Massachusetts Claim Repudiated.

seventy and eighty in number , were nothing more or less than the rituals of the pre-1717 Masons . Each Lodge in those days possessed a copy of the said ritual , but were of course not seen by non-Masons . Occasionally , however , one of the manuscript rituals fell into the hands of what is called " a profane . " Dr . Plott late in the seventeenth century described

a copy of that kind . On the day my article was printed Bro . Hughan sent me a very complimentary letter , frankly approving of my conclusion . Now , if the pre-1717 Masons conferred or possessed more than one Masonic degree , how is it that not a solitary copy of a ritual of that degree , or degrees , has ever been found ?

Again , quite a number of Scotch Masonic Lodge records exist , whose dates begin many years before 1717 . Thus , the Edinburgh Lodge record began in 1598 , other Lodge records began thirty or more years later . Brother David Murray Lyon ,

now Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Scotland , has examined every one of the said Scotch records , but he could nowhere find the slightest hint in any of them that the Scotch Masons conferred more than one degree , before the date when the Grand Lodge of England was formed .

In England were preserved only two operative Lodge records , viz ., the record of Alnwick Lodge , which began in 1703 , and continued till 1757 . The record begins with a copy of the then Masonic ritual , " Old Charges , " and that is the only ritual the Lodge conferred . Another operative Lodge record belonged to a Lodge at Sweldwell , which record began in 1725 , and continued till 24 th June 1735 , when the Lodge obtained a

Charter from the Grand Lodge of England . The said Lodge is now called " The Lodge of Industry , " and is placed on the English Lodge list as No . 48 . Now , both of the said English operative Lodge records have been examined , and no evidence was discovered that either of those conferred more than one degree . Such being the case , what reason had Bro . Nickerson to assert that before 1717 Masons bad more than one degree , and that " few ' Masons went beyond that ( or the first ) degree ?"

Again , the first Boston Lodge was said to have had a record from 1733 , because by-laws dated 1733 have been some years ago printed by Moore , but what became of the said record no one knew . Moore asserted that he returned the said record to the

Secretary of the Lodge , and that it was burnt in the Masonic Temple in 1863 . The record , however , was found in Moore ' s house after Moore ' s death late in 1873 . In January 1874 , I was allowed by G . M . S . Nickerson to examine the said record . After a half hour ' s pondering , I came to the conclusion that the said record was copied from previous records . It seems that

somewhere between 1752 and 1754—or after Charles Pelham had finished manufacturing the G . L . record from 1733 to April 1752 —a Brother who was Warden of the Boston Lodge in 1738 was generous to present the Lodge with a record book , and of course devolved on Charles Pelham the task of transcribing the Lodge minutes from the original minute books . So after getting

somebody to insert into the new book the by-laws of 1733 , and the so-called deputation of Henry Price , it seems that he got the Secretary of 1738 to copy his own minutes of that year into the hew book , but from 1739 ( as far as I remember ) to 12 th September 1744 , the minutes are signed P . ( or Peter ) Pelham , and from the very next meeting after the above date until June

1754 , the minutes are signed G . ( or Charles ) Pelham . But I had not the slightest doubt that from 1739 , to the end of the record , was written by Charles Pelham . When , however , I reported my opinion to Bro . Nickerson , he flew into a passion because I did not believe the record was a bona fide , original record , and he asked me how I knew whether Peter and Charles did not

write exactly alike ? A few years later , however , I learned that I could find a receipt written and signed by Peter Pelham in the Boston Historical Society Eooms . I then took a facsimile of part of the manuscript , including the signature of Peter Pelham , and when I showed it to Bro . Nickerson he admitted

the writing of Peter Pelham on the receipt bore no resemblance to any writing in the Boston Lodge record , but in Brother Niekerson ' s oration , as printed in the " American Tyler " of 9 th and 16 th September , he says that " The record of the first ( Boston ) Lodge , from 26 th December 1739 to 24 th July 1754 , are in tbe handwritings of Peter Pelham and his son Charles . "

I , however , without hesitation , assert that Bro . Nickerson cannot find in his G . L . archives a solitary line or even a word that was written by the hand of Peter Pelham . Sufficient has been given to show that where Masonic prejudice or Masonic pride is concerned , Brother Niekerson ' s statements are just as unreliable as those of C . W . Moore . Bro . Nickerson may flourish as long as he pleases Pelham ' s record to

prove Price ' s Grand Mastership of New England and over all North America ; but as Franklin , for reason already given , never accepted from Price in 1734 or later , either a Provincial deputation , or even a Charter for his Lodge , it is evident , therefore , that Price did not comply with Franklin ' s demand for Price to send him copies of both deputation , certified by the signature of Price ' s Wardens and Secretary . And here again ,

Massachusetts Claim Repudiated.

the only reason I can assign why Price did not send copies of said deputations , was because he was in possession of no such deputations in 1734 . In short , after looking at the question from every standpoint , I can come to no other conclusion than that Price was an impostor , and the so-called Price ' s deputation in the Massachusetts G . L . record of 1733 was not concocted before Charles Pelham ' s appointment of Grand Secretary in 17 nO

I must here add that G . M . Gardner endeavoured , in 1871 , to defend Price ' s claims to Grand Mastership , to which I replied in the London " Freemason , " of 10 th and 17 th August 1872 . The said reply was approved of by Bro . S . Evans , editor of the " Masonic Monthly" in Boston , by the well-known Masonic

journalist and author , Fletcher J . Brennan , by Dr . Joseph Bobbins Grand Secretary of Correspondence of the G . L . of Illinois , who devoted twenty-one pages of the proceedings of his G . L . to review the Henry Price controversy , and he wound up as follows :

" As we have before said , we do not believe that anyone could have handled the materials more ably and judicious than Bro . Gardner has done in his attempt to prove the validity of Price ' s claims . That he has failed—as in our opinion he has—is due to weakness inherent in the case that neither labour nor

skill could cover up . And last , and not least , Bro . J . G . Findel , the well-known Masonic historian , not only applauded in a private letter my reply to Bro . Gardner , but as the fourth edition of his history of Masonry can be seen in the Boston Masonic library , any curious

reader can satisfy himself that he adopted the same opinion about the alleged Henry Price ' s Grand Mastership as I did . In the " Cincinnati Masonic Eeview " of November and December 1890 , and in January and July 1891 , the reader can find more reasons to disprove Price ' s claims , or claims made in behalf oi his claim of Grand Mastership , & c .

I will now wind up with a most unaccountable puzzle , viz About five years ago , Brother Nickerson informed me that he would print the Massachusetts G . L . record from 1733 to 1754 . Since then he printed one volume of the said work , but he never continued the work , nor has the printed volume seen light since it

was printed . It seems that the printed volume is suppressed . Of course there is a reason for it , and some speculation is even now circulating . One opinion is that second thought convinced Brother Nickerson that by circulating the volume it would help to explode his highly favoured Henry Price

hobby . I think that the above reason is not improbable . Perhaps , however , the perusal of the above may induce Brother Nickerson to explain why he did not continue the work , and why he suppressed the volume already printed ? Boston , 1 st October 1893 .

I must here call the reader ' s attention to the fact that it is now more than two years since the above was printed in the " American Tyler , " yet Bro . Nickerson has made no reply to my questions . Last summer he delivered an address about Henry Price , before St . John ' s Lodge , and as far as I could learn ; all of his arguments in support of the assertion that Henrv Price had

been Grand Master were based on the early records of the G . L . of Mass . And I now ask again , first , What authority had he for stating in his-address that Masons had three degrees before 1717 ? and secondly , Why did he not continue re-printing the records of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts , and why did he suppress the volumes he did print ? Boston , 10 th February 1896 .

Masonic Sonnets, No. 115.

Masonic Sonnets , No . 115 .

BY BBO . CHAS . F . FOESHAW , LL . D ., 2417 , 1242 , 295 ( B . C . ) , 761 , 24 ( S . C ) .

STABILITY . O WORD denoting majesty and might I Let all who term themselves Accepted Free , Still cling to precepts ever taught by thee To sons who know thee when they've seen the Light :

And ever strong and steadfast in the Right Firm and immovable for all time be ; Decided , certain , and unwaveringly Performing deeds that know no dread of night 1 Then fixed , determined in their purpose grand ,

bo will they conquer while the world admires This one true precept seen on every hand Which elevates , ennobles and inspires . And deeds Masonic founded on this base Win all renown and justly gain all praise I Winder House , Bradford , 23 rd March 1896 .

OLD Books and Curiosities relating to Freemasonry , Knights Templars , Rosicrucians or other Secret Societies wanted . Address , W . W . Morgan , Hew Barnet .