Royal Arch.

open chapter gave a vote of thanks for their attendance ancl assistance . The business of the evening being ended , the chapter was duly and solemnly closed , when the companions adjourned to refreshment .

Knights Templar.

Knights Templar .

SCOTLAND .

GLASGOW . —Girvan Encampment ( No . . 31 ) .- — An emergency meeting of this encampment was held on Monday , July 22 nd . Sir Kni ght R . Bell ., E . C , presiding ; assisted by Sir Knight J . E . Spiers , C . G . ; G . W . Wheeler , Sec , acting as Prelate ; M . Claurchen , CC . ; D . Butler ,

J . C . ; when the following seven companions , having been properly examined and vouched for , were initiated , dubbed and created Kni ghts of the Order , namely : —James Balfour , J . A . Fergsuon , W . T . Shaw , of Chap . 73 , T . Ellis , D . Barr , T . H . McDonald , and H . S . Bosworth , of

Chapter 87 . The ceremony w-as performed in that impressive style which always distinguishes Sir Knight R . Bell's working . Arrangements were then made for a deputation to proceed 011 the following morning to Edinburgh , to attend the meeting of the Supreme Grand Priory of Scotland .

The Grand Mark Lodge Of England.

THE GRAND MARK LODGE OF ENGLAND .

( From Pomeroy s Democrat . ) The following letter is from the pen of one of England ' s brightest Masons , Bro . William James Hughan , of Truro , England , who has already done so much for the unravelling of many of the musty Masonic manuscripts and records of Great Britain . The title of this article indicates the nature of the communication : —

TRURO , ENGLAND , June 7 , 1872 . Dear Bro . Tisdall , In Pomeroy ' s Democrat for March 30 th , you kindly inserted a letter from me respecting the Mark Grand Lodge of England , and to which you appended some editorial remarks . In the

same paper for the 13 th April you quoted from the Evergreen ( edited by Bros . Parvin and Langridge ) , an opinion expressed by Bro . Parvin , in unison with your own , relative to representation fiom and at the Mark Grand Lodge ; and in the issue of the 2 . G 1 May you greeted the

Freemason s Monthly Alugu & ine very warmly , ancl promised to insert Bro . C . W . Moore ' s article " in reference to the Grand Mark Lodge of England . " With respect to the foregoing I desire to make a few observations in the most fraternal spirit ,

and I hope the editors of your various excellent Masonic papers in the United States who dilfer from me will kindl y insert the following ( with replies ) in their columns ancl mail me copies . Should they require anything explanatory from me , I will write them direct on the subject , as time permits .

It savours somewhat of presumption for me to engage in a friendly discussion with three such able brethren as Bros . C W . Moore , T . S . Parvin , and yourself , but as my course appears to me to be just , and truth is not always with the greater number , I do not fear the result of

the fraternal conflict . Believe me , my desire is to elucidate truth , and I care nothing for anything but that , masonically or otherwise . 1 . In your editorial notes , March 30 th , you state , "We have no objection at all to the Mark Masters of England being recognised ancl

fraternised with the Mark Masters of America . " Thank you ! We are glad of this , ancl shall be exceedingly glad to hear that the brethren of the United States have all decided to receive our certificates as evidence of the Mark degree having been legally given under our Grand Lodge . *

Then , in the case of affiliation of an English companion , who is also a Past Master under the English Constitution , there would remain onl y the "Excellent Master" to be taken before the membership was completed in one of your United States Royal Arch Chapters . You then state that " the troublesome question is , how is

The Grand Mark Lodge Of England.

it to be done under the present American organisation ? " I answer simply thus : Let the Grand Chapters recognise the Mark Grand Lodge as the legal governing body in England land the colonies of the British crown ) for the Mark Master ' s degree , and then all we virtually

ask from you as our brethren will be conceded . The Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Rite , 33 , for England and Wales have done so , as also Ihe Grand Conclave of the Knights Templar , the Grand Chapter of Canada , ancl the Grand Chapters of

Pennsylvania ancl Iowa . It affords me much pleasure to be informed of your recognition of our claims as the legal head of the Mark Master ' s degree in England , and though we do not agree on the representative question , let us , at all events , unite to secure

recognition freely and fully for us , from every Grand Chapter in the United States . If these bodies prefer not to exchange representatives , well , all I can say is , brethren , follow 3 'our own inclinations . If , on the other hand , any say we not only recognise yon , but let us

exchange representatives , we will say , " Certainly , with much pleasure . " Either way , we as a body are satisfied , so long as the thousands of members under our jurisdiction may safel y calculate on their certificates being recognised in your country , ancl wherever the English language

is spoken . In your " notes " to my letter you say , "We consider the Mark degree below ancl not above the Third . " Why do you so consider ? What evidence have you of the Mark Master ' s degree ( not the " Mark Man" ) being ever worked in a

Craft Lodge as lower than the third , or as part of the second degree ? J " ' No evidence has ever been submitted in this country ( or in Scotland and Ireland ) of such an occurrence , although many consider that the degree is " below the third . " But mere considerations are worthless , when facts lead to the reverse conclusion !

1 am tolerably conversant with the history of Freemasonary in America , and make bold to say you cannot produce the records of any Lodge which worked the Mark Master ' s degree in your country as " below the third , " or in a Fellow-Craft ' s Lodge . If you can do so , and f will be

the first to retract , and acknowledge my error , but until then I shall believe that your "consider " is opposed to facts , and until the proof is forthcoming , it will be idle to speculate about the nature of the "lopping off" process you mention , which at the present time I utterly deny ;

because , so lar as my researches go , the Mark Master ' s degree never has been a portion of the Second degree , but only the " Mark num . " You mention that the " sticking point " is the representation of Mark Masons in a Grand Chapter . " If all the representatives are R . A . Masons ,

they take their seats in our Grand Chapters as such , and not as Mark Masons . " Precisel y so . As Royal Arch Mason , they take their seats , as without it they could not attend , but I cannot for the life of me see that on that account they are precluded from acting as Representatives

from the Mark Grand Lodge ; in fact , 1 cannot see that they are necessarily mutually destructive whenever found together . J I can only say that in one of the largeot and best managed Grand Chapters in the United States the principle is admitted for Representatives of Mark Masters and

Excellent Masters . Lodges are expressly provided for in their Constitutions , and they are admitted to the Grand Chapter as suck , whenever it is opened , though of course , they are Royal Arch Masons also I refer now to the Grand Chapter of Pennsylvania , in whose " Proceedings " for 1871 , I have

communicated a few facts relative to Capitular Masonry , in England , Ireland and Scotland , which 1 would like the Craft in the United States to peruse . You say , "As well might a Grand Lodge of Entered Apprentices ( could there be such a thing ) ask of a Grand Lodge of Master Masons

for an exchange of representatives on an equality . " Could there be such a thing , ancl there was such thing , under circumstances similar to the Mark Grand Lodge , there would be nothing absurd about the matter at all , but as there cannot be such a thing , would it not be as well when making known your views to use comparisons within the bounds of possibility ?

The Grand Mark Lodge Of England.

I contend that so long as the representative of Mark Grand Lodge is a Royal Arch Mason , there is nothing contrary to Masonic law—when interpreted in the light of past experience as well as present legislation—in such representation , especially when it is for the good and prosperity

of the same degree which the Grand Chapter recognizes . With respect to representation , I make bold to say that all the laws relating thereto in connection with the Royal Arch and Mark Masonry , are all arbitrary , and made this century . I presume

that Representatives are appointed to fraternally aid in disseminating correct information with respect to their own jurisdiction , and to unite in the bonds of fraternal love more closely , all the several parts of each body , so as thereby to cement the two—as one body—speaking Masonically . I cannot see why we should refuse

representation then to the body acknowledged to be below in point of rank or order to Grand Chapters , seeing that its degree is a part of the Royal -Arch system , and that its seeking recognition , and being a Grand Body at all , are simply due to peculiar circumstances existing nowhere else in the world .

2 . With respect to Bro . Parvin ' s decision , and that of the M . E . Companion , J . H . Drummond —whom I acknowledge to be a hi g h authority —it appears to me that they are not applicable to the present case , as the Grand Commandery degrees are not worked under the Grand Chapter ,

and consequently do not in any way affect or concern them , wdiereas , in the case of the Mark Grand Lodge , the Mark Master ' s degree is legally worked onl y under its authority in England , and under the authority of the Grand Chapters in the United States . It is therefore not a parallel

case , and does not meet the point . I may also state that the Grand Commandery , being subject to the Grand Encampment , is also an objection , as though the Grand Commander may not be allowed to exchange Representatives ; the Grand Encampment might feel quite competent to do so .

I quite think that Grand Commandenes being subordinates of the Grand Encampment cannot legally exchange Representatives at all , as they correspond to our Provincial Grand Lodges in England , ancl Provincial Grand Encampments , who are powerless without the consent of their chiefs . It may be styled " folly " to maintain the

Representation to be legal that we advocate , but mere assertions will not do . Let us know who decides what is , and what is not a correct Representation , and why ? Let us also know why we in the present clay cannot liberally exchange Representatives with all Grand Bodies working similar degrees , so long as their Constitutions are legal ?

3 . As I presume you will shortly insert the learned Bro . Moore ' s article from his " Monthly Magazine , " allow me to say that its consideration requires too much time for me to do justice to it now , as it would involve a long inquiry into the antecedents of Masonry . Bro . Moore seems to consider the Mark was a " waif" in America

until incorporated with the Grand Chapters . Well , so it was , ancl so was the Royal Arch until then . In fact until A . D . 1756 in England , and A . D . 179 J in the United States , both degrees were alike " waifs" on the stream of unrecognized Freemasonry . Bro . Moore incorrectly

takes it for granted that we are anxious to have Mark Grand Lodges . Far be it from us any such intention . We do not believe in such bodies at all , unless as a matter of necessity , such as exists in England , and therefore we fully admit the force of Bro . Moore ' s well-expressed objections

to such a body at all if its institution can be avoided . I could write for a long time , but it would end virtuall y in this , that the Mark degree , as also the Knights Templar , and the Ancient and Accepted Rite , will never be recognized by the Grand Lodge and the Grand Chapter of

England , because of the binding and exclusive nature of the "Articles of Union " of A . D . 1813 . They have , however , exchanged official relations by virtue of a Treaty executed lately , in which they recognize each other as the lawful heads of their respective elegrees under the English Jurisdiction .

Bro . Moore says . Our Brethren of the English Mark Lodge , in seeking an interchange of Representatives with our Gnind Chapters , seemed to