"Ancient York And London Grand Lodges," By Bro. Leon Hyneman.

" ANCIENT YORK AND LONDON GRAND LODGES , " BY BRO . LEON HYNEMAN .

A REVIEW BY BRO . W . J . HUGHAN , OF TRURO , CORNWALL . We intend to write a review of Brother Hyneman ' s latest work in the same spirit that the author states actuated him , viz : " Plain ,

outspoken , and severe , which some may consider too much so ; but , in our judgment , the subjects merited all and more than we have expressed . The investigation wc consider a duty , " and although not a pleasant one , having the means

at hand to answer many of Bro . Hyneman s reckless statements , we should be culpable if our respect and esteem for our brother ' s Masonic labours acted as a deterent to exposing his errors : and moreover , we are persuaded that he

would himself be the last to desire our silence , just as he will be the first to acknowledge the unfortunate blunders he has made in his great anxiety to uphold the pure and ancient Freemasonry which , like him , we strongly believe in , and in such alone .

We come fresh from the city wherein Freemasonry flourished during the last century , and which many in America are so proud—without the slightest reason—to bc called after , namely , York . We have examined all the ancient

records existing in the archives of the " York Lodge , " ( note the representative , it may be said , ofthe extinct ' ' Grand Lodge of England , " ) and also those in the Grand Lodge , London , and have carefully transcribed from them everything

of value to the present inquiry , and , therefore , we are in a position to speak positively on the subject , supported as we are by authentic documents , many of which arc but little known , and some not at all , beyond the threshold of a few antiquaries in Kngland .

Bro . Hyncman has written his work " m the interest of pure , legitimate Masonry , * * ** •* * not in thc view of what Masonry is as expressed in these days , but what it should be . " We are sorry , however , to find lhat he considers the

" popular Masonic writers of the past and present time have created , through their publications , a literature inimical to every feature and principle of legitimate Masonry , which , as historical , is mainly mythical ; if traditional ,

fabulous ; if symbolical , sectarian , and destructive ot universal catholic Masonic principles . * ' In some respects his sweeping censure has been merited , but surely not so of all , or even of the generality of our able historians .

" "Wc are opposed , ' * hc says , " to all sectarian allusion or illustration in Masonry . " So are we , excepting so far as such may truly bc said to bc a / i integral part of Freemasonry , and so we have been led to believe are many in Europe

and America , whose sympathies are for actual Freemasonry , liro . Hyneman states his " review docs not take in the union of the two bodies of Masons , but reaches to the time when it was above being consummated . " It is also

"confined chiefly to Anderson ' s two Books of Constitutions and Preston ' s Illustrations . " So much by the way of preface . We are glad to confirm the careful and exact quotations made by Bro . Hyneman , and can assure our readers

the hule book is worth more than its trifling cost , did it contain nothing else but these valuable extracts from works which few possess , excepting the author aforesaid , and others like ourselves , who are Masonic students . Now , then , to our task .

We cannot too strongly express our regret to find Bro . Hyneman , at the outset , stating so unequivocally " We affirm that Anderson is not to be credited . The Books of Constitutions were written purposely to deceive , to mislead , and

misrepresent facts as they existed ; and if his reports of Grand Lodge proceedings are true copies of Grand Lodge records , then the records were corrupted with the design to mislead the reader . " (!!) The Rev . Dr . Anderson , ( perhaps we had better omit the "Rev .. " as

some have such strange antipathy to so honourable a title , ) in his history of the Grand Lodge of England , ( and also the Rev . Dr . En tick , and others who followed him , ) mainly copied from the records of the Grand Lodge of England , which were written by the Grand

Secretaries , and duly confirmed by thc members as faithful narratives of the proceedings . Unless , indeed , we except the traditional histories prior to the last century , which usually were free renderings of the ancient MSS . that we have just published in our "Old Charges of British

Freemasons , " and which , in some instances , Dr . Anderson unwisely , we think , altered . This being the case , we feel compelled to object most strongly to Bro . Hyneman ' s assertions , especially when his ipse dixit is , in the language of the Keystone , " strongly tinted with

acerbity and personal rancour . We honour the author for his " bold advocacy of pure ancl unadulterated Freemasonry , " and we gladly admit that he has done a good work for the Craft in publishing so many excellent and accurate reprints of our old and scarce Masonic volumes ,

which otherwise would have been but little known by thousands of our institution , who now read and study them with profit ; but we must enter our protest against such wholesale denunciations ancl exposures of men who acted according to their knowledge , ancl did their best

generally for the welfare of the society . We do not look upon Anderson ' s Constitutions " as of divine authority , " and we make bold to say that , beyond the fancies so prolific in Brother Hyneman ' s brain , no one else ever has , or ever heard of anyone so doing ; hut we do say , that

these Constitutions are our guides , if wc wish to understand the past history of the Craft , and if not all that we wish , they are , at all events , most useful as illustrative of the proceedings of the early members of the first Grand Lodge in the world . "The 1717 movement was not a

revival , as Anderson has ^— -revolution the proper term . " Suppose we grant the point , and call the doings of 1716-7 revolutionary , what then ? We have still thc ancient MSS . to light us in our explorations , and many pre-1717 records of Lodges are also in existence . In

many respects the transactions of the second decade of thc last century were masonically , intensely , and expressly , revolutionary ; and advisedly so , for , without many radical alterations , there would have been no Freemasonry of to-day .

There nrecr was a Grand Lodge prior to 1 7 16-7 , and neither the York Grand Lodge , nor any other Grand Lodge , has " a record prior to 1 717 , " although Bro . Hyneman says otherwise . We challenge the production of any Lodge minute or record of any kind whatsoever , of a trustworthy

character , which mentions thc institution if a Grand Lodge antecedent to 17 16-7 . Records of individual Lodges exist before then , but not of Grand Lodges . This should lie always remembered in this inquiry . Bro . Hyneman proceeds to explain the motives which actuated Dr .

Anderson and others in organizing the New Grand Lodge of 1717 . These we will next notice . Hc states that prior to 1717 thc " Craft in the south of England still held their relation to the York Grand Lodge ;" that there were " Lodges in London and other

parts ol the south of England which did not join the revolutionists , but retained their connection with the Grand Lodge at York , and that ambitious Masons in London , effected "a long prc-cntcrtaincdpurpose" in thus organizing the Grand Lodge of 1717 . "Hence the ignoring

the existence of the York Grand Lodge , and their silence in regard to everything concerning the revolutionary movement . " These assertions are wholly untrue , and opposed to every scrap of information preserved in this country , and especially antagonistic to all thc . documents still in existence at York . In

the first place , there never was a Grand Lodge until 17167 , so the Craft in the south of England could not be related to a Grand Lodge at York prior to 1717 , for the "Grand Lodge of all England " held at York was not in existence until a few years later than that period , and never before . For information on this point ,

we beg to refer our readers to our " Masonic Sketches and Reprints , " published by the " Masonic Publishing Company , " 626 Broadway , New York ; also " History of Freemasonry at York , " "Masonic Annual , " M . C . Peck and

Son , Hull , Yorkshire , wherein we have given quotations from the records of this Grand Lodge , and proved the early origin of a Lodge in York , and the modern character , so to speak , of the Grand Lodge . In proof also of our

position , we may refer Brother Hyneman and others to the Master of York Lodge No 23 6 , or to Bro . William Cowling , Past Master and Treasurer , who will be happy to confirm my extracts , as they were made in the presence of

the latter accomplished Mason . Bros , the Rev . A . F . A . Woodford , ALA ., Past Grand Chaplain of England , ( Swillington near Leeds , ) and J . G . Findel , of Leipsic , have also made similar copies of these documents . The Grand Lodge

of

some the " Modems , " ) left its first love and . came under the York branch , as a " Grand Lodge South of thc River TrentP It had , however , but a short history , authorized at least but two Lodges to work in London , and in the next

decade of that century again joined its mother Grand Lodge . Soon after its secession there were thus FOUR Grand Lodgesat work in England , viz . ( a ) thc Grand Lodge of England , ( "Moderns , " so-called ;) ( b ) Grand Lodge of all England ,

( York ;) ( c ) the Grand Lodge of England according to the old Constitutions , ( styled the " Ancients , " and erroneously the York " Masons ,

but they never had any connection with the Grand Lodge at York ;) and ( d ) the Grand Lodge South of the Trent , ( Lodge of Antiquity . )

We challenge Bro . Hyneman to produce one single document even in support of his affirmation of any long pre-arranged plan of reviving or revolutionizing Freemasonry A . l ) . 1717 . It was the work mostly of Dr . Dtssaguliers and Dr .

Anderson , initiated early 111 the last century , and certainly nothing has yet been submitted at all indicative of any long pre-arranged plan of action by Masons to form the Grand Lodge of England . That being so , we are at a loss to

know what justification there is for Bro . Hyneman's statement . Our brother does not like the allusion to the " old Lodge at York city" by Dr . Anderson ; but , in all probability , that was all Bro . Anderson knew of it at the time , ft was

but an old Lodge until the 27 th December , 1725 , when Bro . Charles Bathurst was chosen Grand Master . The year 1725 A ; York was what the year 1717 was to London . Before these years

neither had Grand Masters nor Grand Lodges , and York followed London some eight years after the formei ' s revival or revolution , ( 7 chatever term is preferred . )

Before A . D . 1725 , at York , the presiding officer was called President , * and the next in office Deputy President , and until August 10 , 1725 ,

the offices of Master and Wardens never once occur , so that it was but an old Lodge in York city for some time after the institution of the first Grand Lodge in London , A . l ) . 1716-7 .

Bro . Hyneman remarks that the Masons at York considered as foreign to Masonic propriety " the use of printer ' s ink for the purpose of bringing the Fraternity prominently before the

public . Whatever they may have considered , we know that , in the second year of their existence as a Grand Lodge , a speech by the Junior Warden was printed , viz , December 27 , 1726 , and that it went through several editions .

AVe are told that there is a " meanness in the intended inferences to be drawn in Anderson ' s Constitutions discreditable to the Masonic institution , and disreputable to thc author and all who sanctioned the publication , " ( page 24 . )