"A Very Pretty Quarrel, As It Stands."

its whole existence the FREEMASON ' CHRONICLE has steadily and consistently adhered to the objects and principles which it originally espoused , the great aim being the welfare } of onr Institution and the promotion of fche cause

of Charity . But , apart from the general scope of an organ devoted to these aims , there frequently crop up questions of an historical and archaeological interest , the discussion

of which must be of value to every class of reader . To these our columns have always been freely open , and a glance over tho files of the lasfc thirteen years is sufficient to indicate what a vast accumulation of Masonic knowledge

and opinions has been added to the common stock . The occasions have not been few or far between on which wo havo had to apply the bearing-rein to enthusiastic correspondents who , with " itching fingers , " seem ever ready

to rush into print , and who vainly consider that the point and brilliancy of their effusions lie in the personal animus displayed , and the scathing castigation thoy can administer to their opponents . Such , however ,

is not the view taken by those by whom the chivalry ancl courtesies of journalism aro cherished , even in this age . We have not unfrequently been twitted that Masonic journals aro a mistake , that they tell the reading public too

much , and thafc Freemasonry would do better without them . But , strange to say , these taunts come from the very men who , when seized with their oft-recurring fits of

cacoethes senbendi , " pile up the agony of abuse and scurrility to such a degree that if their lucubrations were permitted to appear they would be the first to blush at their enormity .

In the conduct of the FREEMASON ' CHRONICLE we have stedfastly retained that platform which is held by every conscientious journalist , and whilst affordin g full latitude for the interchange of opinions all round on matters of

Masonic interest , we have unceasingly deprecated anything which might lead to personal wrangling or dispute . Thus , in the matter now under consideration , it is imperative that we should say a word or two , in order to show that

although we do nofc " burke wholesale all the documents that reach our ofiice , too much has been said in regard to the " legitimate Mother Lodgeship of America , " and some

of our correspondents are becoming so heated that ifc is jusfc as well they should "bide a wee" before plunging into another tournament . There is a certain amount of

exhilaration and excitement in a fair stand-up fight , and literary assaults-at-arms are not infrequently productive of the same kind of sentiment , " may the best man win . " Thus , whilst our friends on either side of the " Herring

Pond" were content to " play light" there could be no objection , although at times the raps across the knuckles were sharply administered , and no doubt caused their recipients fco wince . So long as fchey all came up smiling there

was nothing to complain of , and although a majority of English Freemasons care no more whether the " Mother Lodgeship of America " was at Boston or Philadelphia than

they do about the arrival of the millennium , nevertheless , so long as the wordy warfare was conducted in a spirit of amenity , we felt perfectly justified in allowing the contributions to appear .

It may be as well , after this preliminary explanation as to why several communications on this subject are declined , that we should take a cursory outline of the questions which have formed the bone of contention between the

parties . We do not intend to travel over ground that has become wearisome , if not dangerous , but to summarise , as concisely as we can , the salient points upon which so much hig h falutin' has taken place . In the early part of last

month there appeared in these columns an article from the pen of Bro . J . Fletcher Brennan , of Cincinnati , Ohio , with the significant heading of "History of a Crime . " In ifc the writer , after describing how that in June 1730 , the firsfc Prov . Grand Master Deputation ever granted b y the Grand Lodge of England for any part or Province of America

was received , cites from various Masonic writers upon the development of Masonry in New Jersey and other parts of America ; and ultimately he brings us down to the year 1870 , which he says was memorable for its private and

public contibutions to the general enlightenment regarding early Masonic legitimacy in America . But even thus late he asserts that the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts authorised a committee to investigate the subject of the actual

appointment by the Grand Master of Grand Lodge of England in 1733 of Henry Price , as Prov . Grand Master . The Chairman of that Committee , Pas . Grand Master Heard , went to England and there obtained all the infor-

"A Very Pretty Quarrel, As It Stands."

mation possible , which , however , failed to satisfactoril y attest the affirmative of the subject of his inquivy . " He goes on to relate how that Bro . J . cob Norton discovered many mistakes in the " information " received by

Bro . Heard in London , and the "expose' of the late Grand Secretary , Bro . C . W . Moore , of Boston . " The princi pal affliction , " he adds , " was his ( Bro . Norton ' s ) expression of opinion that Honry Price was at no time possessed of a

Provincial Grand Master ' s Deputation ; in fact , while he was possessed of a legitimate Lodge charter , and with , it organised , in Boston , in June 1733 the first Lodge that was legitimately founded in America , and which Lodge was

for many years afterwards known as the ' First Lodge . '" The sentence is vague , and we can scarcely find in the letter as yet proof of the perpetration of any " crime . " But then it comes to pass that in 1873 the Freemasons of

Philadelphia were about to dedicate their new Masonic Temple , and then a " sensation " was got up to claim for that city the " legitimate Mother Lodgeship of America . " The writer proceeds then to make a violent tirade against

Bro . Charles E . Meyer , who , in the Keystone of the 12 th March 1887 , "told the readers of that paper how it was done . " It amounts to this—that an extract had been made from the so-called Henry Bell letter , that it was put into

the hands of the orator for the dedication ceremonies at Philadelphia , " to be used by him to establish the claim of Philadelphia as the mother city of legitimate chartered Freemasonry in America ; that it was so used , to the

surprise of the orator himself , and fche delight of tho remainder , as what fchey desired the truth to be . " This , we understand , to be the "crime , " the fraclulent foundation of a claim upon afictitious document . We need not here recapitulate the

accusations made by Bro , Brennan against Bro . MacCalla , as editor of the Keystone , but it was only natural that such charges , whether well founded or not , should excite a little argument and inquiry amongst Masonic savans .

The first to take up the cudgels in defence of Brother Meyer was our esteemed friend and contributor , Bro . W . J . Hughan , whom all esteem for the moderation and sound judgment which characterise his writings . Bro . Hughan ,

instantly on reading the " History of a Crime , " wrote to us , repudiating , " with utter scorn and detestation , the hateful charge brought against Bro . Meyer by Bro . Brennan . " Summing up the indictments made by that brother , who

insinuated that " the occasion demanded the man , ancl the man appeared for the occasion , " that Bro . Meyer , as the author of the story of the Bell letter , finding himself badly broken up , headed a pilgrimage of Knights Templar to London ,

there possibly to endeavour to straighten his damaged character and satisfy those literary friends who erst had believed in him as a writer , honest and honourable , and also Bro . MacCalla , whom he left behind . " The grave

charge was also made that Bro . Charles E . Meyer committed a crime " to prove that the Masons alluded to , of 1730 , in Philadelphia , received a charter from Daniel Coxe . " These are substantially the allfigations made , with impetuosity , if

not rashness , by Bro . Brennan , who characterises the matter " as having no parallel within the present century in the history of English Freemasonry in America or in any other country . " Bro . Hughan , in his defence of

Bro . Meyer , as his oldest Masonic friend in America , points out that the Bell letter was exhibited in 1872 , in the Grand Secretary ' s Office in Philadelphia , and then and there copied . Bro . Meyer adds : " It bore all the marks of being

genuine , and we have no doubt of its being correct . We , at the present time , under the circumstances , place only so much value on it as far as it is corroborated by other facts . " We are inclined to endorse Bro . Hughan ' s view that

nothing could be more fair than such a statement , and it requires a great stretch of imagination to discern how or where a " crime" has been committed ; certainly Bro . Brennan produces no evidence whatever to prove so

serious an assertion . Due praise is accorded by the writer to Bro . Brennan for his services to American Masonic literature , but " no services , however distinguished , can be admitted to warrant the present attack . " We concur in

the hope that the charge may be withdrawn , and agree with Bro . Hughan when he says , that whilst condemning the " Bell letter " to auy extent he may think necessary , he will not declare Bro . Meyer to be the fabricator .

We now come to Bro . Meyer ' s own version of the affair , which appeared in our issue of 7 th October , and preface our remarks by observing that , although addressed expressly to ourselves , the same letter appeared in the columns of tho Keystone , which reached us even earlier than Bro . Meyer s