Another Solution Of The No. 77 Puzzle.

ANOTHER SOLUTION OF THE No . 77 PUZZLE .

BY BRO . JACOB NORTON . I MUST , in the first place , thank Bro . Gould for having promptly proved his sbatement that a charter of a Lodge was actually sold in 1767 , in which transaction the

Duke of Beaufort and Thomas French ( the G . M . and G . Secretary of 1768 ) were implicated . But as Brother Gould merely referred me for full information to page 471 , second volume of his History of Freemasonry , I shall give the extracts myself ; they are as follows : — " In the same month [ April 1766 ] at the Committee of Charity ,

a complaint was made that the Lodge at the Old Bell * * * bad been illegally sold . It appeared from the Respondents thafc they were foreigners , and had made a fair purchase thereof * * * It

waa determined nnder these cirenmstances that in Equity they had a right to the Constitution , and that they shonld be permitted to hold their Lodge nnder it , bnt that for the future the sale of a Conetitation should on no account be valid . * * *

" A further illustration of tho practice last referred to , is afforded by the minutes of the tame tribunal for 8 th April 1767 , on which date a Bro . Paterson reported that the Constitution of Lodge No . 3 , held at the Snn and Punch Bowl , had been sold or otherwise illegally disposed

of , and that tbe same was purchased by a number of Masons , who now meet by virtue thereof , nnder the name of the Lodge of Friendship , in St . James ' s Street , and that Bro . French was the person principally concerned with the brethren of the Lodge formerly held at the Sun and Punch Bowie .

" The decision of the Committee was postponed , but as a mark of high respect to bis Gi-nee tbe Duke of Beaufort , and the Noblemen and Honourable Gentlemen meeting under the same Lodge of Friendship , and in consideration of their being very young Masons (" the

italicising is not mine ) it was ordered that tho Constitution _ .. _» . a shall remain with them , even thongh ifc should appear , upon further inquiry , that this affair has been transacted contrary to tbe Constitution , bnt at the same time resolved that this shall not be looked upon as a precedent for the future on any account whatsoever .

, " A week later the minutes of the last Committee on Charity wore read iu Grand Lodi _; e and confirmed , except that part of them which related to Bro . French , by whom an apology was made 'in open Quarterly Communication . ' At this meeting the Duke of Beaufort was elected Grand Master , and in the following year , a vacancy occurring , he appointed French to the office of Grand Seuietary . "

The above extracts from official records prove that the warrant of No . 3 was sold , but they also ^ prove that tho Grand Lodge was wide awake to misdoings of its highest dignitaries , and although for certain reasons it acted leniently in the case in point , yot the offence was not

suftered to pass bv with impunity . Bro . French had to make au apology for the part he took in the transaction , and warning was given that his forgiveness by the Grand Lodge shonld not be regarded as a precedent . This fact

strengthens my belief that Bro . Lane made a mistake about the sale of No . 77 to the Wolverhampton Lodge in 1768 , for had such been the case tho Grand Lodge would doubtless have taken notice thereof , the same as it did in other cases above mentioned .

Brother Lano , however , proves conclusively that the Wolverhampton Charter of 1768 was not a warrant of confirmation , bat he omits to inform me whether the Lodge paid or did not pay two guineas to the

Charit y Fund in addition to the two guineas it paid for the Charter and because Past Grand Master Ward was appointed its first Master , he therefore inferred that No . 77 was obtained for the Lodge through Lord Ward's influence , or , in other words , it was obtained by favouritism .

This favouritism theory did not , however , satisfy me ; for in the first place the same Lord Ward was Grand Warden in 1735 , when the law was enacted that Lodges that ceased to meet for twelve successive months lost all

right to regain their old rank . Second , he was one of the Committee ou Anderson ' s Constitution of 1738 , and must therefore havo known all about the laws of 1727 and of

1735 . And third , in an engraved Lodge list of 176-i I found thafc in that year several Lodges were vacant , namely , Nos . 32 , 33 , 35 , 38 , 40 , and 45 . Now , it seems to me that if Lord Ward had been afflicted with a

weakness for getting an old number for the Wolverhampton Lodge , aud had sufficient influence to bo favoured , he surely would have preferred No . 32 to No . 77 . Nay , more ,

No . 35 , claimed to have been the oldest Lodge in creation , for it originated in the days of Julius Cassar ; had Lord Ward been ambitious to preside in Wolverhampton over a very old Lodge , perhaps the very identical Lodge that

Grand Master Julius C _ eaar presided over , Bro . Ward would have preferred that Lodge to No . 77 , of 1735 ,

Another Solution Of The No. 77 Puzzle.

Besides which Lord Ward was an active and zealous Mason , and I could not , therefore , believe that that he would hive allowed himself to be a part y to an illegal transaction , which n _ i _? ht havo involved him as well as tbe then Grind

Lodge Officers in a vote of censure f -om the Grand Lodge ; nor conld I believe that Bro . French , the Grand Secretary in 17 G 8 , had forgotten the rebuke ho had received from

the Grand Lodge in the previous year for violating a Law , and it was not very likely that he would have subjected himself , even at the instigation of Lord Ward , to another disagreeable scene in the Grand Lodge . . "'

Yesterday , I borrowed from the Masonic Temple , Autick ' s Constitution of 17 G 7 , containing an appendix with the history of several years later . My object was to find

out if I could the precise year when the Grand Lodge passed the law , that by paying two guineas for a new charter , and two guineas to the Charity Fund , a dormant Lodge could regain its old number aud rank . Briefly , I found that in

176 * -- and in 1765 Lodges had petitioned for reinstatement to their old numbers and rank , and all that was then required by the Grand Lodge was the payment of two

guineas for the Charity Fund , but no new charter was mentioned . However , on page 264 , giving the history of 1754 , I found a number of Lodges that . vera ordered to be erased from tho Lodge list . Among them I found " 77 , Bell and Dove , Wolverhampton . "

On referring to early Lodge Lists , I find , thafc No . 88 was constituted at the Raven and Bell , at . Wolverhampton , 28 th of March 1732 . In 1740 its number was changed from 88 to 77 , and in 1754 it was erased ( Bro . Gould has

it 1745 , but that is a mistake ) . Had tbat Lodge continued till 1750 , its number would have been 49 . We see now that there was a Lodge at Wolverhampton on and before

1754 , which held the rank on the Lodge List of No . 77 . Now , on the other hand , on 8 bh March 1736 , N . S . Lodge No . 143 was constitut . d , at Ga . eshead . In 1740 its number was changed to 127 . In 1756 its number was again changed to 77 , and in January 1767 the said Lodge was e a . ed .

With the above fac . s before rae , I think that if some one will take the trouble to hunt np all that can be f . und about the history of the Wolverhampton Lodge of 1767 ttiey will , I believe , learn that in 1767 some <^ f the members of

old Wolverhampton Lodge , No . 77 of 1754 , had petitioned the Grand Lodge to have tho Lodge restored or reinstated to their old rank and old number , and having complied with the then law , by paving two guineas for a warrant ,

and two guineas to tho Charity Fund , it got back ifs old number 77 , of 175 1 * , accordingly . I am aware that in the Lodge Lists of 1770 and of 1792 the Wolverhampton

Lodge is placed among the Lodges constituted in 1735 . That , however , I believe to have been a mist .-ke of the Lodge list maker , and we all agree now that Lodge list makers can make mistakes , and can copy mistakes also .

I must , however , further add , I nut only believe that Bro . Lane is not rightl y informed a *» to why the Wolver . hampton Lodge received No . 77 in 1767 , bnfc I also believe that the true history of Lodire No . 178 , of 17 o 8-. > ,

so graphically described by him in the 1 . RE EM AS S CHRONICLE of 3 rd September , is also unknown to him . Taking , therefore , everything into consideration . I still

continue . u my old belief that ihe Grand Lodue of r- <> gl-.. m never knowingly and wilfully give away . or sold au old number of an erased Lodge to a new Lodge entirely composed of new member .-.. BOSTO - ., U . S ., 30 th September 1887 .

Ad00702

THE AMERICAN PI 1 QTARI £ RflIIQIP QTAH 1-Q r U a S H OI iu m _ J d 1 b o S M lv i ) Oi T . F . WALTERS' PATENT . Iron , from 10 _ 6 d . Brass , from SOs each . r [^ lIESB Stands are unsurpassed in simplicity . strength , port _ .-ili . y-JL cheapness , and elegance of finish . They are suit . __ . blo for . Military .... mis Orchestra . , Reading an rt News Rooms , Libraries , __ . ti . du *_ , _ iid Druwii g Bo . vm _ When opened to their full capacity they stand . * - Feet . hi <_ * h , and en * ' be folded nil enclosed in n cast * " 31 inches lone , by 2 inches dinm . t , er . The weiyhtis about 'A lbs . 12 oz ., aud they will support a weight of 50 lb-. To be obtained of all Music Dealers , and of the Manufacturers and Proprietors of the Patent , HARROW & CO ., MUSIC SMITHS , BRASS WORKERS , & G 13 and 14 Portland . Street , Soho , London , W . I DESCRIPTIVE CIRCULARS FREE .