Consecration Of The Queen's Westminster Lodge, No. 2021.

how he would carry out the duties , he had said that which he would now repeat—By God ' s help he would . He knew it was a difficult task to preside over a Lodge and to carry out the work to tho full appreciation of every brother , bufc they must bear with everything that came before them , and therefore he would say that before coming to the chair there were little rocks ahead against which he

must have been shipwrecked but for the assistance of the other founders , who were old Past Masters or instructors of Lodges . Therefore they hacl been enabled to surmount the difficulties and keep their head to the wind . Thafc hacl been their intention , will , and desire , and no effort of his should be spared , either in Freemasonry or anything else , to carry out his duties to tho fullest extent ,

He considered it a great compliment to havo so many Grand Officers present . During 40 years association with Freemasons he had been in the chair several times , and he hoped and trusted his energy would not be diminished , and that he might be all the brethren desired . He should look for their cordial co-operation in bringing the Lodge well to the front . Bro . Frank Richardson P . G . D .

responded to the toast of the Consecrating and Installing Officer . Those who had assisted in the consecration felt it a great honour to be elected honorany members of the Lodge . Several other toasts followed ; the several speakers all agreeing as to the success which had attended the inauguration of the Lodge , which undoubtedly bids fair fco be one of the most successful of those recently established .

Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

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

PROGRESS OF MARK MASONRY . To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I read your account of fche proceedings of the Special Grand Lodge of Mark Masons with peculiar interest . For fche moment I thought you had can ' ghfc the Mark fever , seeing that you devoted so much space to Mark Masonry in connection with the accession to its ranks of the Prince of Wales . Supposing that the

caution so strongly enforced on all sides thafc this act of the Prince of Wales is not to be taken as the foreruunerof an attempt at amalgamation wifch tho Craft , is fully realised , I can perceive thafc not only will harm not arise , but there is every prospect of good coming out of ifc . Of the inherent value of fche Mark degree I do not profess to speak ; thafc ifc has received the sanction of the highest and best Masons in

the land is enough to satisfy ' me , and , I should think most other people also , that it is a worthy adjunct of , though to be kept separate from , Craffc Masonry . I am nofc surprised to learn that Mark Masonry has received a great filip in cosequence of its recognition by the Prince of Wales , and that Lodges are likely to spring up and the Order developo with

greafc speed . You know fche old proverb , Mr . Editor , " the more haste the less speed , " and I would commend this lesson to the brethren who now enjoy what may be termed a distinguished position in the Masonic world . There will be no difficulty in mulitplying Lodges now , bufc never was there a time when greater care was needed in the selection of proper candidates . The prosperity thafc

has already been attained by the Mark Grand Lodge , and the still greater prospority that in all probability will follow , will become a temptation to many to join the body , some it is to be feared with the distinct object of profiting thereby . I trust therefore that those who are members now will not be in too great a hurry to swell their numbers , and thafc they will carefully weigh the claims and position of every candidate before admitting him to the degree . Yours fraternally , MARK .

The High Grades Of Ancient And Primimive Masonry.

THE HIGH GRADES OF ANCIENT AND PRIMIMIVE MASONRY .

To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —Absence from England has prevented my replying earlier to the letters of " YOUR EEVIEWER " ancl " S . J . B . " To the former I need only say that I am quite willing to accept his disclaimer of any intended offence , ancl express my hope that he will excuse anything similar in the warmth of my reply . I

regret that he will not concede that others may perhaps have a know , ledge of matters with which he may he unacquainted , as I wrote in a great measure from actual acquaintance with my subject , and did not touch cyclopaedia literature . Whilst this correspondence has been going on , a gentleman from India , a non-Mason , called upon me with an introduction from the Theosophical Society , and , amongst

other matters , mentioned to me how he had become acquainted with the existence of an old occult society in India consisting of several degrees . A Colonel had given him a recognised sign which led up to the subject . This Theosophical Society has a branch iu London consisting of nine degrees , founded upon the plan of the ancient

societies . With brethren of a certain class it is useless to discuss , as their forte is simply to try to crush out all that which the bent of their education does not enable them to comprehend . With " S . J . B . " it is different , and I am bound to admit a slip of the pen , as I have ought to have said G . M ., or rather P . G . M . Sayer .

The High Grades Of Ancient And Primimive Masonry.

There wero also a few misprints in my first letter , of which I may here mention two , viz ., Norma , should of course bo Numa , and I wrote Trinitarian and not Unitarian . Hyneman ' s hook has several errors , but I quoted it for the sake of tho numerous facts confirmatory of my statement . His idea is that tho Grand Lod ge of 1717 was a rebellious pretender against the

authority of the Grand Lodge at York , and that the Ancient Masons were in reality true York Masons . It is certain that York Masonry and Ancient Masonry were identical . But , doubtless , Modern Masonry , as Craft Masonry , was truly the Ancienfc Craffc system , and the so-called Ancient Masons could only claim that designation as a Eite having its existence prior to the establishment of G . L . This is

a subject which it is very difficult to discuss without exciting a considerable amount of antagonism . Bufc I adhere to the view propounded in my lecture . It was the practical policy of the G . L . of 1717 to ignore the mention of the G . L . of York , as well as its subordinates : this was politic , but nofc honest . Iu Anderson we find mention of only four old Lodges—that is , four assemblies of Masons meeting at

fonrpublio-houses ; bufc the author of "Mulfca Paucis" mentions six such , and there may have been many others at a time when snch confederations were illegal and nothing written allowed . In 1719 we find ifc stated that " several old brethren who had neglected the Craft visited the Lodges . " And if there were not other Lodges practising a system not recognised by the G . L . of 1717 , to whom did Samber

in " Long Livers " 1721 , address himself on the High Grades , as the G . L . of 1717 repudiated all but the three degrees , and even conferred the last in their own body ? It is evident that in 1721 there were Lodges , or at least a Lodge , which recognised certain High Grades , neither possessed or desired by the G . L . of 1717 . There are frequent mentions of unrecognised Masons , and of those hailing from the

Holy Lodge of St . John of Jerusalem , and ifc is fco them that we are indebted for the Seven Degree Rite of the Ancient Masons . As those were not Modern Masons they were Ancient York Masons , and after 1739 simply Ancients : for the peculiarity of these Ancients was thafc their system was identical with that of the G . L . of All England afc York . Several writers of the period allude to the Rosicruoian

proclivities of this section , and old Ephraim Chambers says thafc " there are some Free Masons who have all the character of Eosicrucians . " As I said before , Hyneman claims that all the Schismatics denounced by G . L . were Ancient York Masons , and after 1739 simply Ancient Masons . That the variations between Anderson ' s 1723 and 1738 charges wero made to conciliate the Ancients , and in this I

perfectly agree . He shows , also , thafc the Lodge Lists of Anderson and Entick are irreconcilable , and one or both of them are false . That in 1717 there were 4 Lodges ; in 1721 , 12 to 20 j in 1722 , 24 ; and in 1723 , 25 ; yefc in 1723 there are only 10 known Lodges . Numereus were the schisms ; in 1722 Wharton collected a few Masons irregularly and got himself elected G . M . In 1730 Sayer was reprimanded

for attending schismatic Lodges . In 1734 resolutions were passed against what G . L . calls illegal conventions of Masons . These dis . sensions increased down to 1739 , when Raymond ordered an inquiry . Then followed the erasure of about two-fifths of the Lodges . In 1742 there were 3 erased ; in 1743 , 7 ; in 1744 , 2 ; in 1745 , 20 ; in 1746 , 4 j in 1748 , 4 ; in 1752 , 3 ; in 1754 , 21 . In 1755 the Anoients had become

well established , and for over 15 years there had been , according to Preston and others , bad blood between the G . L . 's of York and London . Fresh restrictions were passed against the Ancients in 1755 , and it could have been no light matter occasioned all this turmoil against a body so highly patronised by noble personages as was the G . L . of 1717 .

The facts indicate , however , thafc modern historians are correct in stating thafc the 1739 organisers of the Ancients were , chiefly , schismatics who had seceded from the G . L . of 1717 , but for the remote origin of that schism I assert thafc we must advance to about the year 1686 , when some Lodge , or Lodges , adopted a ritual of the Holy Lodge of St . John with certain high degrees . Lasfc century

this ritual claimed the year 16 S 6 as the period of its revival , and inquiry is in favour of the record or tradition . However , I am not anxious to discuss this matter any further , but have drafted certain heads for extended inquiry . I am not much interested in the question , as I have more important matters with which to occupy my time . It is a question of antiquarian examination

only , and is in no way intended to hint a precedent action . My intention is to bespeak a conscientious tolerance for ^ all rites outside the Craffc equally , and without bias to any particular system . The Masonio feeling , at present , seems to me to be neither good , just or tolerant , and therefore I rather prefer to withdraw gradually from Masonry altogether . In the Antient and Primitive Eite of Masonry we are able to gratify the conscientious scruples of those Masons who

desire high-grade instruction , and object to Christian Masonry on religious grounds . We are nniversalists , and admit all religions equally ; we only desire to be left alone , we are quite indifferent whether we become a powerful organisation or a weak ono , or whether our members are socially great or small . We rather prefer a small and compact organisation of kindred spirits to a large and heterogenous rite .

Yours truly and fraternally , JOHN YARKER P . M . P . M . K . M . P . Z . & c Witherington , near Manchester , 14 th December 1883 .

Ad00704

FIRE AT FREEMASONS' HALL ! T ARGE photographs of the Temple , taken immediately after the J fire , on -1 th May ( suitable for framing- ) , 5 s each ; or framed in oak , securely pricked , sent to any address in the United Kingdom , carriage paid , on receipt of cbeqne for 15 s . Masters of Lodges should secure this memorial of the old Temple for their Lod ^ e rooms . W . G . PAEKEE , Photographer , 40 High Holborn , W . C . Established 35 years .