Masonic Archæology.

iected ! But because we have some difficulties to contend with ( there are difficulties in everything ) are we to jump to the conclusion that in 1717 a few speculative Masons adopted and adapted the terminology and ritual of the operative guilds to their own purposes , or that

of a purely social , benevolent , didactic , festive club ? We feel persuaded that sueh a theory is most unsound , in itself , critically indefensible , and historically untenable . We believe " au contraire , '' that our own accounts are substantially true , and that for some time previous to

the beginning of tha eighteenth century the operative guilds had been opening wide their portals to speculative members . It is quite clear , we think for instance , that in 1746 among the Freemasons atWarrington , when two speculative Masons were admitted , Elias Ashmole , and Col . Henry

Mainwaring , while Mr . Richard Penket Warden , Mr-James Collier , and Mr . Richard Sankey , were either gentlemen " generosi " or speculative Masons , Henry Littler , John El lam and HughBrewer , were in all probability operative Masons , bu t all members of the same lodge . Those who met

in 1717 were clearly not all operative Masons , though some one has foolishly said so , and in fact they well represent the twofold character of Masonic lodges or guilds then . That they then endeavoured to revive an old association , not to found a new one , we are perfectly

persuaded also , and they did what all ever do in such circumstances . They no doubt made some changes and modifications in the original system , which time and altered circumstances rendered absolutely needful . We see all this , we think , clearly , in the early regulations

of Grand Lodge of 1721 , they were altering an old institution , adapting it as best they could , not starting a new one , and we note how very carefully they handled all the traditions and precepts of the past . Anderson in 1723 went back simply to the guild legends , deriving all his

history and the like from them , one could have wished , with freer criticism , and with a greater power of rejection . We mean , as regards the actual history of Freemasonry . But it is not right to blame Anderson for what he could not do ; what he did do he did well . Probably any

bolder treatment of the subject would not have been acceptable to the Grand Lodge of that day . He did' what he was told to do , and we are not disposed to quarrel much with him because he so strenuously adhered to the old guild legends , and gave them to the Craft , he being au educated

man , " quantum valeant . " Anderson has latterl y been very hastily condemned and unduly deprecated , but we are bound , it appears here , to do him justice , as the first who sought to put in a simple readable form , Uhe confuse chronology , the doubtful declarations , and the quaint

legends of the old operative guilds . We must reject , then , any theory of Masonic history which starts with the assumption that all the years previous to 1717 are " prehistoric" as far as Freemasonry is concerned . We not only do not believe anything of the kind , but as we have said

before , we feel convinced that such a view of our history is as delusive and unci itical as well can he . It is one thing to admit a difficulty in the matter , it is quite another thing to propound a theory of one ' s own , which ruthlessly sweepsaway , and on grounds utterly indefensible , a fiir and reasonable explanation of our true

Masonic history . To suppose that all our old ceremonial dates only from 1717 is positivel y puerile , to assert that we have no evidence of any earlier Freemasonry than the 18 th century , because the oldest MS . ritual only dates from the third decade about the 17 th century , is to mistake entirely the value and bearing of evidence . We have often said that rituals like minute books

are valuable portions of evidence , but they are not all , or the most important . They do not prove a great deal , because if they assume to prove the exact date of Freemasonry , they can onl y be used , properly , as to their exact date , and can legitimately be made to ero no further

" . But such an argument is , as we know , untenable . There is plenty of evidence to prove for 'nstance that before 1700 Freemasonry existed in "lis country , had a ritual and secrets of its own , ana we have MS . evidence of a ritual or portion of ^ atechetical teaching , ( if Mr . Wallbran was cor rec W as earl y as the middle of the j 7 th century

Masonic Archæology.

Even those who fix the date of the hand writing of the Sloane MS ., 3329 , at the first fifteen years of the 1 Sth century , do not deny that the verbiage and archaisms are the middle of 17 th century ; at least , Mr . Sims , ofthe British Museum , does

not ; and we , therefore , have always felt , and feel still , on this and on many other grounds , needless to re-capitulate here , that the theory of the 1717 origin , is , as we have often put it , a critical mistake , and an unsound proposition .

"We Will Not Go To Canossa."

"WE WILL NOT GO TO CANOSSA . "

We have often said that as Freemasons we are not politicians , an : ! therefore have no right to mix ourselves up with ths strife of parties , or the war cries of faction . We repeat the assertion to-day ; and amid many of its distinguishing features not one is more remarkable in the

weekly pages of the " Freemason" than its entire abstinence from anything like political prepossessions , or party utterances . It is impossible , indeed , in a journal like this , of great circulation and of increasing influence , which is perused and appreciated , as we know , wherever the

English language is spoken and Anglo-Saxon Masons love to congregate , ( to say nothing of many kind foreign readers)—it is impossible , we repeat , not sometimes to dwell upon the passing incidents of the great world of politics all around us , and which act and re-act on Freemasonry .

But when we do so we speak as Masonic philosophers , utterly indifferent to the success of this or that party , merely looking at things and men in the great broad light of abstract truth and practical common sense , and especially from a pure Masonic point of view , in

respect of those unchanging principles of our Order , of which time has attested the lasting worth , and of which , as a fraternity we may be all justly proud . When , then , we take up Prince Bismarck ' s famous words to-day , it might seem to the hasty inductionist that we were

contradicting our own statements , and trespassing on forbidden ground . But such would be a great fallacy and a greater mistake . We , as Freemasons , have been taught from our entrance into Freemasonry to acknowledge the central and civil Government of any State as supreme , as

an authority to which the peaceable , loyal , and patriotic will always pay lawful obedience and ready respect , the fidelity of patriotic citizens or the fealty of devoted subjects . When , then , we are told to-day that an Ultramontane party in the Church of Rome is urging on a kind but

weak old man to revive one of the worst acts of a spiritual despotism , our sympathies as Freemasons and patriots , for we are both , naturally are roused in admiration of the seasonable words of a distinguished statesman , and the rightful aspirations of a great people . Though

the subject is not directly Masonic , it is indirectly so , inasmuch as the Church of Rome claims , by viitue of an absolute and spiritual sovereignty , to excommunicate all Freemasons , even where they meet as peaceable citizens , permitted so to do by the laws of the land .

The Ultramontane organs openly avow that the object of this foolish and perverse commemoration is to represent to all the superiority of the spiritual over the temporal power , the subjection of the . Princes of this world to the supreme and infallible Sovereign Pontiff " . This is , in truth , the great struggle which

Germany has been going through recently , the claim of a spiritual power to override , overrule , and dispense with the laws of a temporal power , and which Prince Bismarck sought to repudiate in the name of the German people by these now historic words . But here we stop , as if we advance much more we shall find ourselves in the midst

of political contests and " burning questions , " from which , as Freemasons , we wisely keep aloof . But this we may say . Such an idea and such a proposal are alike childish and senseless , a direct challenge to a remarkable people , both numerous and proud , and deeply humiliated

by the memory of such an act of hyperspiritualism , such an invasion of the rights of temporal sovereignty . One of the gravest wrong-doings of the Church of Rome has been that in its invidious policy it has too often sought to make both vassals and

"We Will Not Go To Canossa."

puppets of earthly sovereigns and of temporal rulers , has subjected them to personal humiliation and degradation in the eyes of their subjects , who have never forgotten the scandal , and never pardoned the disgrace . What the Romish Church hopes to grain as reerards Garmanv bv

this unpolitic and silly act we cannot venture to conceive . By the last census , the population of Germany has risen to 42 , 726 , 8 44 souls , being an increase of 1 , 703 , 749 in four years . This census , which was taken December 1 , 1875 , proves that Germany is increasing at the rate of

above 400 , 000 a year , and though it has been stated that Germany lost about 250 , 000 men in the war with France ( an estimate we fancy far too large ) the present growth of Germany is alike most rapid and wonderful . In this mighty empire , inr 87 r , there werefoundto be 25 , 579 , 700 .

Protestants of all bodies , 594 , 313 persons of other persuasions , including Hebrews , and 14 , 867 , 463 Roman Catholics . It is believed that in 1878 the returns , when complete , will show a large increase of the Protestant population over the Roman Catholic , and we feel

persuaded , from what we remember ofthe German people , that this foolish proceeding about Canossa will shake the faith of thousands of th e German Roman Catholics . As Freemasons , w must deeply sympathise with our German cousins in their struggle to uphold the

independence of their temporal sovereignity , as against an encroa ching spiritual power , much as we regret that any embittered conflict ever should arise as between the State 011 the one hand and a religious body on the other . But after all , from the date of Hildebrand ' s outrageous humiliation

imposed on Henry IV . at Canossa we may really date that struggle as between the temporal and spiritual powers which soon after led to bloody wars , and imposed great miseries on the German people . This strife has continued ever since more or less , and has culminated in the

recent open warfare as between the State and Roman Catholic Church . Wh y then revive these hateful memories ? We trust that the Pope ' s advisers may think better of so absurd a proposal in the interest of peace and goodwill , and that the hidden advisers of an

infallible Papacy may carefully avoid the perpetration of such a gross and stupid blunder in the best interests of the Roman Catholic Church itself . Its only effect can be to make the contest in Germany more embittered and reconciliation less possible . Let the Church of Rome give up

these ridiculous claims of infallible absurdity , and devote herself to the spiritual enlightenment , the moral education , the religious care of those many millions who claim her as their spiritual mother , but whom the foll y and violence of Ultramontanism will undoubtedly otherwise ,

ere long , rend from her fold , at a time , let us remember , when the usurpation of a so-called spiritual authority in temporal matters is undoutedly repugnant not only to the sympathies and sentiments of the age , but to countless Roman Catholics themselves .

Next Boys' School Election.

NEXT BOYS' SCHOOL ELECTION .

Of the candidates for the next'Boys' School election , 21 come from the metropolis , 36 from the Provinces . The contrasted classes which send these orphans to the Masonic Boys' School are as follows , and let our readers carefully note them : —Traders . 2 K : medical oractitioners . r ;

solicitors , 2 j licensed victuallers , 2 ; hotel manager , r ; official , 1 ; clerks , 6 ; commercial travellers , 5 ; schoolmaster , 1 ; architects , 1 ; bank manager , 1 ; civil engineer , 1 ; contractors , r ; merchants , 4 : manufacturer , ! : master

mariners , ii ; miscellaneous , 4 ; in all , 37 . Who can venture to say that our Boys' School is not needed with such a list of applicants ? or who can lay down arbitrarily and dogmaticall y what the maximum or the minimum of an edu .

cation can be or should be when carried on for so many contrasted classes of our community ? With such a long list before us , and with the noble returnof 18 7 6 always present to our memories , we regret that the authorities of the Boys ' School have not seen their way to a permanent increase in the number of inmates . J tj