The Study Of Masonic History.

it has gone on expanding till now there is not a country in tho world in which Masonry has not its disciples . Time , these disciples in some few countries aro forbidden to congregate in Lodges ; but no edict of Pope or Emperor is able to extirpate from their breasts a firm belief in the beauties of our Masonic science . The law is obeved—for

it is a leading principle of our Society that the ordinances of a government must be religiously observed—but tho faith remains . Is there not in all this a magnificent field for study ? If we are proud of a Society which has done all this , is it not well worth our while to learn how this

progress has been achieved , aud to whom , under heaven , we are indebted for this achievement ? The abstruser points of Masonic doctrine and Masonic research may not find favour with some of us , but our history during the last century and a half is worth studying , and there is no

intellect so feeble but it may grasp and keep firm hold of the most conspicuous events of that period . And if we English Masons need any encouragement to enter heartily upon the pursuit of this knowledge , it only needs that we should look to what our Transatlantic brethren are dointr

now , and have been doing for years past . Our history finds favour with them : they read , mark , learn , and digest it ; and consequently there are in the United States many able exponents of the history of Freemasonry . Shall it be said of Craftsmen in the United Kingdom , whence has sprung

all our modern Freemasonry , that we are less curious about our Craft than the Americans ; that we , in the old country are less proud of her than our cousins of the new ? We are certain the question , when it has been fairly and fully considered , will bo answered emphatically in tho

negative , and that no long timo will elapse ere onr present state of apathy will give place to one of energy and earnest study in the domain of history . Lodges , as in the case of some of our Lodges of Instruction—may do much towards securing this desirable consummation ;

but , after all , it is to Grand LVdge we must look for the needful encouragement . There is already one endowment , left by the late Bro . William Preston , the annual interest of which is payable to whoever delivers the Prestonian

lecture . A very small expenditure of trouble would soon induce as great an amount of interest in our history as in our ceremonies and lectures . But the initiative in this , as in all matters pertaining to the Craft , lies clearly with Grand Lodge .

The Coloured Mason Question.

THE COLOURED MASON QUESTION .

BY BRO . JACOB NORTON . IN" the two replies of October 14 th and 28 th , to my article on the Coloured Mason question , yon , Bro . Editor , intimntedyour unwilling , ness to have a controversy with mo upon the subject at issno ; the fact is , I did not anticipate a controversy . I have not quoted a solitary line from your article , and have but barely referred to you , as not knowing what Bro . Findel knew in 1861 . I cheerfully concedo that on most Masonio topics you are better informed than I am , but

on this particular topic I claim to be better informed . I was surprised last Summer to read in the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE , the paragraph from the New York Dispatch , about the Grand Lodge of England repossessing itself , in a rather underhanded manner , of the African Lodge Charter . This story had already been exploded by Bro . Findel , and I naturally concluded that you , Bro . Editor , had not

read that part of Bro . Finders history . The tenor of your article on the Coloured Question tended to confirm that belief , hence , I was induced to write the true history of the case , for the information of the English Craft . The FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE is read by our Boston Masons , and they alone can consistently undertake to controvert either my facts or inferences . But ,

believe me , they will not attempt it . " Facts , " thongh unpleasant ., " are stubborn things . " The question here is virtually settled , viz ., that as far as legitimacy is concerned , there are six of ono and half a dozen of the other ; either both are legitimate , or vice versa . The cry now is , " We don ' t want discussion . " " We have believed ( said a prominent Mason to me ) , for nearly a century

that the African Lodge was clandestine , and what is the use of upsetting onr belief ? " Bro . Gardner , tho ablest Mason in Boston , tried hard to persuade himself of the illegality of the coloured organisations in America . His address , in 1870 , was received with shouts of exultation by the nigger haters ; ono Masonic journal

triumphantly exclaimed , " What will Jacob Norton say to his Grand Master ' s address ? " but my reply to the said address has never been attacked , and why ? The Eev . Bro . Charles Griswokl , P . G . M . of Minnesota , in his article in the " Toice of Masonry , " April number , eavs : —

" When Grand Master Gardner . . . March , 1870 , reviewed the status of the coloured Masons in this country , it was supposed that his facts were so stubborn , and his arguments so unanswerable , as to for ever put to rest all questions relating thereto , and it came very generally to bo conceded that the coloured Lodges are hopelessly out

The Coloured Mason Question.

in the cold , aud must for ever bo regarded as clandestine ; but during the past few years everything Masonic has been undergoing a very severe scrutiny . . . . Especially is this true with reference to thoso questions under discussion , relating to tho coloured Lodges . A thorough investigation has brought to the surface facta so positive iu their nature , and arguments so conclusive , as to put

rho legitimacy of tho coloured Lodges in this country beyond tho possibility of being successfully controverted . " Again , the rejection of tho motion by tho Grand Lodge of Ohio , in October Inst , to recognise tho African Grand Lodge in that State as an independent G . L ., was not on account of illegitimacy , that was not disputed , but on account of its conflicting with tho constilntion

of Ohio , which contains a clause of exclusive jurisdiction . If , then , an Ohio colonred Mason should wish to visit an English Lodgo , how could he consistently be debarred admission ? You , my worthy brother , havo declared that you havo no objection to coloured Masons . Now , I never supposed that you did object to colour or race , and never said so . My remarks referred to our

American pretenders , that colour was not their objection . I am able to demonstrate that this is a now doctrine hero , and it originated only since tho Grand Orient of France rebuked tho injustice of tho American Grand Lodges to the Coloured organisations , aud I am oven prepared to prove , notwithstanding their protestations to tho contrary , that colour , and that alone , is the drawback now to the

recognition of tho said brethren . I stated that Prince Hall applied to tho 1777 Grand Lodge for a charter : yon mado a point thereof . I now bog pardon for my mistake : for , on referring to Bro . Gardner ' s address , I found that Hall applied to G . M . Warren for a Charter ; so that point is disposed of . But your point is , tkat a letter from Union Lodge , New York , in 1791 ,

asserted that since the war tho Masonic bodies in the different States had considered themselves independent , and you trinmphantly ask , whether I am prepared to rebut the evidence of that letter ? In answer , I beg to state that I not only concede it , but will even add , that the Grand Lodgo of Massachusetts itself , in 1783 , issued a dictum of exclusive jurisdiction ;—and what then ? There is an adage

that "it takes two to make a bargain . " The question now is , haa the G . L . of England assented to that dictum ? and have the Lodges in Massachusetts assented ? The fact ia , the Grand Lodge of England had never been informed that there were any other Lodges in Boston , save those of its own creation ; and tho English Provincial G . L . had not written a lino to London since 1770 . The English G . L .

really did not know , in 1784 , whether any Masonic Lodges survived iu Boston after the war . Again , St . John ' s Lodge , in Boston , was evidently dormant from the beginning of tho war till 1784 . It seems even to have lost its Charter . And , according to tho assertion of the late C . W . Moore , John Eowo , the English Provincial G . M . appointed in 1768 , granted a charter to St . John ' s Lodge in 1784 , or

a year after the so-called Grand Lodge issued its dictum of exclusive jurisdiction . This statement of Moore is discredited here , but , nevertheless , it is a well-known fact that tho Masons in Boston of English origin regarded the St . Andrew's Lodgo of Scotch origin , and her progeny , including tho new G . L ., as clandestine Masons ; and even St . Andrew ' s Lodgo itself did not acknowledge tho legality of tho

G . L . of Massachusetts before 1809 . The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts even now upholds the same doctrine . For instance , tho said G . L . chartered a Lodge in Valparaiso , in 1853 . A Grand Orient had either then already existed thoro , or it had been organised since ; tho Grand Orient requested tho Lodge to enrol itself nnder its jurisdiction . It also notified the G . L . of Massa .

chusetts of its law of exclusive jurisdiction , but our Massachusetts Grand Lodge paid no attention thereto , and had actually chartered since then a second Lodgo in Valparaiso , or some other part of Chili . I think it needs no argument to prove that if Massachusetts is right in establishing Lodges in Chili , that the Grand Lodgo of England had greater right to Charter a Lodge in Boston in 1784 . But here is a case still more pertinent . Tho Duke of Sussex

granted a charter to Hebrew Masons in Frankfort-on-the-Mnine , and the Lodgo is still under English jurisdiction . If tho Duke of Sussex could violate a German jurisdiction on behalf of Jewish Masons , the Duke of Cumberland could , with equal justice , invade an American jurisdiction ( suppose it was so ) on behalf of colonred Masons . I shall now proceed to sum up the arguments pro and con in an imaginary scene .

NOTICES OF MEETINGS . Lodge of . —Half an hour beforo the Lodge opened , Bro . White Jonathan and Bro . Jonathan Black were introduced to the Tyler , as Bro . Masons , who wished to visit tho Lodge . Tho former seemed very much excited . "I must speak with Bro . John Bull , your W . M ., " said he , " ere I enter the Lodge . " Just then Bro . Bull came

in , and after an introduction , they retired to a private room , where the following dialogue took place : — Jonathan . — "I hail from St . John ' s Lodgo , Boston . I am , therefore , all rigid , lint that nigger there belongs to tho African Lodge , which was erased from your books , and , contrary to American Masonic jurisprudence , the blacks organized a Grand Lodge in our jurisdiction ,

which established nigger Lodges all over the U . S . ; he is , therefore , all vsrong ; ho is a clandestine , and , if yon admit him , our American Grand Lodgo will certainly resent your insult to their authority . " John Bull . — " I am aware that your St . John's and his African Lodge derived their respective powers from our Grand Lodge , and am u ' . so rin-arc that both Lodges acted wrong in so doing , and wero I guided by American Masonic jurisprudence , I would kick tho pair

of you down-fairs ( figuratively so , of course ) , and would give you tho hardest , kicking . The whole history of Colonial Grand Lodgo is ii tissue ef irregularities and deceyitions . You paid no attention to the conditions of your Warrants or tho Book of Constitutions . According to your Hocords , you have chartered forty Lodges , and registered hero only five . Tho fees of the remaining thirty-five Lodges due to onr Grand Lodge you have spent in triunpetting , drumming , and feasting on St . John ' s Days . From 1770 to about 1840 , you did not even