Massachusetts Claim Repudiated.

MASSACHUSETTS CLAIM REPUDIATED .

We reprint , from the "American Tyler" of 23 rd Dec . 1893 the following article by Bro . Jacob Norton , as corrected by its author .

IN 1842 Grand Secretary Charles W . Moore told me that he had an original record of his Grand Lodge from 1733 . In 1857 Moore published a book , called " The Constitutions of

Massachusetts , " containing also the life of Price , & c , and in a list of officers given on one of the tables Charles Pelham is placed as Grand Secretary under date of 1744 . But in 1869 I saw the old record and found there—in Charles Pelham ' s own handwriting—that he was the first Grand Secretary of the G . L . of Massachusetts , and that his appointment did not take place before April 1750 , hence the Massachusetts G . L .

record could not have been an original record since 1733 , or before April-1750 ; other internal evidence served further to confirm the fact that no record whatever was kept before Charles Felham ' s appointment . Among which I noticed that a number of paragraphs began with " About the time . " In original records we do not find paragraphs begin in that fashion . Here is a specimen , and I will hereafter show that the statements therein are incorrect . It begins as follows :

" June 24 th 1734 . * * * About this time our W . Bro . Benjamin Franklin , from Philadelphia , became acquainted with our R . W . G . M . Mr . Price , who further instructed him in the Royal Art , and said Franklin on his return to Philadelphia called the Brethren together , who petitioned our

W . G . M . for a Constitution to hold a Lodge , and our R . W . G . M ., having this year received orders from the G . L . of England to establish Masonry in all parts of N . A ., did send a deputation to Philadelphia , appointing the R . W . Mr . Benjamin Franklin first Master , which is the beginning of Masonry there . "

On page 97 of Moore ' s book , above referred to , Moore said : " The first warrant ( Price ) issued was for a Lodge in Philadelphia , called in the records ' The first Lodge iu Pennsylvania . ' The authority for it was granted to his intimate personal friend and Brother , Benjamin Franklin , who was its first Master . The warrant bears date June 24 th 1734 . "

But Franklin ' s letters to Price , wherein he petitioned for a deputation , published in the " American Tyler , " 16 th September , was not dated before 28 th November 1734 , the Charter Price granted could not have been dated 24 th June 1734 . Again , Franklin ' s letters to Price of November 1734

were signed " B . Franklin G . M ., " hence 1734 could not have been the beginning of Masonry in Philadelphia . But I shall hereafter show that 1734 was not the beginning in Philadelphia . And I shall show hereafter that Price never established legal Masonry in Philadelphia at all .

Thus , Franklm visited Price in Boston , 1733 , and we may naturally suppose that he asked Price to show him his English deputation . It seems , however , that Price avoided showing his deputation , and that Franklin evidently doubted the genuineness of Price ' s claims . When , however , Franklin read an article in the Boston prints , which was asserted to

have come from London , " purporting ( as Franklin says in his letter ) that at a Grand Lodge there ( in London ) in August last Mr . Price ' s deputation and power was extended over all America , which advice we hope is true , " & c , which means that he was not quite sure that it was true ; he , nevertheless , wrote to Price to send him a document that would

serve to legalise Masonry in Pennsylvania . But Franklin wanted Price to send him , in addition to a deputation to give authority for his Masonry iu Pennsylvania , evidence that Price was in possession of authority from England to enable him to legalise Masonry in Franklin ' s Province . It is reasonable to suppose that if Price had shown to Franklin a genuine

document , signed and sealed , which empowered him to act as G . M . for New England , Franklin would not have demanded of Price to send copies of both deputation , signed by the Boston Wardens and Secretary . The fact , however , is , all the power that Price received from the English Grand Officers was merely for opening a Lodge , copies of such document have been furnished in those days to persons in England , as well

as to some who went to America . Bro . Hughan furnished two or more copies of deputations for merely constituting a Lodge in a place where no Provincial G . M . was appointed , and the same document , says Bro . Hughan , the Master of the Lodge preserved as its Charter , and here is a specimen of one of these deputations issued by the same Officers , which gave Price ' s deputation in 1733 .

" Montague , G . M ., ( Seal . ) Greeting . Whereas , a petition has been presented to us , and signed by several Brethren residing in and about the City of Exeter , humbly praying that they

may be constituted into a regular Lodge . These are therefore to empower and authorize our Right Worshipful aud well beloved Brethren , John Bray , Esq ., and Mr . Thomas Jeffreys , or either of them , to convene our Brethren at Exeter aforesaid , who have signed the said petition , and that the said John Bray , Esq ., or Mr . Thomas Jeffreys , do

Massachusetts Claim Repudiated.

in our placo and stead , constitute a regular Lodge in due form ( they , the said John Bray , Esq ., and Mr . Thomas Jeffreys taking special care that they and every of them have been regularly made Masons ) , with like privileges as all their regular Lodges enjoy ; and that thoy may bo required to conform themselves to all and every the regulations contained in the printed book of Constitutions , and observe such other rules and instructions as shall from time to time be transmitted to them by us , Thomas Betson , Esq . our Deputy Grand Master ,

or the Grand Master or his deputy for the time being ; and that they do send to us , or our deputy , a list of the members of their Lodge , together with the rules agreed on to be observed , to the end that they may be entered in the Grand Lodge book , and upon the duo execution of this our deputation , the said John Bray , Esq ., or Mr . Thomas Jeffreys , is hereby required to transmit to us or our said deputy , a certificate , under both or either of their hands , of the time and place of such Constitution , iu order that they may be entered on the Book of Regular Lodges .

Given under hand and seal of office , this eleventh day of July , and in the year of Masonry 5732 . "

Here follow the signatures of tho D . G . M ., the two Wardens , and of the G . Secretary . Now , when constituting a Lodge by a temporary Deputy Grand Master , the said personage opened a G . L ., appointed his deputy ; and two Grand Wardens , and played Grand Master during the time it took him to constitute the Lodge . After the

ceremony was over , the grandness of himself , of his deputy , and of his Wardens , disappeared , and continued to be no more than the other Brethren of the Lodge were , and just such a deputation did Price bring to Boston . And as to the alleged deputation he received from a G . L . held in August 1734 , no copy whatever exists or ever has existed . Indeed , Price could not

have received any power from a G . L . held in London in 1734 , because no G . L . was held in August 1734 , or , in other words , no G . L . met in London from 30 th March 1734 Dill the 24 th February 1735 . The article in the " Boston News , " mentioned in Franklin ' s letter , was doubtless inserted into the Boston paper at the instigation of Price , but was not the only untruth Price was guilty of .

That Price did not legalise Pennsylvania Masonry either by sending to Franklin a deputation or Charter , may be clearly proven from the fact that in 1749 Franklin received a deputation from G . M . Oxnard , of Boston , who was Provincial G . M . of all North America . Franklin then , as Provincial G . M . of Pennsylvania , chartered the Philadelphia Lodge . Yes , he chartered the very Lodge wherein he himself was initiated in 1731 . And

according to the Masonic Constitution , he sent to Oxnard three guineas for the said Charter . The record has it that Franklin sent thirty guineas . Such , however , was the sum according to depreciated currency then circulating in Massachusetts , but in reality it amounted to £ 3 3 s . sterling . Now , had Price legalised Masonry in 1724 , there would have been no need for Franklin to have obtained a deputation from Oxnard in 1749 .

Again , within a few months after Oxnard legalised Masonry in Pennsylvania , Bro . W . Allen , who constituted himself Grand Master of Pennsylvania in 1732 , petitioned the Grand Master of England to send him a deputation for Provincial Grand Master over Pennsylvania , and a deputation was sent to him accordingly . It is therefore evident that had Price legalised Masonry in

Pennsylvania in 1734 , that Bro . Allen would not have waited , until 1750 before applying to the Grand Master of England for said deputation , and Franklin would not have paid Oxnard in 1752 three guineas for a Charter for his Lodge . These , besides , other reasons , convinced me that Price did not send to Franklin in 1734 either a deputation or a Charter , and for good reasons I

am satisfied that Price had no power to send a Charter to Philadelphia . Nay , more , the record claims that Price chartered four Lodges during the four years he was G . M . But there is no truth whatever in it . Price did , indeed , open a Lodge in Boston in 1733 , but he chartered no other Lodge afterwards , nor did he send a Charter to South Carolina in 1735 , as C . W . Moore asserts .

Having given a specimen of the unreliability of C . W . Moore ' s historical statements , I am sorry to say that the present G . S . of Massachusetts is not much better than Moore was . Moore had an advantage of the present G . S ., for Moore was not only boss of the G . L ., but he was regarded as " the greatest Masonic authority in the world , " both inside and outside

of the G . L ., and no one dared to question his statements . But now , though Bro . Nickerson is also boss of the G . L . yet outside of the G . L . he is not regarded as infallible authority , and people are free to criticise his statements . Briefly , then , I willshow that where Masonic pride or prejudice prevails over his mind ,

he is more or less regardless of strict truth . For instance , in his address at the 150 th anniversary of Masonry in Massachusetts , printed in this paper on 9 th and 16 th September 1893 , speaking of the pre-1717 Masons , Bro . Nickerson said : " And ' few went beyond that degree . "

Thus implying that the pre-1717 Masons had more degrees than one , but in the first place , there is not a particle of evidence to prove the beibre-1717 Masons had more than one " Masons ' word , " or conferred in their Lodges more than one degree . In an article of mine printed in the " Freemason" ( London ) , I demonstrated that the manuscript , which Bro . Hughan called " old charges , " and I believe that they now count up to between