Bro. Gould's "Four Old Lodges.''

BRO . GOULD'S "FOUR OLD LODGES . ' '

BY Duo . J . vfor . NOK'VOX . T SHALL call attention to but two subjects in Bro . Gould ' s lv > i > k . -I 1 st . I hog to express my thanks to liini for supplying a desideratum , viz ., by publishing so many Lodge lists , which were inaccessible to me , more particularly the lists of 1740 , 175 G , 1770 , 1781 , and 1792 . Theso lists wero published after each re-numbering of the English Lodges , and Bro . Gould has supplied double columns of

numbers , denoting what the number of each Lodgo was before and after it was re-iirimbcred . With tho aid of these Lodge lists , I shall provo that No . 79 , of 1730 , was never a Philadelphia Lodgo in 1730 , or at : > ny subsequent timo . I shall begin with the Ledge list of 1730 to 1732 , page 50 , and next , I will cite a Lodgo list of 1737 ( not in Bro . Gould's book ) , and then continue with Bro . Gould's lists .

Old No . i ' cwNo . 1732 ... 79 Castle at Highgate . 1737 ... 79 TwoAngelsandCrown , LittleSt . Martin's-lanel 730 1740 79 G 8 Griffin , Snow Hill 1730

1756 G 8 42 Windmill , Rosomary-lane 1730 1770 42 35 Windmill , Rosemarv-lane ' 1730 1781 35 31 L . of Fortitude , nainlmrgliArms . E . Smithfield 1730 1792 31 29 L . of Fortitude , Hamburgh Arms . E . Smithfield 1730 1814 29 45 Lodge of Fortitudo , Burnham , Essex ... 1730

The last line I have copied from Bro . Hnghan ' s " Memorials of the Masonic Union " Lodge list , page 101 . Under tho 1832 column of the list , the space where the No . ought to appear is blank , thus showing that the Lodgo was extinct in 1832 . The above demonstration must now satisfy all parties concerned , that Lodge No . 79 of 1730 was born in England , lived in England , and died in England .

Tho subject I now call attention to is tho second of the old Lodges . In 1738 , Anderson described tho fonr Lodges respectively as having held their meetings in 1717 : —1 st . At tho Goose and Gridiron ; 2 nd . At the Crown , Parker ' s-lane ; 3 rd . At tho Apple Tree , Covent Garden ; and 4 th . At tho Eummer and Grapes , Westminstei ' . In a Lodgo list appended to the 1738 Constitution , he begins with : —

" 1 st . King ' s Arms Tavern , in St . Paul s Churchyard , removed from the Goose and Gridiron . This the Senior Lodge , whoso Constitution is immemorial . " 2 nd . Horn Tavern , in New Palace Yard , Westminster . The old Lodge removed from Rummer and Grapes , Channel-row , whose Constitution is also immemorial , it being one of the four Lodges

mentioned , page — . [ I forget tho page ] . Tho list then continues with tho new Lodges constituted in 1721 and 1722 , till he comes to No . 10 , and I will givo it entire . " 10 . Queen's Head , in Knave's-acre . This was one of tho four Lodges mentioned , viz ., tho Apple Tree Tavern , in Charles-street , Covent Garden , whose Constitution is immemorial . Bnt after they

removed to the Queen ' s Head , upon somo difference , the members that met there camo under a now Constitution , though they wanted it not , and it is , therefore , placed at this number . N . B . Tho Crown , in Parker ' s-laue , is now extinct . 27 th Feb . 1723 . " This " Crown , in Parker ' s-lane , " was the second oldest Lodgo in 1717 , and I shall designate it Lodge No . 2 . Now , Bro . Gould ,

by following up carefully the successive Lodge lists from 1723 , traces the successive removals from public-house to public-house of tho very original No . 2 Lodge , until 1733 . The Grand Lodge Record bears testimony to the existence of the said No . 2 Lodge in 1733 , when it paid to the charity fund dSl Is . Here then is a puzzle : — How could Lodge No . 2 have died before 1723 and still continue on

all the Lodge lists , as well as in the Grand Lodgo Record , up to 1733 , as Lodge No . 2 ? Now , let us hear what Bro . Gould says about it : — " Original No . 2 , meeting at the Crown , Parker ' s lane , in 1717 , was established at the Queen ' s Head , Turnstile , Holborn , in 1723 or earlier . It had removed to the Green Lattice , Brownlow-street , by

1725 , whence it migrated to tho Rose and Rummer 1728 , and to the Rose and Baffler 1729 . In 1730 , it met at the Bull and Gate , Holborn , and appearing for tho last time in the engraved list for 173 G , was struck off the roll at the renumbering in 1740 . " The above summary may , I think , bo relied upon , bnt an entry in the minutes of the Grand Lodge , of' March IGth 1752 / is a littlo

confusing . " ( Here is the minuto of IGth March 1752 . ) " Tho petition of several brethren meeting at the Crown in Parker ' s-lane , praying that the Lodgo formerly hold there might be restored and havo its former place in tho Lodge Book . Bnt it appearing the said Lodge had been discontinued about thirty years , and that no ono of tho petitioners had been a member thereof

—ordered , that tho said petition be rejected . "If this minute of Grand Lodgo bo literally accurate [ says Bro . Gould ] tho following difficulty is presented : — " The old , or original Lodges , meeting respectively at the Goose and Gridiron , tho Apple Tree , the Rummer and Grapes , having been identified beyond cavil with Nos . 1 , 10 , and 2 in Anderson ' s List for

1738 , and the remaining old Lodgo of 1717—tho Crown [ No . 2 ] — having lapsed about 1722 , whence camo tho No . 2 of 1729 , with a Constitution dating from 1712 , considering that only four old Lodges were existent in 1717 , all of which are otherwise accounted for ? "Tho most natural explanation of this mystery would bo some such hypothesis as the following , viz ., that an additional ^ re-revival Lodge had somehow crept into the new organisation . "

With regard to the Grand Lodgo minuto of 1752 , Bro . Gould suggests that " the period of discontinuance attributed to the Lodge [ No . 2 ] may havo been recorded as thirty instead of tiecnlij years , " & c . With all due respect to Bro . Gould , I cannot agree to either of his theories . There is not a shadow of evidence to support the theory of a pre-1717 Lodgo having crept into the new organisation ; and the evi-

Bro. Gould's "Four Old Lodges.''

dence of tho identity of the No . 2 of 1717 and the No . 2 of 1733 is so complete and overwhelming as to destroy , in my mind , all belief in the statement made by tho Grand Lodgo Committee in 1752 . Grand Lodge Committees are not infallible . Tho Grand Lodge Committee in 1752 may have been prejudiced against tho petitioners or the petition ; tho petitioners , who had never bolonged to Lodge No . 2 of

1717 , wero , consequently , unablo to contradict the statemeut of tho Committee about the Lodge having lapsed thirty years before . Besides , tho statement of tho Committee was supported by Anderson ' s Lodge List . True , Anderson was tho only source whence they derived their information ; bnt what petitioner would havo been bold onongh in thoso days to ask for additional evidence ? I myself always

believed Anderson to stato that Lodge No . 2 died beforo 1723 , and I would havo continued to bolievo so if Bro . Gould had not convinced tne that tho Lodgo lived till 1733 at least . This knowledge induced me to study Anderson anew , and I came to the conclusion that we all misunderstood his paragraph relating to Lodge No . 2 ; or , in other words , I believe that Anderson never intended to convey the idea

that the said Lodge became extinct before 1723 . Be it remembered that Anderson did not compile bis Lodge List in 1723 , but in 1738 , and having accounted for three of the old Lodges with the finish of the paragraph relating to No . 10 , a sudden thought seems to have entered into his bead , that ho might as well have finished tho job at onco by accounting for tho romaining Lodge ; so he wrote , there and then ,

"No . 10 . The Crown , in Parker s Lane ; the other of the four old Lodges is now [ 173 S ] extinct . " It was simply a blunder on the part of Anderson to write the paragraph relating to No . 2 as he did ; and even as it is , if the said paragraph had been put down as a foot-note , it would not have been misunderstood , while , on the other hand , as already hinted , the Committee of 1752 on the petition must

naturally have sought for information in Anderson's Constitution . Indeed , it was then the only printed authority a Committee could have consuited on the subject ; and , understanding the Anderson Lodge List as we all understood it , reported accordingly . " But it appears the said Lodge had been discontinued about thirty years . " I admit that this is only an hypothesis ; but when the continued existence of Lodge No . 2 is proved beyond doubt , we must either come to the

conclusion that Anderson wilfully lied , or that there is a mistake somewhere . Now , in this particular case , 1 can imagine no motive that conld have induced Anderson to misstate a fact , which must havo been known to most of his readers in 1738 ; while , on the other hand , his phrase , " is now extinct , " can be rationally explained by supposing that he meant to say , " Now-, in 1738 , the Lodge ia extinct . " By adopting , therefore , this hypothesis , the whole " mystery" is solved . BostoD , U . S ., 17 th Sept . 1880 .

Freemasonry In The House Of God.

FREEMASONRY IN THE HOUSE OF GOD .

BRO . the Rey . R . L . Cloquet , Rector of Covenham , St . Bartholomew , Louth , Lincolnshire , preached , a sermon to Freemasons on Sunday afternoon , 26 th September , in St . Benedict ' s Church , from tho text Eph ii . 20 , 21 . The rev . gentleman thus introduced the subject : —

Whatever tho carping critic may say as to the propriety of introducing the subject of Freemasonry in the House of God , we reply that tho Freemasons of England take the Bible as their infallible guide , and havo for their ruler the highest Prince in the empire—our beloved Prince of Wales , the illustrious son of parents , perhaps , the most

renowned of all time . Albert the Good shall never be forgotten ; and Victoria our Queen , since that memorable morning in her maidenhood , when , having just ascended the throne , her eyes flashing and her bosom heaving with strong emotion , she wrote across the dark page of the condemnation

of the soldier of tho line , tho bright saving word " Pardoned ! remarking to the Duke of Wellington , " Let it be for others to use influence . I will try mercy in this case " —since that hour , we say , up to the present moment , a long period of over 40 years , Victoria stands perhaps the only Sovereign in the world's history whoso life , public

and private , the biographer can immortalize with the motto , Sans Tache . Long may your Grand Master reflect the virtues of his immortal strain ! " After referring to the antiquity of Freemasonry , and its various aspects , which , as the reverend gentleman remarked , " must commend it to every human heart , " he

proceeded : —We must not flatter you . We do not say you are perfect . We know how some of your brethren on the Continent havo been anxious to throw off formal and expressed allegiance to high heaven . But we do say , in all the sincerity of our heart , that Freemasonry as a rnle , and perhaps with this single exception , is one of the mostperfect

developments in these our days of " pure religion and nndefiled beforo God and tho Father . " For yon gladden and " visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction , " and if you are true to the Craft , yon will study to " keep yonrselves unspotted from the world . " Amongst the manv valuable and suggestive remarks of the preacher , the following

especially are well worthy of record , and should be studied by all : And would to God your Order were even still far more extended , for then might " wars and rumours of wars " cease upon this blood-stained earth . Great and substantial and ennobling rewards have crowned your labours of lovo ; and it may be that tho day is not far distant

when through some snch practical lever as your institution snpplies , the nations of our world shall bo elevated to the true degree of humanity , and " . learn war no more : " heartily joining in the angelic invocation of one of your rituals , " Glory bo to God in the highest , on earth peace , good will toward men" —when