Philadelphia "Mother" Question; Bro. Lane's Theory On.

my Philadelphian opponents maintaining that the first warranted Lodge in America was located in Philadelphia . Leaving out tho evidence derived from the Dublin Pocket Companion , on which I have already commented , I mnst

begin with Daniel Coxe , who was appointed by the G . L . or G . M . of England , in 1730 , Prov . G . M . of New York , New-Jersey and Pennsylvania . I also know that on the 24 th of

June 1731 a party , who called themselves Masons , turned out in procession in Philadelphia and variously claimed to be a Lodge and a Grand Lodge . Hence Bro . Calla jumped to the conclusion that Daniel Coxe must have authorised

the Masonry in Philadelphia in 1731 . All this is , however , mere guess-work . Bnfc here is something , if ifc were true , that would have furnished clear evidence for legal Masonry in Philadelphia in 1731 . I refer to a fragment of

a letter alleged to have been written in 1754 by Henry Bell to Cadwallader at Philadelphia . There is an unaccountable mystery about the history of that letter , no one can learn how it has been concealed since 1754 ,

nor the name of its present custodian , nor about the part that preceded the fragment , nor about the finishing part thereof . However , here is the fragment of Bell's letter .

" As you well know ( wrote Bro . Bell ) I was one of the originators of the first Masonic Lodge in Pennsylvania . A parfcy of us used fco meet at the Tun Tavern in Waterstreet . Once , in the fall of 1730 , we formed a design for

obtaining a charter for a regular Lodge , and made application to the Grand Lodge of England for one , but before receiving it we heard that Daniel Coxe , of New Jersey , had

been appointed Provincial Grand Master of New York , New Jersey and Pennsylvania . We , therefore , made application to him and our request was granted . "

Now , I do not believe that Bro . Bell here wrote the truth , and to show that a Mason could err even in those days , I will just give one instance . We have in Boston a Grand

Lodge record beginning in 1773 . In reality , however , it was written by Charles Pelham , at the dictation of Henry Price in 1751 , and under date of 24 th June 1734 is the following , viz .:

—" About this time our W . Bro . Benjamin Franklin , from Philadelphia , became acquainted with our R . W . Grand Master Mr . Price , who further instructed him [ Franklin ] in the Royal Arfc , and said Franklin , on his return to

Philadelphia , called the brethren together there , who petitioned our R . W . Grand Master , having this year received orders from the Grand Lodge of England to establish

Masonry m all North America , did send a Deputation to Philadelphia appointing the R . W . Mr . Benjamin Franklin first Master , which is the beginning of Masonry there . "

Now , the above paragraph is absolutely incorrect . I do not believe Price was appointed Prov . G . M . of New England in 1733 , and consequently I do not believe that his power was extended in 1734 . It is certain , however , that

Price brought with him a Lodge warrant m 1733 . There are other discrepancies in this record which need not be mentioned here . Now , if Henry Price could lie in Boston in 1751 , why could nofc Henry Bell lie in Lancaster ,

Pennsylvania , in 1754 ? The orator , at the dedication of the Philadelphia Temple in 1873 , who for the first time quoted Bell ' s fragment , . seems to have doubted about Daniel Coxe ' s Warrant , for he ( the orator ) added , " If it was

granted at all . " But again this is nofc all : from the above letter one would infer that Bro . Bell was an important member of the first Pennsylvanian Lodge , for he claims to have been one of the originators of the Lodge , and

took an active part in petitioning , first the Grand Lodge of England , and next Daniel Coxe . He says , " We , therefore , made application to him , and our request was granted . " Now , the recently-discovered Ledger of the

first Philadelphia Lodge , extending between 1731 and 1738 , or later , containing as it ought to do the names of all the members of the said Lodge is , however , minus the name of Bro . Henrv Bell .

I will now proceed to show that Benjamin Franklin did not know of any connection between his Grand . Lodge and Daniel Coxe as late as 28 th November 1734 . I must premise by stating that in December 1730 Franklin

was an anti-Mason , and he also was guilty of a fib : he claimed that there were then several Lodges in Pennsylvania . However , he afterwards became a very zealous

Mason , for in 1731 he was a Grand Warden , and in 1734 he was Grand Master ; during that year he visited Boston and became acquainted with Price ; where he probably saw , for the first time , Anderson's Constitutions of 1723 , which

Philadelphia "Mother" Question; Bro. Lane's Theory On.

ho loprinted in 1734 . Price of course told him thafc ho was Prov . G . M . of New England , bufc I very much doubt that Franklin saw Price ' s Deputation . Lifer on , in 1734 , Franklin saw , in a Boston paper , that Price received an

extension of his Deputation . At that time a rival Lodge was started in Philadelphia , and as Franklin ' s Lodge used to hold its meetings at the Tun Tavern ifc is very probable that the rival Lodge met at the Hoop Tavern . * Bufc be

that as it may , on the 28 fch of November 1734 Franklin wrote two letters , on the same sheet , to Price , one was official , fche other unofficial . In the first place he wrote" We think it our duty to lay before your Lodge what we apprehend needful to be done for us , in order to

promote and strengthen the interest of Masonry in this Province , [ the following is very significant ] which seems to want the sanction of some authority derived from home to

give the proceedings and deliberations of our Lodge their due weight , to wit : a Deputation or Charter granted by tho R . W . Mr . Price . "

Franklin , however , mado a condition which Price could not grant ; he requested that the Deputation should be accompanied " with a copy of the R . W . Grand Master ' s first Deputation , and of the instrument by which it appears

to be enlarged as above mentioned , witnessed by your Wardens and signed by the Secretary . " The above condition shows that Franklin was not very sure of Price ' s Grand Mastership . The second letter contains an equally

significant hint that Franklin knew nothing about Coxe , and that he was conscious that his own Lodge was as unauthorised as the new opposition Lodge , for therein he said :

" I beg leave to recommend their request , and to inform you that some false brethren , who are foreigners , being about to set up a distinct Lodge , in opposition to the old and true brethren here , pretending to make Masons for a

bowl of punch , and the Craffc is like to come into disesteem among us unless the true brethren are countenanced and distinguished by some such special authority as herein desired . "

The only claim Franklin urged of superiority of his Lodge over the other Lodge was " true brethren" and " old brethren . " These were mere quibbles ; we know that his Lodge was not old , and he very well knew that his brethren were no more true or authorised than fche others .

If Franklin had received any authority , either from Coxe or " from home , " he would never have needed any authority from Price , or even if he did need such authority he would have used very different language to what he did ;

moreover , if the first chartered Lodge in America was located in Philadelphia , the Provincial Grand Masters appointed by the Grand Lodge of England over all North America in the last century would have been Philadelphians and nofc Bostonians .

In 1743 Thomas Oxnard received from England a Deputation for Provincial Grand Master over all parts of North America where the Grand Lodge of England itself had nofc established a Prov . Grand Lodge . As , for obvious reasons ,

Price did nofc legalise the Philadelphia Masonry , Oxnard made Franklin Grand Master on 10 th July 1749 . And immediately after our Philadelphians were legalised they applied to the Grand Lodge of England for a

Deputation , by virtue of which Allen succeeded Franklin , on the 13 th of March 1750 . The fact that Franklin in 1734 went begging to Price for recognition , and in 1749 he went begging to Oxnard , shows conclusively that until 1749

there was no legally chartered Lodge in Philadelphia . For if Franklin had received any authority , either from Coxe or " from home , " he would not have waited till 1749 ere he applied to the Grand Lodge of England , bufc would have done afc first what he did afc last .

Again , for a succession of years after 1731 Franklin continued to publish , now and then , some Masonic matter in his paper . In 1734 he published Anderson ' s Constitutions , bufc among all Franklin ' s writings Coxe ' s connection

with Masonry is never alluded to . Coxe returned to New Jersey in 1734 , and he died in 1739 , and there is not a particle of evidence that when Coxe died anybody iu

America knew that Coxe was a Mason . Even Franklin , who published an obituary notice of Coxe ' s demise , did not mention his connection with the Craffc . Finally , I have indisputable evidence , on the English