Original Correspondence.

existence of our Freemasonry , or Speculative Masonry , with its system of three degrees , ceremonies , ritvtals , and secrets , before A . D . 1717 , much less , 'in the year 1136 , ' or ' the year 926 . ' The ' manufacturers of Freemasonry ' ( Drs . Desaguliers , Anderson , & Co . ) , further says this frank disowner of sham antiquity , about 1717 , simply make use of the old operative masons , their societies ancl their

nomenclature , just in so far as suited their purpose . They mixed operative masonic ideas , Rosicrucian lore , Egyptian and Jewish legends , & c , and so made up thai system which has been , and may yet be , as the old 1723 constitution says , ' the centre of union , ami the means of concilitating true friendship among persons that must have remained at a perpetual distance . "

Immediately on it being pointed out to mc , I wrote the following letter to the Editor : —

" ANTIQUITY OF FREEMASONRY . "Sir , —My attention has been called to a paragraph in your newspaper of iSth April , which I did not see until some days after it appeared , concerning the antiquity of Freemasonry . A ' brother , ' it seems , has written in THE FREEMASON , taking notice of some remarks in the lodge a few weeks ago , that Freemasonry ' was in a nourishing

condition , in the year 1136111 the northern parts of Great Britain ; ' and hereupon the following challenge was made : — ' I William P . Buchan , Master Mason , of the Lodge of Glasgow St . John , No . 3 , bis , Grand Steward , Grand Lodge of Scotland , & c ., hereby and forthwith challenge Brothers Izett Paton , ' Montra , ' and all other Master Masons throughout Great Britain , as well as the

world at large , to prove the existence of our Freemasonry , or Speculative Masonry , with its system of three degrees , ceremonials , rituals , and scents , before A . n . 1717 , much less ' in the year 1136 , or the year 926 . ' The paragraph concludesthus : — 'The manufacturers of Freemasonry ( Drs . Desaguliers , Anderson , and Co . ) , further , says this frank disavower of sham antiquity , about 1717 , simply made

use of the old operative masons , their soci sties and their nomenclature , just in so far as suited their purpose . They mixed operative Masonic ideas , Rosicrucian lore , Egyptian and Jewish legends , & c ., and so made up that system which has been , and may yet be , as the old 1723 constitution says , the centre of union , and the means of concilitating true friendship amoung persons that must

have remained at a perpetual distance . 1 accept Brother Win . 1 \ Buchan ' s challenge , and propose to reply to him in THE FREEMASON , showing the baselessness of his theory or assumption that Freemasonry was invented and palmed upon the world in 1717 by Drs . Desaguliers , Anderson , and others . Meanwhile , may I be allowed lo ask the attention of your readers lo thc following

considerations : — " 1 . There is no evidence adduced of the formation of Freemasonry in 1717 , or about that date . The assumption is wholly gratuitous . 11 belongs to those who make such an assertion to adduce proof of it , and no proof has been adduced . " 2 . Dr . Desaguliers , a Frenchman , and Dr . Anderson ,

a Scotsman , were not men likely to waste their time in inventing a system of pretended antiquity , or lo palm it off upon tlie world . They were men of great eminence in the scientific and ecclesiastical world at the time in which they lived , and many works remain to show their diligence and success in scientific and ecclesiastic pursuits , so that thenvery name gives thc lie to tlie notion that lhey were guilty

of what they are now charged with . i hat they and theii associates improved Freemasonry may well be supposed probable , but that lhey found il in existence , and accepted it as valuable , seems also , irrespective of all other evidence , the most probable opinion . " 3 . We have abundant evidence that kings , prince * , and nobles , were patrons of Masonry long before the

eighteenth century . 1 do not think il necessary here to refer particularly to the connection of the F . uglish kings with the Masonic Brotherhoods of their times , but I may call attention to the unquestionable fact that James II . of Scotland appointed the Earl of Orkney Grand Master of the Masons of Scotland , with remainder lo his successors in the Barony of Roslin ; and this high oflice was therefore

held by the St . Clairs of Roslin , his descendants and representatives , till 173 6 , when William St . Clair of Roslin demiltcti it in order to the formation of a Grand Lodge in Scotland , with an elective Grand Master . Of all this there is abundant documentary evidence ; and although the original charter by James II . is no longer lo be found , having been destroyed , it is said , by a tire in ihe Castle of

Roslin , there are in existence in Ihe Advocates Library , two charters , the first of them without date , but evidently of the reign of James VI . of Scotland , the second of date 1630 , and confirmatory ofthe first , by which thc Masons of Scotland acknowledge the old rights of the St . ( lairs of Roslin , as exercised 'from adge to adge , ' and call upon them to continue in Ihe exercise of the same . This is

surely enough lo prove that Masonry was , al a date long preceding 1717 , no mere common Craft or Guild . No Earl of Mar or Earl of Buchan -no great lord or laird wns ever appointed to such an office in the Craft of tailors or cordwainers , or in any other Craft . The Masonic Craft alone was distinguished iu this way ; it alone received the special attention of the Crown ; and this distinction is of

great importance in reference lo Us position 111 old tunes . All this militates strongly against the notion that the system of Freemasonry was devised in ill _ begininning of ihe eighteenth century . However it may have been improved by Desaguliers , Anderson , and others , il was certainly not not invented by them . " 4 . Not to go out of Edinburgh for proofs , 1 can point

to tlie existence of ' The Canongate Kilwinning Lodge , ' which received a charier in the year 1677 from ihe 'Mother Kilwinning Lodge , ' which claims dale as far back as 1140 , they having documentary evidence from ihe year 1 G 42 . Thc Edinburgh 'Canongate Kilwinning Lodge' never consisted of Operative Masons , but always of noblemen and gentlemen , so that wc have abundant

Original Correspondence.

evidence ofthe existence of Speculative Masonry in Scotland long before 1717 , the date which Bro . W . V . Buchan's theory assumes as that oi ils origin . There i . s also another Edinburgh lodge , 'The Canongate and Leith , ' of date 168 S , and this lodge was never Operative . Also the lodge 'Edinburgh Mary ' s Chapel , ' of date 1518 , but as it was originally Operative , I will not at present sayat what date

it became Speculative . " In maintaining my cause against Bro . W . P . Buchan , I am not bound , as I think , to show that the system of ' three degrees' existed , although I can do so , at any date prior to that which he has chosen to name , 1717 ; nor that the ' ceremonies , rituals and secrets , ' were precisely the same . I do not express any opinion at present

on these points further than saying they were somewhat similar' to the present . The main question does not depend on them , and by putting them forward in such prominence , Bro . W . B . Buchan shows the weakness of his cause . I am at present engaged on several Masonic works , and immediately on their being finished I propose to take

up the ' 1717 theory , ' and show it to be a mistake . " I am , & c , " CHALMERS IZETT BATON . " The Tower , Portobello , 26 th April , 1 S 70 . " In the hope that you will give this a place in THE FREEMASON * , to show all the corespondence that appears on the subject . I remain , yours fraternal !) -, CHALMERS IZETT PATON .

United Grand Lodge.

UNITED GRAND LODGE .

The Quarterly Communication of Grand Lodge , took place on Wednesday evening , at Freemasons ' Hall . Owing to the absence of the Grand Master , who is in attendance on Her Majesty at Balmoral , the Earl of Zetland , Past G . Master , opened the lodge , surrounded by , among others , tlie following brethren : —

Victor Williamson , as S . G . W . ; Sir Frederick M . Williams , J . . W . ; Thos . H . Hall , Prov . G . M . for Cambridgeshire , as Deputy G . M . ; tlie Lord Carnarvon ; Sir Albert W . Woods , ( Garter , ) G . D . Cers . ; John Havers , F . Dundas , W . C . Stephens , P . G . W . 's ; John Ll . Evans , P . Board of G . P . ; Ai J . Mclntyre , Grand Registrar ; H . Lloyd . Senior

Grand Deacon ; J . Savage , H . Browse , J . Hogg , George Cox , W . E . Walmisley , J . Creaton , W . P . Scott , S . E . Snell , W . E . Gumbleton , IL Grisscll , B . Baker , G . W . K . Potter and E . J . Fraser , P . G . Deacons ; W . W . Beach , MP ., Prov . G . M . Hants , and J . W . ; Samuel Tomkins , G . T . ; J . Symonds , P . G . Asst . D . C . ; F . Roxburgh , P . G . R . ;

C . C . Dumas , Asst . G . D . C . ; Hollon , G . S . B . ; Rev . R . I . Simpson , P . G . C . ; Rev . SirJ . W . Hayes , P . G . C . ; T . F . Ravenshaw , P . G . C . ; Revs . C . J . Martyn and W . F . Short , G . Chaplains ; Jas . Mason , R . J . Spiers , H . Bridges , II . Pullen , W . Young , J . Nunn , II . Empson , E . II . Patten ancl . W . E . Walmisley , P . G . S . Bearers ; ( . Hervey , G . Sec . ; J . Coward ,

G . O . ; Lord Limerick , P . G . M . Bristol ; R . J . Bagshawe , Prov . G . M . Essex ; Joseph Smith , P . G . P . ; E . B . Sutton and G . T . Payne , j . G . D . 's ; Jas . Brett . G . P . ; John Coutts , Asst . G . P . ' ; E . E . Wendt , G . Sec , German Correspondence ; S . Rawson , District G . M . China ; W . Farnfield , Asst . G . Sec ., J . Trickett ( W . M . 1194 ) , W . II . Hubbard ( 1293 ) , W .

Blackburn ( P . M . 337 ) . F . Walters ( W . M . 1309 ) , W H . Green ( J . W . 1310 ) , N . Bridges ( S . W . 772 ) , C Foster 'P . M . 250 ") . G . Slacev ( P . M . 209 ) , Capt . J W . C . Whitbread ( W . M . Si ) ' , Capt . Haldane . Dist S . G . W . Malta ; W . II . Peacock- ( W . M . 200 ) , D Roberts ( P . M . 3 6 } , W . E . Gompcrlz ( W . M . S 69 I . W . Dodd ( S . W . 1194 ) , J . Smith ( W . M . 731 ) , W

Wigginton ( W . M . 129 8 ) , 'F . Adlard ( P . M . 7 ) , G . Cord \ veH' ( P . M . 3 d K . W . Stewart ( P . M . 12 ) , F . Bennoch ( P . M . 1 ,, Jas . Stevens ( W . M . 1216 } , G , King ( W . M . 1260 ) , ' ) . Terry ( W . M . 1278 ) , George Gee ( SAV . 1257 ) , R . W . I . it ' tle ( P . M . 97 ;) , J . Weaver ( W . M . 862 " , II . G . Buss ( P . M . 27 ') , 15 . Todd ( P . M . 27 ) . II . Thompson ( P . M . 177 ) , C G . Prideaux ( P . M .

165 ) , K . | . Cox ( W . M . IOI > , W . Johnstone ( W . M . 1341 J . H . Wvnnc ( P . M . 101 ) , 11 . f . W Dumas ( P . M 99 ) , 11 . W . Ilemsworth ( W . M . irjo \ 1 ) . | . Drakeford ( 190 ) , J . W . Palmer ( W . M . 19 S ) , J . R . Sheen ( P . M . 2 on , W . Littaur ( 205 ) , Thos . James ( 217 ) . II . C . Levander ( W . M . 507 ) , A . Perrot ( 507 ) , Jas ! Kench . ( W . M . 53 S ) . II . Massey ( P . M . 619 ) , S . G .

I-oxall t \ V . M . 742 ; , C . A . Cottebrune ( P . M . 733 ) , Thos . Meggy ( W . M . 21 ) , A . A . Pendlebury ( P . M . 1056 ) , W . Smith ( P . M . 33 ) , Matthew Cooke ( P . M . 23 ) , Sam May ( W . M . 23 ) , J . Glaisher ( S . W . 33 , II . Gary ( 87 ) , and J . A . Rucker ( W . M . f . 6 . ) GRAND SECRETARY read the minutes ofthe 2 nd of March , 27 th April , and 141 I 1 Mav , which were

then put to the lodge by the Grand Master in the chair . Bro . RAYXHAM W . STEWART said he should be happy to endorse those minutes , if he could concienliously do so ; but inasmuch as he had ; i

communication to make to Grand Lodge iroscr . tly on a subject involved in those minutes , he could not let them pass uncontradicted in every particular . He referred to the thanks voted to the Stewards on the 14 th of May , for attending to the comfort of the brethren . There was such disorder on that occasion

United Grand Lodge.

as he hoped never to see again . He had no feeling but one of regret that Masons should so far have forgotten themselves , and he trusted that better arrangements would be made in the future . Bro . GALE corroborated the statement of Bro . Stewart . He did not sign the Scrutineers' paper , ancl received no bone ticket of admission . A great

many were served in a similar way , and other brethren got as many as three or four bone tickets . He never saw anything so bad as the management . The GRAND MASTER in the chair thought the objection to the vote of thanks should have been mooted at the time , and that it was too late now to say anything about it .

Bro . HAVERS thought that although what Bro . Stewart had said was quite correct , that brother should be content with having drawn the attention of Grand Lodge to the subject , and not move the non-confirmation of a part ofthe minutes . Bro . HORACE LLOYD , Q . C , would suggest , that attention should be called to the irregularity at the time it occurred .

Bro . STEWART would adopt the view of Bro . Havers , and hope that the circumstances would not occur again . Bro . PRIDEAUX , Q . C , understood that Bro . Stewart's remarks implied a censure on the arrangements made on the 14 th ult ., and he could not help feeling from what he witnessed himself on that occasion that there were strong grounds for it .

The GRAND MASTER in the chair said , disorder certainly prevailed , and Bro . Stewart was satisfied with having directed attention to it ; and that being so , he should now put the minutes for confirmation . The minutes were then confirmed . Thc GRAND MASTER in the chair , then called

on Bro . thc Earl of Carnarvon to take thc obligation of Deputy Grand Master . Bro . T . F . HALL administrated the obligation , and thc Grand Master in the chair having invested the noble Earl , vacated thc throne and placed the Earl of Carnarvon on it . The customary salute having been given ,

Thc EARL of CARNARVON , who presided during the remainder of the evening , stated that the Grand Master had appointed Bro . W . Ough , late Grand Pursuivant , to take rank as , and wear the clothing of , a Past Grand Pursuivant . In doing so , he wished to express on behalf of his noble friend and brother , Lord Dc Grey and Ripon , Grand Master , his great regret that he was unable to be present .

He particularly regretted that he should be absent on so early an occasion after his installation , but nothing but the imperative necessity of his official duty of his attendance on the Queen kept him away from Grand Lodge that evening . The election of the members of the Board of General Purposes was then taken , and Scrutineers were appointed to examine the ballot .

The report ofthe Board of Benevolence was read by Bro . Buss , and grants of , £ 50 to the widow of a brother of No 431 , of ^ 50 to a brother of No . 12 , and of . £ 150 to the widow of a brother of No . 208 , were confirmed . Bro . RAYNHAM STEWART did not like the principle of coming to Grand Lodge for these confirmations . He thought that if the Board of Benevolence

had the contulence of the brethren lhey should have the power of making the grants . Bro . BENNOCH demurred to this doctrine . A case had occurred where the Board of Benevolence had recommended a grant ; but it was in antagonism to the feelings of Grand Lodge , and was referred back to the Board for re-consideration , and ultimately it was ( -Hashed , as they had come to the conclusion on too slight consideration .

The GRAND MASTER in the chair said , that with regard to thc vote af £ 150 he might be allowed to say , that the Grand . Master a few days ago had written lo him a letter , in which he expressed his great interest in this particular vote , and he would not be doing justice to him or to the Board if he

failed to mention , that the brother to whose widow thc grant was to be made had filled situations of very great Masonic trust , nnd that he wns a most zealous Mason , lie had worked hard in the provinces and in London in ihe cause ofthe Masonic Charities , and his widow was at this lime in very great distress .

The report of the Board of General Purposes which was as follows , was then read : — To the United Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted

Masons of England . The Board of General Purposes beg to report that the Board of Benevolence having preferred a complaint against two brethren , viz ., thc W . M ., and Bro . R . A . D . Bain , a Past Master of the Vitruvian Lodge , No . 87 , London , for having been both present at the same time at the meeting ofthe Lodge ofBencvolencc on the 20 th day of

April last , in contravention ofthe law as laid down in the Book of Constitutions , both 1-rcllircn were summoned to attend . Ii appeared lliat the W . M . was rightly in his place at Ihe Lodge of Benevolence , and the Board therefore dismissed the complaint as against him . Bro . Bain admitted his fault , but said he had erred through ignorance , and had not voted . It appeared that the W . M . had