Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

All Letters must bear the name ani address of the Writer , not necessarily for publication , but as a guarantee of good faith . We do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions of our Cor . respondents . We cannot undertake to return rejected communications .

ORIGIN OF THE ROYAL ARCH .

To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —Dr . Oliver's "Origin of the R . A . " contains some facts that were then unknown . I consider it , therefore , worth more than all his other works combined ; but I am sorry to arid , that his perverse nature would not allow him to write truth

without adulterating it with absurdities . Leaving out his nonsense about the Christianity of that degree , I shall now merely run through a few of his historical errors . Thus , he ascribes the discontent of some Lodges in 1734 to their being prohibited to confer the second and third degrees . But the fact is , that prohibition was repealed in 1725 .

The R . A . Degree ( says our Doctor ) was brought to England by Chevalier Ramsay , who first offered it to tho G . L . of the Moderns , but as that G . L . wonld have nothing to do with it , he next disposed of it to tbe Ancients , & c . Now , for all the above assertions there is not a shadow of evidence . The third degree was dismembered ( says our Doctor ) first , by

Ramsay , or Dermott ( who made two degrees out of one ) and Dunckerley , when he afterwards introduced R . A . Chapters among the Moderns , mutilated the third degree of the Moderns . The truth , however , is , the third degree was never dismembered or mutilated , either by Ramsay or Dunckerley , for it is the same to-day as it was a hundred and fifty years ago .

The R . A . ( says Dr . 0 . ) was introduced by Dunckerley among the Moderns " not earlier than 1776 , " and to the same year he ascribes the establishment of the G . L . of the Ancients . It will , however , be seen , that Dunckerley did not introduce the Chapter among the Moderns , and that tbe said events took place before 1776 . Preston says , "Under the appellation of the York banner the

Ancients gained the countenance of the Scotch and Irish Masons who readily joined in condemning the measures [ some alleged change in the ritual ]* of the Lodges in London . " Dr . Oliver magnified this into " a treaty of alliance and confederation " with the Scotch and Irish Grand Lodges . I am , however , persuaded that the coolness of the G . L . of Scotland , if it ever existed , originated after the Dnke

of Atholl's election as G . M . of the Ancients . The fact is , Dr . Oliver never examined the original records in Freemasons' Hall , but confined himself to printed authorities only , viz .: to the several editions of the Constitutions , the Ahiman Rezon , and Preston ; bnt the histories appended to tho Constitutions say very little about the origin of the troubles either of 1734 or later .

The Ahiman Rezon is utterly unreliable ; aud Preston , who never mentions the Royal Arch , and who luas not a Royal Arch Mason at all , absolutely furnished no materials for such a history ; and besides wbiob , Preston ' s account of tbe origin of tho Ancients is crude , ambiguous , and is altogether unworthy of credit . Our Bro . Oliver , however , not only repeated the errors of Preston , bnt also added some

from his own imagination . And , of course , whatever " the learned " Dr . Oliver wrote was received by the Craft as " gospel truth . " The appearance of an English edition of Bro . Findel's history in 1866 gave rise to , or stimulated , a new school of Masonic critics , whose aim was , and is , "Truth at any price . " These were , of course , assailed by the old Masonic castle builders in the air . Some were

hurt because the antiquity of Masonry was shaken . Others , because their chivalric moonshine degrees and high titles were demolished ; and others again , who trembled in their boots lest the disbelief in the " thousand and one " pre 1717 Grand Masters should cause Masonry itself to topple over , either joined in chorus with the former , in crying down the iconoclasts , or endeavoured to steer a middle conrse . " Oh

well ! " said they , " there is a stratum of truth to all traditions , " and if it does uot mean this , "it , no doubt , means that , or the tother . " Some of those timid ones even said , in my presence , " Yonr theory may be all trne , but it won ' t do to denude Masonry of all humbng . " This hue and cry did not , however , stop inquiry . Bro . Buohan defended the " 1717 theory . " Bro . Hughan unearthed additional

facts about the G . L . of York and about the Ancients . Bro . D . M . Lyon published his immortal History of Freemasonry in Scotland , and Bro . Gould will , I trnst , stick to the motto , " Truth at any price , " and will endeavour to outshine all his predecessors . And now let ns see what has thus far been accomplished in correcting tbe errors of the old school as far as the history of the Royal

Arch is concerned . First , I must call attention to Bro . Hughan ' s discovery of " Dassigny ' s Inquiry . " This was printed in Dublin in 1744 , but no Masonic writer referred to it save and except Dermott , who quotes one paragraph with approbation from the " R . W . Dr . Dassigny's " book , and who appropriated other portions of that work without acknowledging its source , ( compare p 93 , & c . of Hughan's

" Memorial " with pp 14 , 15 , & c . of tbe first edition of the " Ahiman Rezon ) . " Bro . Dermott , however , never told us what Dassigny said about , the Royal Arch . Thanks to Bro . Hughan's assiduity , we can now glean something from that work about the Royal Arch . "How comes to pass ( says Dassigny ) that some have been led away with ridiculous innovations , an example of which I shall prove

by a certain propagation of a false system some few years ago iu this city , who imposed upon several worthy men under a pretence of being a Master of the Royal Arch , which he asserted he had brought with him from the city of York , and that tbe beauties of tbe Craft did principally consist in the knowledge of that valuable piece of Masonry . However , he carried on his scheme for several months

and many of the learned and wise were his followers , till at length his fallacious act was discovered by a brother of probity and wis . dom , who had some months before attained that excellent part of Masonry in London , and plainly proved that his doctrine was false ; whereupon tho brethren justly despised him , aud ordered him to be excluded from all benefits of the Craft , " & c . The principal value of

that work consists—first , in being the earliest book wherein the phrase "Royal Arch" appears ; second , in furnishing information as to how the Royal Arch found its way into Ireland , and as to how it was first received ; and third , it confirms Dr . Oliver ' s theory , that the Royal Arch made its first appearance about 1740 . But whether that adventurer in Dublin was an Englishman or an Irishman ,

whether he was the inventor of the Royal Arob , and an Irish pupil of his afterwards impregnated with it an Irish brother of " probity and wisdom " in London ; or whether tbe Dublin " Master of the Royal Arch " got his Mastership in London , no one can now discover . Bat one thing is certain—namely , Dassigny's warning to the Dublin Masons did not altogether stop tbe " Master of the Royal Arch" there

from grinding his Royal Arch mill ; the material Masons are made of is too tough to yield to snch warnings . Indeed , such warning is more likely to impel them to rush headlong into a moonshine conoern than to restrain them ; as an instance of the truth of my statement , Dermott himself states , in a record , that he received Royal Arch in Dublin in 1745 or 1747 . This fact was communicated to me

by an officer of the Grand Lodge , and to whom I am under great obligation for calling my attention' to other facts , for showing me the original records , and for furnishing me with extracts and notes , as will be shown hereafter . But the fact must not be forgotten—viz ., that Laurence Dermott was a full fledged Royal Arch Mason when he first came to London .

From Bro . Gould's " Atholl Lodges , " I learn that " Dermott was born in 1720 , Initiated in Ireland in 1740 , Installed Master of No . 26 , Dublin , June 1746 . On coming to England , he first joined a Modern Lodge , but was a member of Nos . 9 and 10 Ancients , when elected G . Secretary , 5 th February 1752 . Appointed D . G . M . March 1771 . Being succeeded , at his oxen request , by W . Dickey , 27 th December

1777 . Again D . G . M . from December 1783 to December 1787 , when , also at his own request , he wns succeeded by James Perry ; Preseut for the last time in the G . Lodge 3 rd June 1789 . " From the fact that Grand Officers were appointed at Dermott ' s request , and from tho fact that Dermott ' s writings constitute the whole stock of the Ancients ' Masonio literature of the last century , we may reasonably conolnda

that Dermott was not only the original organizer of the Ancients , bnt that he was also the father of Royal Arch Masonry among them . And now I will show up what kind of a body were the seceders before 1751 . Upon this subject I further learn from Bro . Gould ' s " Atholl Lodges , " that on the 17 th July 1751 , the Masters of six selfconstituted Lodges in London assembled and constituted themselves

into a Lodge of Grand Masters , and these six Lodges were styled " Time Immemorial Lodges . " After Bro . Turner was elected Grand Master of the Ancients , the Grand Master's Lodge was perpetuated as a mere Lodge , and was placed as "No . 1 on the roll of the Lodges of the Ancients . Of theso seven Lodges one died at the close of 1751 , one in 1754 , the remainder died in 1759 , 1769 , & o . ; two lived

np to 1783 and 1785 respectively . It is evident that some of the original Lodges , including the Grand Master ' s Lodge , were meresiraw Lodges . When a Lodge ceased to meet among the Ancients , its number was sold to a younger Lodge , that is , sold to the highest bidder , thus : the Grand Master's Lodge died in about August 1759 . Its number was then sold to a Lodge constituted iu 1787 . Thia

Lodge since the Union figures as No . 1 of the United Grand Lodge . The next question to be considered is—How and when did the Moderns get hold of the Royal Arch ? I have no doubt that Royal Arch Degree peddlers continued to ply their trade after the Ancients adopted that degree . Indeed , Dermott himself censures somebody , whose name he withholds , for peddling the R . A . degree . It is

therefore possible tbat some of tbe Moderns may have bought the secret from those peddlers . But be that as it may , and putting conjecture aside , my friend in the Grand Secretary's office , already referred to , showed me a record of a Chapter constituted by Moderns , beginning 12 th June 1765 . But the record shows that four brethren were exalted in March , and one in April previous , and the very first

anniversary celebrated by that Chapter , which styled itself , " The Holy Royal Arch Chapter of Jerusalem , " was on the 8 th of January 1766 . Hence its organisation must have taken place iu January 1765 . In the beginning of the said record are a series of resolutions or regulations , to which a number of signatures are appended , among which is that of John McLean . One of the regulations reads as follows :

" Resolved , that the Companions belonging to , and having been exalted in the Caledonian Chapter , or any Chapter in the country or abroad , being properly vouched for , shall be admitted visitors in this Chapter on payment of 2 s 6 d each . " Now . I do not believe that outside of the jurisdiction of the Ancients , any Chapters existed either in the country or abroad in 1765 . But here is mentioned the " Caledonian Chapter , " evidently

a Chapter constituted by Moderns before 1765 . , The second anniversary of onr new Chapter was celebrated on tn 26 th of December 1766 , and in the minutes of that meeting js the following tribute to Bro . McLean , to whose signature I direote attention above by giving it in italics : — . " The thanks of the Chapter was given bv the Z ., in an address tc

Bro . John McLean , as Father and Promoter , who for his instrnction and careful attendance was requested to accept a Gold Plate , W the following device . " ( Here follows the inscription in Latin , & e . ) Some years after this , Bro . McLean was compelled to app ly t 0 - Chapter for Charity , which of course was granted j and in the reco