The History Of Freemasonry.

is concerned , by the excerpts that follow from martyroloo-ies and breviaries , is a point about which we have very considerable doubts . Bro . Gould himself says , in the latter part of the chapter , " A good deal has been made of the Four Martyrs , taking the name for the whole , from a

Masonic point of view , but as I think erroneously . These martyrs were the patron saints of particular trades , chosen , like the patron saints of all other trades , long after the event of martyrdom , when trades acquired some corporate or other organised form , and when in consequence

they chose for patrons those who had some kmd of affinity , more or less remote , with their own pursuits . " And again , " If Freemasons would only cease reading in a circle , and would take counsel of some other writers besides those within the mystic pale , they would see that the legend of

the Four , besides being perfectly natural and authentic , is of immeasurably higher antiquity than anything of which the building or any other trades can boast . It will be tolerably evident to those who take the trouble to reason calmly and correctly , that when the guilds , trades unions , or

by whatever other name the associations of workmen may have been called , were formed , that according as was the fashion of the times , they chose patron saints , and that the building trades chose the sculptors under the generic name of the Four Holy Martyrs , as being the nearest approach to

men of their own calling . " The cogency of these remarks makes it the more surprising that Bro . Gould should have devoted so much space to examining the different versions of a legend , which is not so very material to the history of the Mason Craft .

The concluding chapter of the second volume treats of "Apocryphal Manuscripts , " which , with the exception of the " Larmenius Charter , " are considered " according to priority oi publication . " The first of these is the " Leland-Locke " MS ., the first trace of which is to be found in the

Gentleman ' s Magazine for 1753 , wherein it is described " as a copy of a small pamphlet at Frankfort in 1748 . " The value of this may be judged from the following remarks , quoted from Halliwell : " The orthography is most grotesque , and too gross ever to have been penned either by Henry

the Sixth or Leland , or both combined . For instance , we have Peter Gowere , a Grecian , explained in a note by the fabricator—for who else could have solved it?—to be Pythagoras ! As a whole , it is but a clumsy attempt at deception , and is quite a parallel to the recently discovered

one of the first Englishe Mercurie . " Bro . Gould's conclusion is , " that the cathechism must have been drawn up at some period subsequent to the publication of Dr . Anderson ' s

'Constitutions '"; and he thinks it " not improbable that the memoir of Ashmole , given in the' Biographia Britannica ' ( 1747 ) , may have suggested the idea of practising on the credulity of the Freemasons . "

Of the " Steinmetz Catechism , " which comes next in order , the author says : " Its antiquity is a difficult matter to determine , To judge by the orthography and construction , we must call it quite modern—say eighteenth century ; but it is evident that Schneider may have taken it

from the mouth of an eighteenth century workman , and the absence of all archaic expressions and spelling would thus be accounted for . Again , the fact of its being the examination of a salute-Mason—as distinguished from a letter Mason—points to a date subsequent to the fusion of

the Steinmetzen with the bricklayers and others ; though , on the other hand , it may have been communicated to these new bodies by the old Steinmetzen , and slightly altered to suit the circumstances . Steinbrenner , however , is certainly not justified in calling it the ' Examination of

a German Steinmetz during the Middle Ages ; ' he adduces no proof of such a high antiquity ; and disproof of course is equally wanting . The age of the catechism becomes , therefore , a matter of conjecture rather than of opinion . The document may be of recent origin , or a survival of

something more ancient ; though , in its present form it is , without doubt , of quite modern date . " The three that follow are the Malcolm Canmore Charter , Krause ' s MS ., or Prince Edwin ' s Constitution of 926 , and the Charter of Coloerne : and laatlv ornnfis thn Lnmnenins

Charter or the Charter of Transmission . The claims of these to be what they profess to be are very carefully and criticall y considered by Bro . Gould , and the conclusion he

arrives at in each case is perfectly satisfactory . Many , indeed , will be inclined to say that he has been at too great Pains in order to demonstrate the worthlessness of these and the previous manuscripts . But it must not be forgotten that there are writers of ability who have accepted them .

The History Of Freemasonry.

Thus of the Leland-Looke , Fort , as quoted by Gould , says that " a careful examination of the pamphlet convinces me that it is genuine and entitled to full credence . " And again , " whoever wrote the document in question was profoundly learned in the secrets possessed by the Craft ;"

while of the Larmenius Charter , we are told that Sir James Burnes has written of it : " Stai'tling as is the assertion , there has been a succession of Knights Templars from the twelfth century down even to these days ; the chain of its transmission is perfect in all its links . Jacques de Molay ,

the Grand Master at the time of the persecution , anticipating his own martyrdom , appointed as his successor , in power and dignity , Johannes Marcus Larmenius , of Jerusalem , and from that time to the present there has been a

regular and uninterrupted line of Grand Masters . The charter , by which the supreme authority has been transmitted , is judicial and conclusive evidence of the Order ' s continued existence . "

We have now completed our lengthy review of the Second Volume of Bro . Gould's important work . We think there is much in it that might have been treated more briefly , but save in this respect , the volume fully sustains the author ' s reputation . As regards the third

instalment of his labours , which has reached us quite recently , we can only say just now that it treats of by far the most difficult portion of our history , and will require to be very carefully and critically considered before wo can venture to offer an opinion upon its merits .

St. John's Lodge, Philadelphia.

ST . JOHN'S LODGE , PHILADELPHIA .

EARLY MEMBERS OF THE LODGE—1731-8 . FKOM THE KEYSTONE . ( Continued from page 125 . ) We quote from William Pringle's Masonic record , as follows : 0

ADom : W . PKINGLE to Stock 1731 Dr . June 24 To 5 Lodge days Omitions @ 6 d per diem 2 6 July 5 To stock for this Lodge day ... ... 6 Aug . 2 To stock for this day ... ... 6 Sept . 6 To your monthly quota ... ... 6 Oct . 4 To quota ... ... ... ... 6 Nov . 1 To monthly quota ... ... ... 6

Deo . 6 To quota ... ... ... ... 6 1731-2 Jan ' y 3 To ditto ... ... ... ... 6 Feb ' y 7 , 6 March 6 ,, ... ... ¦•• ... , 6

1732 April 3 To ditto ... ... ... ... 6 and so on to 2 nd July , 1733 . William Pringle was a most regular attendant at the Lodge , but one absence being charged against him , to-wit , on 4 th Sept . 1732 . We quote from John Hubart ' s record , as follows :

A Dom : JOHN HUBART to Stock 1731 Dr . June 24 To 5 days omitions @ 6 d per diem ... 2 6 July 5 To stock for this Lodge day 6 d ... 6 Aug . 2 To stock for this day ... ... 6 Sent . 6 To monthly quota ... ... ... 6

Oct . 4 To quota ... ... ... ... 6 Nov . 1 To quota ... ... ... ... 6 Deo . 6 To quota ... ... ... ... 6 1731-2 Jan ' y 3 To Do ... ... ... ... 6 Feb ' y 7 To Do ... ... ... ... 6 March 6 To Do ... ... ... ... 6

1732 April 3 To Do ... .. ... 6 John Hnbart was a moat exemplary member , for he never appears , by his record , to have missed a meeting from June 1731 to June 1738 .

Humphry Murray was elected Provincial Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania in 1734 . He was a member of the Common Council of Philadelphia in 1739 , Alderman in 1744 , aud Mayor of the city in 1745 . We quote from Humphry Murray ' s record as follows : A Dom .