fields.
In
constructing this account of the Craft Anderson relied, almost exclusively, on
his general knowledge, and made very little use even of such documents
relating to the Masons themselves as were available at the time. Still less
did he make any sort of independent inquiry. He was content to link up his
Hanoverian Grand Lodge with Scotland and Rome, and to treat everything that
was not due to one or the other of these influences as merely English
barbarism.
OTHER
MATTER IS ADDED
This
history was completed during the mastership of Montagu, to whom the concluding
paragraph refers; and the Dedication suggests that it was read by Montagu and
approved by him. But it was not at once printed. The Craft had its traditional
Rules, the Old Charges, and the new Grand Lodge had its own Regulations,
introduced by Payne in 1721, and apparently it was decided that these should
be embodied in the work as published, the task of preparing them for
publication being also entrusted to Anderson, who possibly had for this part
of his labors the assistance of brethren specially conversant with the facts.
Current opinion, as we see from various allusions in contemporary literature,
associated Desaguliers in particular, not only with this part of the work, but
also with the History, it being suggested (somewhat uncharitably perhaps) that
a note therein which indicates a knowledge of Hebrew could not have been
written by Anderson without assistance. In any case, Anderson proceeded to
embody in his work a set of Charges, thirty-nine Regulations, the Manner of
Constituting a New Lodge, and a selection of poems and songs.
The
Charges were six in number, and were in fact a complete restatement of
precepts to be found in the old texts, with some added material. They have
been preserved to our own day with certain verbal modifications. The
Regulations, as Anderson has himself stated in the heading to them, were a
restatement of Payne's original rules, and it is not possible to disentangle
the new from the old in them; but it is obvious that they contain a great deal
that was never put forward by Payne. Indeed, they are not even a statement of
the law as it stood at the time, but are rather a draft of what Anderson
considered it should be; for instance, they provide for a Treasurer, but this
officer was not appointed for many years. They make elaborate provisions as to
the election of the Grand Master, which never were the law, and they enact
provisions with regard to the Annual Feast, which were independently
promulgated some years later, the fact that Anderson had included them in his
Regulations being ignored.
Such
then was the First Book of Constitutions: a History, written in the taste of
the time; a set of six so-called Ancient Charges, which were in fact a modern
arrangement based on passages in the old texts; a code of Regulations
corresponding to nothing that existed in practice; directions for the ceremony
of constituting a new lodge, which were probably official and genuine; and a
set of songs and poems of which one, the Enter'd Apprentice Song, has alone
survived. The work was Anderson's private property, although it took rank as
an official publication with the general public. From this book has come down
the whole series of Constitutions, Ahiman Rezons, or whatever they may be
styled, that have been issued by Grand Lodges all over the world, but the
original model has of necessity been much varied in the course of time. The
developments beyond the United Kingdom lie outside the scope of this article.
ITS
VALUE AS CONTEMPORARY EVIDENCE
As a
contemporary document the Constitutions of 1723 afford us a certain amount of
information as to the condition of affairs in the Craft at this period, but
not so much as we would like; far from it. In this respect the most important
contribution is a list of lodges, distinguished by numbers merely, which is
appended to what is called the Approbation. The work was submitted for the
approval of Grand Lodge, in manuscript, in December, or late in November,
1722, and was then ordered to be printed; and a formal and very long
Approbation was drawn up, possibly by Anderson himself, which was signed by
the Masters and Wardens of twenty lodges--in two cases the signature of the
Master has not been obtained. This is a valuable list of names. A year later,
in November, 1723, the Grand Secretary compiled a list of lodges with names of
their members in many cases, which is still on record in the first Minute Book
of Grand Lodge.
From
this and other sources, it appears that in December, 1722, there were at least
twenty-three lodges in existence, so that three were not represented at the
meeting of Grand Lodge at which the Approbation was signed. But no conclusion
can be drawn from this circumstance. At the same time, from the actual minutes
it is apparent that, when the brethren had had time to study Anderson's
Charges and Regulations, many of them were very far from approving the way in
which he had carried out the work entrusted to him. The publication being,
however, a private venture, the most they could do was to prevent any
resolution being recorded approving of his version of the Regulations, or
confirming it; and this was what actually happened at the next meeting of
Grand Lodge after the publication, when a resolution to that effect had to be
withdrawn, and one was submitted that it was in the power of no person to make
any innovation in the Body of Masonry without the consent of the Annual
Meeting of Grand Lodge. Anderson seems to have realized that he had not earned
the esteem of the brethren, for he did not appear again in Grand Lodge for
some seven years.
The
work also enables us to reconstruct the actual history of the events of 1722,
as to which Anderson in his second edition in 1738 put forward a very
inaccurate story. The Grand Master from June, 1722, to June, 1723, was Philip,
Duke of Wharton, a nobleman of a most unstable and eccentric disposition, who
quitted England in 1725, a discredited Jacobite, and after wandering about the
continent died in a Spanish monastery in the utmost indigence and misery in
May, 1731. In 1723 he had had a serious difference with the Grand Lodge, which
refused to allow itself to be turned into a Jacobite political organization
for his benefit, and he revenged himself by founding a rival society, styled
the Gormogons, which professed to impart the secret wisdom of the Chinese, and
assured all concerned that the Freemasons were a set of charlatans and
humbugs. The Society collapsed as soon as his influence had been withdrawn.
Accordingly, while in 1723 during his Grand-Mastership his name was given due
prominence in the Constitutions, the position of affairs was very different in
1738. Anderson now alleged that Wharton, instead of succeeding to the office
in the regular course in June, 1722, had got himself irregularly elected by a
small clique, and was only allowed to hold office at all through the
generosity of Montagu, who in January, 1723, recognized his authority, and
permitted him to complete his year of office with his own Deputy and Wardens.
That Wharton had been Grand Master could not well be denied, but it was now
made to appear that he seized the office by fraud, and only held it by
Montagu's good will. The whole story is a fabrication; the Constitutions of
1723 show conclusively that Wharton was Grand Master in his own right, with
the approval of at least twenty lodges out of twenty-three in December, 1722,
and was then busy constituting new lodges, and the contemporary references in
the newspapers show that he was not merely elected in June, 1722, but was
chosen by a unanimous vote.
MAKING
MASTERS IN GRAND LODGE BECOMES OBSOLETE
We
learn, from the official Minutes, that the direction of Grand Lodge, which
appears in the Regulations, that the superior Degree, the Master's Part, was
only to be conferred in Grand Lodge, was abrogated in November, 1725. It is
obvious that as soon as there were lodges all over England--and the Craft had
begun to spread to the country in the previous year--this restriction was
unworkable. It is most probable that the restriction was in fact never
observed. It would almost appear as though Payne, at the same time that he
regularized the formation of new lodges in 1721, thought it wise to institute
this check on their activities; but that the old lodges were not willing to
allow what had been their time immemorial privilege to be thus taken from
them, and that the Regulation was in fact a dead letter. This may indeed be
the explanation of the introduction of the intermediate degree of the
Fellowcraft, which was arrived at, not by interfering with the Master's Part,
but by splitting up the Acceptance. By this means a Brother became a Fellow,
and so technically eligible to be the Master of a lodge; and Grand Lodge's
position being thus turned as it were, the abrogation of the Regulation was
bound to follow sooner or later. The custom which makes it necessary that the
Master should have taken the Third Degree is a development of later date.
There
are very few hints of Ritual in the book. We have a prescribed form of words
for the ceremony of constituting a new lodge; we have the definite statement
that there were only two degrees, the Admission, and the Master's Part, which
conferred the rank of Fellow and Master; and we have a long note in the
History on the name Hiram Abif. This indicates that the name itself was not
regarded as secret--although it does appear that it had been so considered in
earlier times--and also shows, as we should expect, that it had a particular
significance for the Craft. It was also a name which, outside the Craft, would
at this time be unknown to the general public, as it had disappeared from our
Bibles by 1550, or so. Accordingly, it was presumably because it had been
preserved in the lodges themselves, without its exact meaning being
understood, that a note was now deemed appropriate. It cannot be said that
there is anywhere in the work a specific reference to any other degree,
although there are several hints of mystery introduced, and at the end there
occurs the phrase "the whole body resembles a well-built Arch."
In the
same way as the original restrictions as to conferring the higher degree had
to go by the board, so the form of constituting a new lodge had to be modified
when lodges had come into existence far away from the metropolis. Originally,
the ceremony was to be conducted by the Grand Master or his Deputy in person;
later the duty was delegated to a deputy appointed ad hoc, in the locality;
and eventually the formalities were exchanged for the issue of a written
certificate--the Warrant of today--the ceremony being carried out by the
Provincial authorities. The Provincial system, which is peculiar to this
country, is in its development closely connected with the constituting of new
lodges.
In
1738 Anderson brought out his second edition. In this he re-wrote the History
in such a fashion that Gould was driven to suggest that he was either failing
in his wits, or deliberately hoaxing the Grand Lodge. But it was an uncritical
age, and this extraordinary account of our origin and early history, was
solemnly reprinted for a century and more by Preston, Oliver and others, and
is not without its admirers today. It ceased to appear as part of the
Constitutions after the Union. In 1738 Anderson also re-issued his original
Regulations, but he added to them a confused jumble of alleged amendments and
explanations, which made the whole thing unintelligible. In the next edition,
that of 1756, the Regulations were entirely recast. They were again revised in
1815 and still again in 1882, when they took the form they have today,
although since then various small amendments have been made. Throughout all
these changes a certain amount of Anderson's wording has persisted, and can
still be traced, in the earlier Regulations of our modern official
Constitutions. The Six Charges stand today very nearly as he wrote them in
1723.
The
influence of this work on the Craft ever since its original publication, just
over two hundred years ago, is difficult to estimate; but with all its faults
it must always be one of the most important possessions of Freemasons.
----o----
Royalty and Their Patronage of the Craft
By W.
BRO. J. WALTER HOBBS, P.M., L.R., P. Z., ETC.
LITERARY EDITOR "MASONIC RECORD," England
Great
Kings, Dukes and Lords,
Have
laid by their Swords,
Our
myst'ry to put a good grace on;
And
ne'er been ashamed
To
hear themselves nam'd
With a
Free and an Accepted Mason.
THUS
sang the late Bro. Matthew Birkhead in 1722 in a song which is still heard
among the English Craft in many places, at the toast of the health of an
initiate. Bro. Birkhead sang of a time when the association of Royalty with
the English Craft was but a tradition, or perchance something less, for his
knowledge of the past history of the old Craft could not have been great even
if derived from some old brother or from a copy of the Old Charges. The
magician's wand of fanciful history it is true was being waved around by that
master of the imaginative art, Dr. Anderson, but whether Bro. Birkhead (who is
named in the 1723 Constitutions as Master of a lodge, and in the heading to
the song as "our deceas'd Brother") knew of Anderson's work and realized the
extent to which that brother had unwarrantably called in the great ones of the
earth as Grand Masters or not it would not much matter. It was still tradition
as I have said, and in cases the facts do not justify the assertions even on
the ground of probability.
The
Old Charges as we know them refer, it is true, to royal personages as
supporters of the Craft, as having loved Masons well, given them a Charge, and
called Assemblies. The historical value of these statements is mostly nil, the
traditional value very little more. Some support can be obtained by inference
for statements here and there but the Masonic historian who treats the subject
as definitely proved, has a good deal to learn.
Where
then shall I begin? Excursions in the realm of imagination are barred and if
they were not I should not travel that way. To lose oneself in a maze of
Continental Masonic degrees and their royal patrons would be valueless because
this article is written for the purposes of a British number in order to
afford readers of THE BUILDER sufficiently interesting and conclusively proved
material in regard to the members of the royal ruling houses in England
subsequent to the origination of the Mother Grand Lodge of the World in 1717.
The ideas of the founders of this organization may not be clearly understood
now, for the period of the early growth and limited operations of the
reorganized Craft is one still calling for much patient research and care. It
can, however, be accepted that although there is nothing to show that Payne,
Desaguliers and Anderson had anything to do with the origination of Grand
Lodge--yet it was hoped by some one to get a nobleman to become Grand Master.
This eventuated in 1721 with the installation of John, Duke of Montagu, since
which time noblemen, or Princes of the Blood Royal, have continuously
succeeded to that high office or have been members of the Craft.
We
shall then proceed to enumerate the Royal Patrons of the Craft, meaning
thereby the Blue, or Symbolic, Masonry.
1.
H.R.H. FREDERICK PRINCE OF WALES, 1737
The
Grand Lodge of England had enjoyed the presence of noble Grand Masters for
nearly twenty years before any scion of the reigning family became a member of
the Craft. The first to do so was Frederick Lewis, Prince of Wales, the eldest
son of H. M. King George II. The record of his initiation and of his
proceeding to the subsequent degrees is contained in Anderson's Constitutions
of 1738. The initiation took place on Nov. 5, 1737, at an occasional lodge
held in the Palace at Kew, near Richmond, Surrey. The Master of this lodge was
the Rev. Dr. J. T. Desaguliers, a Past Grand Master, with other brethren
present, including the Rt. Hon. Charles Calvert, Sixth Baron Baltimore.
Anderson goes on to say, the lodge being formed and held, H. R. H. "was in the
usual manner introduced and made an Enter'd Prentice and Fellow Craft." He
continues that "our said Royal Brother was made a Master Mason by the same
Lodge that assembled there for that purpose." Whether this was at the same
time, so that our Royal Brother was Initiated, Passed and Raised on the same
day may be open to doubt, but the practice of the two first degrees being
conferred on the same occasion was not unusual, without regard to the rank of
the candidate. That the "usual manner" is mentioned bears this out, and
further indicates as incorrect what is sometimes assumed to be the case with
royal brethren, that the usual formalities and procedure are not adopted but
waived in their favor. That the Prince took more than a superficial interest
in the Craft is clear for the 1738 Book of Constitutions was dedicated to him
(and he is there described as a Master Mason and Master of a Lodge) and
actually presented to him by Anderson in 1739 at a private audience on the
introduction of the Marquis of Carnavon, the then Grand Master, who was in the
minutes of Grand Lodge, April 6, 1738, described as a "Gentleman of the
Bedchamber to our Brother His Royal Highness, Frederick, Prince of Wales." Our
royal brother died in 1751 and his activity in the Craft is not further known,
but that the Craft was not regarded with disfavor by his family is clear, for
no less than three of his sons, viz., the Dukes of York, Gloucester and
Cumberland became members of it, the latter becoming Grand Master in 1782, as
will be seen later. The eldest son of this Prince became King George III, but
he was not a member of the Craft.
2.
H.R.H. WILLIAM AUGUSTUS DUKE OF CUMBERLAND, 1743
He was
brother of Frederick, Prince of Wales, being the second son of King George II.
He is said in Multa Paucis to have been initiated in 1743 in Belgium, but
although Gould refers to this there is but little to support the statement.
The Duke was a notable soldier and commanded the English troops in the Low
Countries at the battle of Fontenoy in 1745. Of his other military exploits
nothing need be said here.
3.
H.R.H. EDWARD AUGUSTUS DUKE OF YORK, 1765
This
Prince was son of the above named Prince of Wales and brother to King George
III. He was initiated at Berlin on July 27, 1765, in a French speaking lodge
there, which, after the Duke's admission adopted the name of the "Royal York
Lodge of Friendship," and obtained a warrant from the Grand Lodge of England
under which it worked, and to which Constitution it remained subject, until
its cessation many years afterwards. The Duke was patron of the lodge. The
Duke of York was present in the following year when his brother the Duke of
Gloucester was initiated in the New Lodge at the Horn, Westminster, No. 313,
of which lodge he himself became an honorary member. He was appointed Past
Grand Master, as became customary until the present generation.
4.
H.R.H. WILLIAM HENRY DUKE OF GLOUCESTER, 1766
He was
brother to the Duke of York (No. 3) and the Duke of Cumberland (No. 5) and to
King George II. He was initiated on Feb. 16, 1766, at an occasional lodge held
at the Horn Tavern, Westminster, being the New Lodge, No. 313 (as
distinguished from the Old Lodge also held there). The then Grand Master, Lord
Blayney, was in the chair as Master and the Duke proceeded to all three
degrees on that occasion. Report being made (as in all cases of Royal Masons)
of the admission of the Prince into the Craft to Grand Lodge, he was appointed
a Past Grand Master in 1767. He became an honorary member of the New Lodge,
which was afterwards called the Royal Lodge, and attended some of its
meetings.
5.
H.R.H. HENRY FREDERICK DUKE OF CUMBERLAND, 1767; G.M., 1782-90
This
Prince was also brother to the last two named, and the third of the sons of
the first royal Freemason (No. 1). The Duke was initiated on Feb. 9, 1767, at
an occasional (or emergency) lodge at the Thatched House Tavern, St. James's,
the home of the Royal Lodge, No. 313, already mentioned, and was passed and
raised on the same occasion. Upon the usual report to Grand Lodge he was
appointed Past Grand Master. The activities of the Duke of Cumberland were
very considerable, for in 1782 he was elected Grand Master of the Craft. It
may be noted that this is the date given in the official Year Book issued by
Grand Lodge, but Gould in his History gives 1783, the point is however not of
importance as election and installation may explain the difference. He filled
this office until his death in 1790. It was with his support and patronage
that the great Institution for Girls, as it is today, was founded; and as
indicating the Grand Master's interest it may be noted that it was then called
the Royal Cumberland Freemasons' School, and the Duchess took a personal
interest in the management and in the scholars. It is a provision of the
English Constitution that where the Grand Master is a Prince of the Blood
Royal there should be an Acting Grand Master--who must be a Peer of the Realm
(now called Pro Grand Master), and in the present instance the Earl of
Effingham so acted from 1782 to 1789, when he died.
6.
H.R.H. WILLIAM HENRY DUKE OF CLARENCE, 1786 (AFTERWARDS, KING WILLIAM IV)
This
Prince was third son of King George III and the first of six of them who
became Freemasons. He was initiated on March 9, 1786, in the Prince George
Lodge, No. 86, meeting at Plymouth. The Duke followed the naval profession and
was ultimately Lord High Admiral so that his initiation in a naval port may be
regarded as a professional act. His reception into the Craft was not announced
to Grand Lodge until the following year and until after that of his eldest
brother, George, Prince of Wales (No. 7). This Duke was, as customarily,
appointed Past Grand Master. He was installed as Master of the Prince of
Wales' Lodge on Feb. 22, 1822, and so remained until 1830. This lodge was
formed in honor of the Prince of Wales as noted under (No. 7). In 1830 the
Duke succeeded to the throne on the death of his brother, King George IV, and
so became Patron of the Craft. The active interest in the Craft of necessity
ceases in the case of monarchs.
7.
H.R.H. GEORGE PRINCE OF WALES, 1787; G.M., 1790-1813 (AFTERWARDS KING GEORGE
IV)
He was
the eldest son of King George III and was initiated at a Special Lodge held
for the purpose on Feb. 6, 1787, at the Star and Garter, Pall Mall. The news
was communicated to Grand Lodge the next day by the Grand Master, the Duke of
Cumberland (No. 5), and a resolution of appreciation of the honor conferred on
the Society by the Prince's initiation was passed and the Prince was appointed
a place in Grand Lodge next to and on the right of the Grand Master. On the
death of the Duke of Cumberland in 1790 he was elected Grand Master and was
installed as such in 1792. The Prince of Wales' Lodge was founded in his honor
in 1787 (now No. 259), of which the Prince was Master from 1787 to 1820, the
year in which he succeeded to the throne. Prior to this he was, owing to his
father's ill-health, Prince Regent from 1811 to 1820, and in the year 1813
resigned as Grand Master but remained as Patron of the Craft. He was also
Grand Master and Grand Patron of the Grand Lodge of Scotland.
8.
H.R.H. FREDERICK DUKE OF YORK, 1787
He was
second son of George III and was the third of the sons who became a member of
the Craft. He was initiated in the Britannic Lodge, No. 29, on Nov. 21, 1787,
and appointed a Past Grand Master. The Duke is known to have attended various
Masonic functions and Grand Lodge. He was Master of the Prince of Wales'
Lodge, 1823 to 1827. He died in the latter year.
9.
H.R.H. EDWARD DUKE OF KENT, 1790
He
was the fourth son of George III and the fourth of such sons to be received
into the Craft. He was initiated in the Union Lodge of Geneva on some date not
discovered, but the fact of the Duke's initiation was announced in Grand Lodge
on Feb. 10, 1790. He was appointed a Past Grand Master of Grand Lodge and
later was District Grand Master for "Gibraltar and the Province of Andalusia
in Old Spain" from 1790 to 1801. It is here needful to specify that this was
the Grand Lodge of 1717 (Moderns), for this Royal Brother was one to whom the
Craft was indebted for facilitating the Union of the Grand Lodges. His
influence no doubt largely predominated with the Ancients for on the
resignation of their Grand Master, John, fourth Duke of Atholl, this Royal
Prince was admitted an Ancient Mason and elected as such in his place for the
purpose of giving effect to the Union, as appears in the records thereof and
Hughan's Memorials of the Union. (It may be mentioned here that many
descendants of this Prince, through his only child, Princess, afterwards Queen
victoria of revered memory, became members of the Craft.)
10.
H.R.H. PRINCE WILLIAM DUKE OF GLOUCESTER, 1795
This
Prince was a son of H.R.H. Prince William Henry, Duke of Gloucester (No. 4
above), and nephew of King George III, one of whose daughters he married. He
was initiated in the Britannic Lodge, No. 29, on May 12, 1795, and being a
Prince of the Blood Royal was accorded the privilege of a Past Grand Master.
He took part in Masonic functions--attended the Grand Festival, and so on. In
the case of several of these royal personages one must always remember that
they were necessarily over-shadowed by the Prince of Wales, the virtual head
of the family, being also at the head of the Craft, so that their activities
were restricted or the record of them not so elaborate.
11.
H.R.H. ERNEST AUGUSTUS DUKE OF CUMBERLAND, 1796 (AFTERWARDS KING OF HANOVER)
This
Prince was the fifth son of King George III and also the fifth of the family
to become a Freemason. He was initiated on May 11, 1796, in the house of that
great Freemason, the Earl of Moira (afterwards Marquis of Hastings) who was
then Acting Grand Master having been appointed as such in the place of the
Earl of Effingham who died in 1789. He, too, was appointed a Past Grand
Master. He succeeded as King of Hanover owing to that title being relinquished
by his elder brothers and not passing by reason of the Salic Law to Queen
victoria.
12.
H.R.H. AUGUSTUS FREDERICK DUKE OF SUSSEX, 1798; DEP. G.M., 1812; G.M.,
1813-1843
He was
the sixth son of King George III and the last of the six brothers who were
members of the Craft, and was no doubt the most active Grand Master the Craft
had ever seen.
He was
initiated in the Royal York Lodge of Friendship in Berlin in the year 1798 (a
reference to this lodge will be found under the name (No. 3) Edward Augustus
Duke of York 1765). He was appointed a Past Grand Master in 1805. On Feb. 12,
1812, he was appointed as Deputy G. M., and in 1813 he was elected Grand
Master in the place of the Prince of Wales, who had been Prince Regent from
1811 but now resigned. This office of Grand Master the Duke of Sussex held at
the Union and was G. M. of the United Grand Lodge until 1843. He was Master of
the Prince of Wales' Lodge from 1831 to 1843, the year of his death.
It
would be a long story to tell of all the Duke of Sussex did as Grand Master
and the effect of his actions. Some may not bear the construction now put upon
them; some may be too lightly regarded now; but at any rate he filled a
difficult position, for after having had a share in the Union of the Grand
Lodge he had to rule over the new organization and deal with a period of
transition, the difficulties of which the Masonic historian has not yet fully
dealt with. One can see in Freemasons' Hall, London, the statue of the Duke
placed there by the Craft in 1846 as a token of their esteem and in the
Library can be seen the magnificent piece of plate presented to the Duke in
1838 on completing his twenty-fifth year of office as Grand Master. He died on
April 21, 1843, and there being then no Royal Prince a Freemason, the Earl of
Zetland was elected G. M.
Conclusion
It is
beyond the scope of this article to tell of the Masonic doings of those Royal
Freemasons who have been initiated into the Craft since the Union of 1813. It
may, however, be permissible to say that there are at present four members of
the Royal Family within the ranks of Freemasonry. The manifold and great
services of our revered Grand Master, H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught, are too
well known to need repetition. The other Royal Freemasons, viz., H.R.H. the
Prince of Wales, H.R.H. the Duke of York, and H.R.H. Prince Arthur of
Connaught, have all recently been selected by the Grand Master to rule over
Masonic Provinces in England, and, from personal knowledge, I should like to
add that these royal appointments to Provincial Grand Masterships are no mere
titular honors, honorific though they be, but they entail a good deal of
actual work. The three last named royal brethren are deeply imbued with the
dignity and high importance of the Craft, and are active in their duties, and
in their practice of Masonry and its ceremonial, and, in words of old time
commendation, they are "worthy Masons all."
While
in the English Constitution the association of females as members of the Craft
has never been permitted or allowed, yet the patronage of exalted ladies, and
indeed of ladies of every rank, to the great Masonic Charities has always been
welcome. Notable examples of this may be found in the patronage to the Girls'
School of the Duchess of Cumberland and of Queen Adelaide (wife of King
William IV), besides Queen Victoria, Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary in more
recent years. Also this reference to royal ladies would not be complete
without mention of Princess Mary, daughter of King George III, who married a
Freemason (see No. 10 above), as also did Princess Mary, daughter of King
George V, within the last few years.
Neither time nor space permit of a reference to the Capitular and other
degrees to which our royal brethren have extended their patronage.
And a
final word, as an historian and student of the progress of the Craft, as well
as a personal observer of persons, actions and doings in the Craft of today, I
am persuaded that the advantage to the Craft Universal of the membership of
the royal brethren to whom I have referred and of those who have joined the
brotherhood since the Union of 1813, is great and permanent, and has always
tended to enhance the dignity and prestige of the Craft, and the importance
and value of its imperishable principles and tenets.
----o----
“Adhuc
Stat" - A Sketch of the History of the Grand Lodge of Ireland
By
BRO. JOHN HERON LEPPER, W.M., Quatuor Coronati Lodge, No. 2076, England
THE
eastern seaports of Ireland having been constantly affected by English
influence from the year 1173, when Henry II granted the City of Dublin to the
subjects of his City of Bristol to inhabit, it is not surprising to discover
traces of phenomena identical with those that preceded the establishment
Freemasonry as a social institution in England, also appearing in the smaller
island. Thus we find the Gilds of Dublin as late as 1541 indulging in annual
Corpus Christi plays (Note 1), the term "Freemason" occurring on monuments at
the beginning of the seventeenth century, the Masonic Ritual a subject for the
mirth of the uninitiated by 1688 (Note 2), and, apparently, Speculative lodges
established in country districts, remote from any town, prior to the accession
of George I (Note 3).
When,
therefore, the Freemasons of London and Westminster decided, in 1717, to form
a central body to regulate their general interests, much as the Independent
States of America evolved their Federation in 1788, it might be expected that
the idea would cross the sea and be copied by the Freemasons of Ireland: and
so it happened.
GENESIS OF THE IRISH GRAND LODGE
It is
impossible to say, in default of early official MS. records, the exact date at
which a Grand Lodge was first established in Dublin. That such a body was in
existence in 1725 is certain, thanks to a long and curious account given in a
Dublin newspaper (Note 4). From this we learn that about one hundred brethren
belonging to the six lodges of "Gentlemen Freemasons who are under the
Jurisdiction of the Grand Master" assembled at 11 a.m. on June 24, at the
Yellow Lion in Werburgh Street, and proceeded in coaches to the King's Inns
(Note 5), wearing "Aprons, White Gloves, and other parts of the Distinguishing
Dress of that Worshipful Order."
After
a procession round the great hall of the Inns "with many important
ceremonies," the Grand Lodge "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 discovered to a Private Brother; they proceeded
to the Election of a new Grand Master &c." The election resulted in the Earl
of Rosse being declared G.M., Sir Thomas Prendergast and Mark Morgan, Esq.,
Grand Wardens, and the G. M. was pleased to appoint Humphrey Butler, Esq., his
Deputy. The G.M. was then conducted to his place, and invested with the jewel
of his office, a gold trowel hung on a black ribbon; after the brethren all
dined together sumptuously, and later attended a play in full Masonic costume
(Note 6).
This
is the earliest account we have of the meeting Grand Lodge in Dublin, and
though apparently it had then been in existence for some time, it cannot have
contemplated any authority over lodges remote from the metropolis, because, in
the following year, a similar body was established in Cork City, and assumed
the style of the Grand Lodge of Munster, having as its Grand Master, the Hon.
James O'Brien, and as Deputy G. M., Springett Penn. Both these Masons were
members of English lodges (Note 7).
But a
more famous Irish Freemason of the day, who also had received his degrees in
an English lodge, was James, fourth Lord Kingston. In 1728 he had been elected
and served as G. M. of England; and, in 1730 (Note 8), became G.M. of Ireland;
and in August, 1731, G.M. of Munster. His tenure of the dual office in Ireland
apparently led to the fusion of the two Grand Lodges into one that since that
date has been truly national (Note 9).
Lord
Kingston's tenancy of these three chairs in Masonry is important, as showing
that at this date the Ritual innovations, that afterwards led to estrangement
between the Masonic jurisdictions of England and Ireland, cannot yet have come
into being. His tenures of office should also serve to remind Irish Masons
that while the existent Irish Rite is probably the most unaltered version
extant of early eighteenth century Masonic Ritual, yet its well-head was no
other than the primitive English Rite, as practiced before 1730, possibly with
a few additions of Anglo-Irish phrases or ceremonies--distinctions without any
real difference.
THE
FIRST WARRANTS
At
some time during 1731, the Grand Lodge of Ireland determined to bind closer to
the central authority all the lodges in Ireland that would acknowledge its
supremacy, by issuing to them a document that should be the warrant for their
Masonic proceedings; and accordingly on Feb. 7, 1732 (N.S.), the first of
these authorizations to hold a lodge and make Masons were issued. This was a
purely Irish invention that was copied later by the Grand Lodge of the
Antients in England, and later still by the Grand Lodge of the Moderns, the
title willingly assumed in the eighteenth century by the Mother of all Grand
Lodges. It is by no means certain that every existing lodge in Ireland applied
at once for one of these new warrants (Note 10). In fact, the evidence tends
to show that a good many, particularly in remote parts of the country, were
content to go on working in the "time immemorial" manner; but these
recalcitrants were not treated as regular Masons by those who adhered to the
Grand Lodge, and in time they died out (Note 11).
The
effect produced by the issue of these warrants was universal, not merely
local. It was some time before the law crystallized that a warrant should be
anchored to one place, and at first the idea prevailed that any band of Masons
possessing one of these charters was legally entitled to make initiates
wherever it took the warrant. This procedure was checked by a new law made
June 24, 1741 (Note 12), but in the beginning the Grand Lodge seems tacitly to
have assented to the practice, particularly as it had issued warrants as early
as 1732 to military lodges, enabling them to hold regular meetings all over
the inhabitable globe. The great spread of Masonry in the American Colonies is
attributable in a great part, no doubt, to this practice. But the influence of
the Grand Lodge of Ireland on America did not end with this: the fact that the
native American lodges would naturally be impressed by the working they
observed under the ambulatory Irish warrants, during a period when the only
ambulatory warrants were Irish, led them to mistrust those alterations in the
Ritual that the Grand Lodge of the Moderns saw fit to adopt for well nigh
eighty years. The enormous emigration from Ireland to America during the
eighteenth century also helped to cement the Masonic ties between the two
countries; indeed, it is quite likely that some of the earliest Irish warrants
whose original bailiwicks and ultimate resting places are unknown may have
helped to lay the foundations of those great Masonic Constitutions whose
extent and vitality seem so marvelous to us today.
THE
STRENGTH OF THE IRISH JURISDICTION
If we
are to measure the growth of the Grand Lodge of Ireland during the eighteenth
century by the number of warrants it issued, we find that it increased from 36
lodges in 1734 to 195 in June, 1749; by 1758 the number had risen to 300; by
the end of 1782 it was 610; and in 1804, when Downes' famous list was
published, the Grand Lodge of Ireland had well over 700 lodges on its roll.
But at none of these periods could those numbers be taken au pied de la lettre,
for there were always some lodges either moribund or dormant, as an analysis
of the lists would show, did space permit. During the nineteenth century the
number of lodges varied, the high water mark being reached in 1815 when 1020
subordinate lodges were in official existence. The number at present working
approaches 600.
The
members of the Grand Lodge at its formation consisted of the Grand Master; his
Deputy, whom he nominated; the Grand Wardens, elected by Grand Lodge; all Past
Grand Officers; and all Masters and Wardens of subordinate lodges. In 1749 the
Grand Master's Lodge was formed, and all Master Masons raised therein were
given the privilege of sitting and voting in Grand Lodge. This privilege
continued down to 1837, when it was rescinded and extended instead to all
properly certificated Past Masters. The number of the Grand Officers has been
increased from time to time, and at present includes the representatives of
all foreign Grand Lodges with whom fraternal communication exists, an
excellent tribute paid to the universality of the Craft, and a constant
reminder that our Masonic duties and interests are not bounded by the limits
of any one particular Constitution.
HISTORIC DATES
Space
does not permit the inclusion of much detail about such important matters as
the development of the Irish Masonic charitable organizations and the
evolution of Masonic jurisprudence. But both must be mentioned. In regard to
the former, it will be enough to say that the first successful attempt to deal
on an adequate scale by the children of deceased brethren dates from 1792. In
that year the liberality and energy of some members of Royal Arch Lodge, No.
190, Dublin (1749-1815), launched the Masonic Female Orphan School, whose
record since then has been one of increasing success and blessing. It has been
followed by the Masonic Orphan Boys' School (1867), and by such splendidly
administered pieces of provincial emulation as the Belfast Masonic Charity and
Widows' Funds, and the Down Masonic Widows' Fund.
In the
matter of the evolution of Masonic jurisprudence, the most interesting
development took place as early as 1768, when the Grand Lodge created an
Inspection Committee to decide upon the eligibility of candidates for
Freemasonry in the metropolitan district. Since that year no man has been
initiated in a Dublin lodge till his name has been approved by the Grand Lodge
Committee, and the same provision has since been adopted in other important
Masonic provinces in Ireland. This is, of course, not an infallible method of
securing the admission of none but worthy men, but it does tend to exclude
undesirable members and is yet another way in which the Grand Lodge of Ireland
has set a good example.
Other
minutiae of changes that have accumulated during almost, perhaps quite, two
centuries of government, while they would loom largely in a complete history,
must be discarded in a short sketch; but mention should be made that since
1829 the Royal Arch Degree has had a central governing body of its own, known
as the Grand Royal Arch Chapter of Ireland; since 1836 the Knights Templar
have been ruled by a supreme body now known as the Grand Preceptory; and since
1826 the Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite has
exercised jurisdiction over all degrees in its system superior to the Craft
degrees. Prior to these respective dates those Orders, and many other Masonic
degrees as well, were conferred in the Craft lodges at the convenience and
free will of the members.
THE
ULSTER SCHISM
During
its long life the authority of the Grand Lodge of Ireland has only once been
seriously threatened by internal schism (Note 13). This took place in the
period 1806-1813, when a number of Ulster lodges, deceived by the
misrepresentations of Alexander Seton, a former Deputy Grand Secretary, who
had been dismissed from his office for misconduct, attempted to secede and
form a Grand Lodge for the province of Ulster (Note 14).
It was
due entirely to the tact and disinterested efforts of the reigning Grand
Master, Richard, second Earl of Donoughmore, that the better class Masons who
supported the movement at the outset, because of certain undoubted grievances,
returned to their natural allegiance within a very short time; while those who
persisted in following Seton only involved themselves and their lodges in
disrepute, not merely at home but also all over the Masonic world. The Grand
Lodge of Ireland emerged from a severe inter-necine war, if not stronger in
numbers, stronger in having vindicated its authority without compromising its
dignity, and within a few years all the rebel lodges had either submitted, or
become extinct, or if they continued to drag out an estranged existence were
regarded with abhorrence as clandestine Masons.
To the
student of this unhappy event one thing stands out enshrined, the truly
Masonic spirit of the Grand Master, a broad-minded, warm-hearted man, who
thoroughly deserved the tribute addressed to him by his Irish brethren when in
1813 he retired from office, at his own request:
"Your
lordship's services to this institution will long live in the grateful
remembrance of a Society whose principles ensure its duration, and who will
ever rank the name of Donoughmore among those that are dearest to Masonry and
Ireland."
That
these words were no mere empty compliment was shown exactly one hundred years
later, when 2,000 Irish Masons assembled in Grand Lodge to acclaim as their
new Grand Master, another Earl of Donoughmore, who since then has amply proved
that he has inherited not the honors and name only, but also the ability of
his great ancestor to maintain the dignity of his office and be a trusted and
beloved leader in time of stress.
IRISH
MASONIC INFLUENCES
The
influence of the Grand Lodge of Ireland on new, independent Masonic
Constitutions has been large, out of all proportion to the home territory it
governs, a fact that has never, in default of an official history, been
adequately realized by the Craft generally. Allusion has already been made to
its work in the U.S.A. In Canada, too, Irish lodges were early at work as well
as in the British West Indies; Masons in Portugal, Peru, Brazil have worn our
colors; the very first lodge held in Australia met under an Irish warrant No.
227 held in the old 46th Regiment; and in that Commonwealth as well as in New
Zealand, Africa and India, some lodges still retain their allegiance to the
old Irish Constitution. Let me add, that the Grand Lodge of Ireland never
places any obstacle in the way of one of its lodges wishing to sever
connection with the Mother Constitution to join a newly-formed Grand lodge in
the country where it is situated; and provided the new Constitution conform to
the ancient standards it is assured of immediate recognition and brotherly
cooperation from the Grand Lodge of Ireland, which is swift to welcome the
appearance of a new star in the banner of the Masonic Federation of the World.
IRISH
MASONIC CELEBRITIES AND SCHOLARS
Throughout a history of two centuries it is but to be expected that the Grand
Lodge of Ireland should be able to show with pride many distinguished names on
her rolls, but of all on the list possibly none exerted more lasting effect
upon the Freemasonry of his generation, aye, and of future generations, than
that stickler for orthodoxy in matters of the Craft, the inspired
journeyman-painter Laurence Dermott. His story has been well and fully told by
divers scholars (Note 15) but no reference to the Irish Grand Lodge would be
complete without mention of the brother who was initiated in Lodge No. 26 in
1740, became its Master in 1746, and departed to England to become the most
notable figure in eighteenth century Masonry, as poet, controversialist, and
restorer of the old landmarks --to say nothing of his being the inventor of a
term, which I understand to be very bad Hebrew, Ahiman Rezon, which like a
javelin of flame flew from him with such impetus as even to cross the Atlantic
and to be adopted for long enough as a symbol by those who prided themselves
upon preserving the old traditions of the Craft (Note 16).
Laurence Dermott is the more noteworthy, because the Grand Lodge of Ireland
has not produced a great number of historians or writers who have added to our
knowledge. Vallancey and O'Brien (of the Round Towers), however, are still
occasionally quoted by those who have never learned caution, and there have
been several deservedly respected names in our own times. Some like Twiss,
John Robinson, Tait, and Redfern Kelly are still with us; others, alas, are no
longer here to teach us, such as F. C. Crossle, Westropp, and the Master Mason
of them all, the late Dr. Chetwode Crawley, some time Grand Treasurer, a
scholar so meticulous, whose work was so comprehensive that those who come
after him seeking to pursue some line of research often find themselves only
plowing a furrow that has already been broken by his industry. That there is
still something to be added to the work he accomplished is merely another way
of saying that the progress of knowledge never stands still, but his followers
and emulators may well despair of ever hoping to surmount his total of
achievement. It may have been some satisfaction to his last years to see the
formation in Dublin of the Lodge of Research, No. 200, pledged to continue the
labors wherein he took such an interest, and though it may seem too much to
hope that this body will ever produce another scholar to compare with the one
that is gone, still it has already proved a focussing point for those Masons
who bend their energies towards finding more light for the present from the
lessons of-the past. With no mean aim, this lodge contemplates, indeed the
project is in process of realization, the compiling of a reliable history of
the Grand Lodge of Ireland, a book that is badly needed, never having been
attempted; and I hope that the present short and imperfect sketch has shown
that the history of that Grand Lodge has not been without interest, as
assuredly, it has not been without honor.
NOTES
Note
1. Vide Harris' Dublin, 1766, p. 142 et seq.
Note
2. Vide Crawley's Introduction to Sadler's Masonic Reprints and Revelations.
Note
3. Vide Articles on Mrs. Aldworth A.Q.C. VIII-16, 63.
Note
4. The Dublin Weekly Journal NO 13, Saturday, June 26, 1726.
Note
5. The Irish equivalent of the London Inns of Court.
Note
6. The short report of this event, inserted in the London Journal, July, 1725,
is quoted by Gould History of Freemasonry, III, 34.
Note
7. It was natural for Springett Penn to hold high office in the Craft in
Ireland where he had large estates; but his appearance in this character is
even more interesting on account of the close Masonic communication that
afterwards existed between the Grand Lodges of Ireland and Pennsylvania, which
state was largely colonized by emigrants from Ireland.
Note
8. Ed. Spratt Constitutions, Dublin, 1751, page 121.
Note
9. Lord Kingston, while still the Hon. Jas. King. was initiated on June 8,
1726, in a lodge held at the Swan & Rummer in Finch Lane, London, Dr.
Desaguliers, D. G. M. of England, attending to confer the ceremony. For
Kingston's activities when G. M. of England, vide Minutes of the G.L. England,
etc.. by W. J. Songhurst, London. 1913; p. 37 et seq.
Note
10. In the course of the year 1732 the following advertisement appeared
several times in the Dublin newspapers: "Whereas there are Several Lodges of
Free-Masons congregated in several Towns in this Kingdom, without a Warrant
under the Hand and Seal of the Right Honourable the Lord Viscount Netterville,
Grand Master of all Ireland. .. . It is therefore Ordered that all such Lodges
do apply to the Secretary Mr. John Pennell in St. Patrick St.. Dublin, and
take out true and perfect Warrants and be enroll'd in the Grand Lodge Book, or
they will not be deem'd true and perfect Lodges." (Faulkner's Dublin Journal:
Sat. Dec. 30, 1732--Tues. Jan. 2, 1732/3.)
Note
11. Right up to the beginning of the nineteenth century we come across the
terms "Clandestine" and "Hedge Masons" applied to these bodies by the regular
Masons: instances of the "re-making" a non-regular brother who conformed are
not uncommon.
Note
12. Vide Dassigny's Serious and Impartial Enquiry, 1744, page 48.
Note
13. In 1740 an attempt seems to have been made to form a rival Grand Lodge
which proved abortive in its very conception.
Note
14. The authorities on this subject are F. C. Crossle, Henry Sadler, and, of
course, Dr. Chetwode Crawley. Some fresh information collected from the
records of disaffected lodges is also given in a paper by the present writer,
read before Quatuor Coronati Lodge, No. 2076 (E.C.), on St. John's Day, 1922.
Note
15. Notably Bywater and Sadler.
Note
16. Attention must also be called, if only in a footnote, to services rendered
by such Masons as John Fowler in the metropolisMichael Furnell in Munster; and
Archdeacon Mant in Ulster.
----o----
Masonic Benevolence Between 1717 and 1813
By
W.BRO. MAURICE BEACHCROFT, M.A., O.B.E., P.G.D. (England), Patron and
Secretary of the Royal Masonic Institute for Girls, England
The
beginnings of Masonic benevolence are, like most beginnings, involved in much
obscurity. The early days of modern Speculative Freemasonry would appear to
have been characterized rather by good fellowship and conviviality than by any
exercise of charity, although the idea of some special bond of "brotherhood"
between the members dates back as far as the words go.
There
is a fine phrase in the last section of the "Ancient Charges," as we know them
today, enjoining a Mason to "cultivate Brotherly Love, the foundation and
copestone, the cement and glory of this Ancient Fraternity." This is an
obvious expression of some higher ideal than that of mere good fellowship; and
it is interesting to find it appearing for the first time in Anderson's
Constitutions of 1723.
GENERAL FUND OF CHARITY RECOMMENDED TO GRAND LODGE
Such a
nobler spirit was abroad just then; if indeed we are not tracing the working
of one individual influence, at work behind the scenes; for, in the year 1724,
we find these higher ideals taking a form and practical expression of their
own.
On
Nov. 21 in that year, Grand Lodge was petitioned for relief by the first Grand
Master of the Order, Bro. Anthony Sayer, who had fallen upon evil times; and,
at the same meeting, the Earl of Dalkeith, who was then "Immediate" Past Grand
Master, recommended that a monthly collection, for the purpose of providing a
relief fund, should be made in each lodge, "according to the quality and
number of the said lodge, and put into a joynt stock."
The
fund was known thereafter as the "Generall Bank of Charity," and, on March 17,
1725, a committee was appointed to consider the best means of regulating it.
In
November of that year this committee reported, and, among other suggestions,
advised that contributions should be voluntary and should be paid quarterly.
They
recommended that no more than 3 pounds should be given to any brother without
the consent of Grand Lodge; that such sums should be disbursed by a standing
committee of seven, and that a treasurer, nominated by the Grand Master, and
approved by Grand Lodge, should be appointed in due course.
It was
not until June 24, 1727, that the committee and treasurer were appointed, and
there is a touch of sorry humor in a minute of March 27, 1729, to the effect
that "the Deputy Grand Master rose up and acquainted the brethren that,
although he had been appointed treasurer of the charity two years before, he
was extremely concerned that, in so long a time, he had not received one
shilling from the lodges or from any brother."
However, in November, 1729, the first list of contributions appears on the
minutes, and, in December of the same year, a motion was duly carried that
every newly constituted lodge should contribute two guineas to the fund.
At
that meeting a very respectable list of contributions was received; and
thenceforth the fund took on a more permanent and settled aspect.
CHARITY IS DISPERSED BY KNOWLEDGE
In
April, 1730, the "Infirmary at Westminster" offered to take care of "any poor
brother, who might happen to be disabled, by broken limbs, etc., from
following his employment, which often happens amongst working Masons"; and it
was thereupon decided that five guineas be paid annually to the Infirmary by
the treasurer.
At
this Grand Lodge Bro. Anthony Sayer put forward a further petition for relief;
and, after some discussion as to the amount, a sum of 15 pounds was voted to
him. Later, the committee was strengthened by the addition of twelve "Masters
of Lodges,"