An Old Masonic Letter.

eurendered np to the Grand Fund of Charity . 3 d question—Altho' I have been admitted many years ago—in Bristol—I am not now much in favour of R . A . Were it cnnfered on those only who merit that distinction , ( as was intended by the Royal builder ) it would be well : but white ifc is so easy to be obtained for money , it

will ever prove destructive to true , genuine , usfnl Masonry—' tis not established in our State ( nor do we ever wish ifc should he ) yet now and then , we have some poor empty-head Bro . coming from a neighbnnring State ; puffd np with superior consequence of high rank in Ma . onrvwhen at the same time he canofc answer a simple question

, in lectures on the first degree—and incapable of knowing anything of the R . A . more than feeling himself thirty dollera lighter , paid for his fee admission . R . A . and every other description of Masons , must be under the contrnl , regulated by ; and subject to ; the authority of fche Grand Lodge , and cannot hold any meeting without having firsfc

obtaind a warrant from the G . L . —for thafc purpose—whether the Officers have or have not been admitted into that degree . Because the Officers of the Grand Lodge having pass the chair are qualifyd , and possess thafc by service io the chair , and meritwhioh the R . A . have only by assumption . Tho R . A . has

beauties nnd sublimity when fche members are properly selected . But what is the opinion of your Grand Ledge respecting tho Sovereign Princes and Grand Inspectors—said to be established in So . Carolina—assuming to extend their controul over the two hemispheres ? Do you submit to receive them , and their 33

degrees ?—in your States— " they come in such a questionable shape "—Masonry having been so much disgracd in Europe , by pre . tended Societies , thafc much caution is necessary amongst us . As for our Lodge , we shall treat , their proposal with silence—we consider our Grand Lnd < - * e sovereign of Masonry within this State . Not

wishing to extend Masonry beond the three blu * degrees ( as those worthies sfile them )—we are afc present in ful Harmony , union , and good felloship ; practicing brotherly love , relief , and truth—in three decrees . I am very desirous of a General Convention to regulate everything relative , and belonging to the Craft . To introduce a

uniform system—and mode of wording , " preserving the old landmarks . " and a true American Constitution—you seem truly qualifyd , Most Worshipful , for undertaking , and for promoting such a plan . You may insure yourself , of the aid and support , of every good Mason .

I mnst make an apology for nofc answering your letter sooner—a brother ' s failings claims indulgences—this I claim—for trifleing matter , stale information , and elapse of time since I received your favour .

I Most Worshipful Sir and Brother , Your most ob'fc ser't , THO . THOMPSON , G . M . of Masons N . H .

Most Worshipful John Crawford , Esq . " I have omitted two postscripts to the said letter , which refer exclusively to American Masonry ; the nature of Bro . Crawford ' s contemplated " work on a plan entirely new , " will never be ascertained , because the copy of Brother Crawford's letter was not

preserved . Bro . Thompson ' s notion , which he derived from Preston , that the Grand Lodge ( Modern * - ) deserved blame for its innovations , & c , which caused the schisms amongst the Cra t , is now exploded , He equally erred about the R . A . degree having originated by a "Royal builder . " But his contrast between the Moderns and An .

cients , viz ., that the former body " was composed of men of talent , birth , and education , the latter were generally men of inferior abilities and lessrpfined in their manners , and not careful whom they admitted into their Society , " is donbtless true . I also approve of his opinion about the baneful influence of the high degrees on the

Masonic Fraternity . The presenthigh-degreers , as a rule , areas empty , headed simpletons , who are puffed up with their imaginary superior consequence in Masonry , as they were in 1803 . I cannot , however , approve of his opinion that the Grand Lodge should grant Charters either for the Royal Arch or any other high degrees . Indeed ,

whenever and wherever I meet with an infatuated high degree Mason I have strong reason to suspect that he is either a knave or a fool . And this is not only my opinion , but it is also the opinion of a large number of intelligent Masons who have taken all the high degrees . Unfortunately , however , for Masonry , these very intelligent high

degreers who , in private conversation , frankly admit that the high degrees are an imposition , & c , lack the moral courage of the Crown Prince of Prussia to say so openly and cut loose from them . Bro . Schnltz explains the allusion of Bro . Thompson to fche Sovereign Inspector General " thus : —

" The Supreme Council of the Thirty . third Degree opened afc Charleston , May 31 st , 1801 , by brethren claiming to be Sovereign Inspectors General , issu . d in December 1802 a circular to all the Masonic bodies over the face of tlie two hemispheres . In this

documerit that body claimed control over all the degreps of Masonry , except the firsfc three or Blue degrees ( over these it had waived its authority ) . " Ifc was to this circular that Graud Master Thompson referred

The most amusing part is , that while those high degree South Carolina charlatans claimed control over all Masonic degrees in the two hemispheres , their descendants have been unable to exercise •lay control at all . Tlio fact isdisharmony is inherent in those

, "'glees ; wherever those degrees were introduced , quarrels and dig . pules were engendered , which caused division and schisms . Take , , 0 r instance , France , Italy , Spain , and even England , —vou will ' und in i in

oo „ v . —„ . „ .. * ... •___ _ _____ . •_ una each conntry two or more high degree factions , denouncing each other as impostors , & c . Here , in Boston , we have the "" pi-erne Council of the Northern Jurisdiction , and ihe De La Granja c — - -. — _¦ -. __ . _ ..., _ . _ ,.. . __ .., __ ,. _ , __ .. _ .. _„___ i . jn n , e Council New rk is ihe Centre of the

^ "pr . Y .. Cerneau Supreme U . uncil and of the Seymour Supreme Conncil . But that is not alla coloured American Masons are also cursed with high degreedom ; ^ ey have one Supreme Council in New York and another in

An Old Masonic Letter.

Philadelphia , and these two coloured hodies abuse each other jnst the same as the white high degreers do . Again , that is not all . Albert Pike is a descendant , of the Charleston high degreers , and he calls his concern " The Mother Supreme Conncil of the World . " But , alas ! even in his own Southern Jurisdiction there is another Supre-me

Conncil . viz , in New Orleans , whose Sovereign denounces Albert Pike and his " Mother Supreme Council of the World " as an " illegitimate , " " a humbug , " & c . Now , when our eight Scotch Rite American Sovereigns are at such loggerheads , and abuse each other after the above fashion , it is no wonder that their respective followers

fight among each other when they happen to belong to a Commandery , or some other so-called Masonio body , and even our Grand Lodges are not free from disharmony arising from high degree squabbles . It is no wonde- * , therefore , thafc many of the better

informed hi _ * h degreers are getting disgusted with all kinds of high degreedom , and say in a whisper , ¦ ' Oh ! I wish all the high degreers were in Sheol . " Fraternally yonrs , JACOB NORTON . Boston , U . S ., 9 th Jane 1885 .

Employment Bureau.

EMPLOYMENT BUREAU .

To the Editor of the FREEMASON s CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —Referring to -- WATCHMAN ' S" letter in your issue of 2 nd May 1885 , ancl other communications whioh have appeared in your paper on the same subject , the idea is so good , practical , and inexpensive , that I trust your correspondent will not

lefc the matter drop until something be accomplished . The scheme itself , prop ° rly developed , would not only give employment to men on its staff , and actually be self-supporting , but I really believe a profit would accrue from fche fees , which might be applied to any Masonic purpose . A few pounds , say £ 150 , under

proper supervision only being required to start it . Discreetly advertised , there would be many outside the Craffc who wonld ( as employers , not those to be employed ) be glad to avail themselves of its means to obtain employes whose antecedents would be so well guaranteed , or could be so well ascertained through the Secretaries

of the various Lodges to which the various applicants belonged . I am so convinced of the feasibility of the scheme , and the immense good to be done by its agency , thafc I should be glad to

undertake a part in the management . However , I hope yon will nofc allow the matter to drop now that there is so much distress about , and which might easily be mitigated . Yonrs fraternally , NEMO .

Renumbering Of Lodges.

RENUMBERING OF LODGES .

To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I was glad tn see a letter from Bro , W . J . Hughan above mine in your issue of the 20 th June , and more especially so as ho is also of opinion thafc any alteration in the numbering of our Lodges would bo objectionable . I fully endorse

Bro . Hughan's arguments , and would point out another , which I think is equally strong , in favour of allowing matter- ) to remain as fchey are . Here , iu the Provinces , we are often cal'e I upon by " distressed Masons , " and I venture to think our difficulties in discriminating between genuine distress and imposture wonid be

increased by any change , ns an impostor might get " so confused by the alterations , " as really not to know the number of his Lodge . Any how , I look upon this point as another reason why no alteration should bo make , and if I have not explained my reasons very clearly , it is only becanse I do not wish to disclose too much of our local examination of " distressed Masons . "

For my own part I think we should be content to let a Lodge number stand as part of its title for all time . Masonry is nofc an ever-changing science , and why should any of its most prominent features be continually being altered . We might as well revise our Lodge names every few years , and really I do not know bub such an

arrangement would have much more reason than a mere readjustment of numbers , for whereas the latter has no particular inapplicability fco any district or section , the former may , either by the removal of the Lodge , or the enrolment of quite a different ; class among its members , prove most absurd , and this is particularly the

case where a purely local name or title was selected afc the start . The only objection that can be raised—so far as I can see—to a continuance of the present state of affairs is , thafc the numbers given fco our newest Lodges are misleading as to the numerical strength of the Craft , but this affects but very

few brethren , while any who do really desire to know the actual number of Lodges can discover it without very much trouble , by counting the list given in the Grand Lodge Calendar ; besides , a renumbering would not put this matter straight , for even during the few weeks thafc would elapse between the renumbering and the

publication of the revised list there would be a few , or it might be several , changes . Indeed , ifc might happen thafc at the very moment the result of the official revision was announced , steps wero being taken in another part of the world which would remove a dozen or more Lodges from tho English register , so it is no use urging a

renumbering on that plea . I have yet to learn that the number by which each of our Lodges is distinguished is more than the number it holds on the register—the books—of Grand Lodge , and if a Lodge does drop out it does not follow that all record of its existence ia to

drop out also . Tbe Lodges of South Australia , for instance , were regularly constituted , and existed for years , and still exist . Why , then , should their history in the Register of Grand Lodge be wiped out in order