-
Articles/Ads
Article THE SO CALLED INIGO JONES MS. OF THE OLD CHARGES OF BRITISH FREEMASONS. ← Page 2 of 2 Article REVIEW. Page 1 of 1
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The So Called Inigo Jones Ms. Of The Old Charges Of British Freemasons.
I could not make out up till now the sources of the three paragraphs following , about Aururiagus , Claudius , the Monastery near Glassenbury , the Trajan Column ; perhaps one of our learned English brethren will be able to trace them . The paragraph on the introduction of Masonry into France and Charles
Martell has been omitted , though it is to be found in all versions of the Old Charges . The paragraph then following begins : " Anno Christi 300 . In St . Alban ' s Time , the King of England , that was a Pagan , did wall the Town about , and that was called Verulam . And St . Alban was a worthy Knight , " and goes on as usual .
I was struck by the name of " Verulam , " but I found it also in the speech of Drake held at York in 1726 , where we read : "And tho' Old Verulam , since call'd St . Albans , may justly claim Precedency , " etc . ( Cole ' s edition of 1734 , page 19 ) . Now , Bro , Drake tells us of an old Record preserved in the Lodge of York , from which he took some other particulars not found in any of the MSS . extant , and as we know that one of the
ancient York MSS . of the Old Charges ( No . 3 ) is missing , Bro . Drake is likely to have got his information from this MS ., now unfortunately lost . At first I thought the compiler of the Spencer version might have seen Bro . Drake's speech , but it not being delivered before the 27 th of December , in 1726 , and the Spencer MS . being dated of 1726 also , the compiler cannot possibly have made use
of the speech . Wherefore I now believe the compiler had a copy of the Old Charges , wherein he found the passage s " Did wall the towne about that was called Verulam , and is now called St . Albans ; " for this must have been the original reading , as I shall show in another place . Or the compiler ' s copy contained only the words— " Did wall the town about that was called Verulam , " omitting the latter half of the sentence . The copy
was of the Grand Lodge Branch , but none of the three we know ( Grand Lodge MS ., Wilson MS ., and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MS . ) . There aie some peculiarities of the Grand Lodge Branch that occur also in the Spencer version , but not in any other . Almost in the beginning , in the address to the brethren , we find the sentence— "And also to those that be here , we will charge by the charges that belong to every Free-Mason , " being
verbatim the same in the three copies just mentioned . The sentence next following has been somewhat altered : " lor in good Faith , Free-Masonry is worthy to be kept well ; it is a worthy Craft and a curious Science , " instead of : " For in good faithe , and they take good heed to it , it is vvoorthy to be well kepte , for it is a worthy Crafte and a curious Science / ' ( Grand Lodge and Wilson MSS . ) In this passage the Inigo Tones MS . has better
preserved the orit * inal text : " * For in good Faith ^ if they take Good heed to it , it ' s worthy to be well kept . For Masonry is a Worthy Craft and a Curious Science . " But immediately after this the Inigo Jones MS . has only : "And One of the Liberal Sciences , " whilst the Spencer MS . affords the original text * . " For there be seven Liberal Sciences , of which seven it is one of them , " verbatim as in the Grand Lodge Branch .
From these different manners of changing , we must conclude that there was another MS . of the Spencer version , probably the original , which agreed more with the Grand Lodge Branch , and both of the transcripts taken from that ori ginal made alterations of their own . So at the end of the prayer the Inigo Jones MS . had the original reading : " that never shall have ending , " whilst the Spencer MS . and Cole have : "that never shall have an End . "
In the whole , the Spencer MS . has better preserved the traditional version , though in some cases the Inigo Jones MS . kept the old words , where the Spencer MS . had made slight alterations . Wherefore I believe it more correct to call this group of copies the " Spencer version . " The
Inigo Jones MS . always has added numbers where there vvas an opportunity of numbering , in the list of the seven liberal sciences as well as in the different charges , excepting the Euclid charges ; besides , the text of the charges has been very often altered , whilst the Spencer MS . agrees almost verbatim vvith the Grand Lodge Branch .
Now 1 go on in making up the peculiarities that are to be found in the Spencer version , as well as in the Grand Lodge Branch , especially the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS ., which differ in some points from the Grand Lodge MS . I shall omit the conformities that are not absolutely striking .
r " The second is Rhetorick , and that teacheth a Man lo speak fair in soft Terms ; " the same as the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS . " And they had no competent Livelyhood to find their Children ; " the same as the Grand Lodge , Wilson , and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS ., besides only the Aberdeen MS ., which belongs to the same family , but not in all to the same branch , and the Harris MS . of the Bedford Lodge .
"And then did they proclaim "—Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS . —the word " proclaime " being omitted in the Grand Lodge MS . " Under Condition that ye will grant them , and that I may have Power lo rule them ; " the original reading is : " Under a condition that ye vvill grant me and them a commission , that I may have power to rule them ; but the Grand Lodge Branch omits the words " a commission , " and so does the S pencer version .
, " And then this worthy Clerk Hermes took to him these Lords' Sons ; " Clerke " also in the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS ., the Grand L ° Q ^ ' omMln S tile word . Instead of " Hermes " the Inigo Jones MS . has " Euclide ; " also in the other passages where Euclid is named , < 7 p ' . Spencer MS . has altered the name , putting "Hermes" for Euclid . " This is another proof that the Inigo Jones MS . is not a transcript of the Spencer MS ., but of another original .
"And that they should truel y deserve their Pay of the Lord , or the Master of the Work that they serve ; " the words " of the worke " being ° n ' y in the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS . ' And he ordained for them a reasonable Pay , whereby they might live nonestl y ; " the same as the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS .
" And that worthy Clerk Hermes ( Euclede , Inigo Jones MS . ) gave it ^ e name of Geometry ; " " Clerke Euclide" also in the Grand Lodge branch ; all other copies having "Master Euclide , " only the Aberdeen MS . agrees also here with the Grand Lodge Branch . „ " So that he had Fourscore thousand Workmen , that were Workers of ¦ ¦
-unes the words " workemen that were " are only in the Grand Lodge ranch , the words " workemen" also in the Aberdeen MS ., and in the vv ° od MS . We read " workemen of stones . " .. ' He gave them two Shillings a Week , and three Pence to their Chear ; " sh * ii * ° pies but the Wl , son and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS . have "two uiings six pence , " and " cheer " is only to be met with in the same MSS , and ihe Grand Lodge MS . ( To be continued ) .
Review.
REVIEW .
SECOND NOTICE . THB HISTORY OF FREEMASONR 7 . By Bro . ROBERT FREKE GOULD , Vol . VI . London : Thomas C . Jack , 45 , Ludgate Hill . 188 7 . We remarked in our general notice of the concluding volume of Bro . Gould ' s " History of Freemasonry " that it was our intention to treat more fully of thc views he has expressed in portions , and especially in the chapter devoted to " Freemasonry in the United States of America . " When that notice appeared , the
volume had been in our possession only a few days , and all we felt justified in stating at the time vvas that Bro . Gould , "in his researches and the conclusions he has seen fit to adopt therefrom , " seemed to have '' traced the history of the Craft in this portion of North America with clearness and precision , and most assuredly with every desire to play the part of a strictly impartial historian . " A careful study of the contents has confirmed us in this opinion , and vve now hasten to redeem our promise , so far as it relates to Freemasonry in the United States .
Most of the leading events connected vvith the early history of the Craft in these parts are tolerably well-known to the majority of our readers , and we need not trouble to repeat them here . Bro . Gould has stated the case on the whole very fairly when , speaking with reference to Daniel Coxe and Henry Price , he says : " The former received a deputation as Provincial Grand Master , but there is hardly 3 . scin-Tilla of evidence to show that he ever exercised any authority under it . The latter ,
on the other hand , exercised all the authority of a Provincial Grand Master , though no absolute proof is forthcoming that he vvas at an ) time in lawful possession of a deputation . " It vvould be rash to a-isume that the constitution of the St . John ' s Lodge , Philadelphia , whose ' * Libre B " has been brought to light within the last three or four years through the fortunate labours of Bro . MacCalla , vvas the act of Daniel Coxe , done by virtue of the deputation granted to him by the Duke of Norfolk ,
G . M ., in Jane , 1730 ; or that Henry Price did receive , as alleged , the deputation from Viscount Montague , G . M ., dated 30 th April , 1733 , because he constituted the " First Lodge in Boston , " or " Holy Lodge of St . John , " on 31 st August , 1733 . Both propositions seem reasonable enough in their way , though neither of them , in the present state of our knowledge , is perhaps capable of direct proof . Yei , having regard to the circumstances which are known , it strikes us that , in dealing with the
rival claims of precedency of Philadelphia and Boston , Bro . Gould need not have followed the example of Lord Keeper Bridgman , who , " if a case admitted ol divers doubts , what the lawyers call points , " " vvould never give all on one side , but either party should have somewhat to go away vvith . " In his very natural desire to be strictly impartial , as between the claims of Philadelphia on the one hand , and those of Boston on the other , he seems not to have given sufficient wei ght to the
position of those claims as they stand to each other now since Bro . MacCalla ' s discovery of the aforesaid " Libre B . " We doubt if he has made sufficient allowance for the effect of this discovery . We do not mean as to whether Coxe did anything in Masonry by virtue of his deputation , or Price had the authority of a deputation when he constituted the "First Lodge in Boston , " but whether in dealing with the rival claims of Philadelphia and Boston to precedency , we are not
justified , or indeed compelled , to give a verdict in favour of the former , It is on record that a deputation vvas granted to Coxe as Prov . Grand Master of New York , New Jersey , and Pennsylvania , in 1730 , and " Libre B . " discloses the fact that a Lodge ot St . John was working in Fhiladelphia in June , 1731 . The two need not be associated together as cause and effect , but for the present , at all events , the existence
of a lodge in Philadelphia in regular working disposes of any claim on the part of Boston , which had no constituted lodge till August , 1733 , to be the mother city of American Freemasonry . Coxe may never have performed a single duty as Prov \ Grand Master , yet , unless this " Libre B . " is a forgery , Philadelphia had its Masonic lodge in full working order at least two years before Boston .
Bro . Gould is to be commended for the patience vvith which he has sifted all the different scraps of evidence vvhich bear upon this question . It is better that he should have bestowed too much rather than too little time and pains in his endeavours to settle satisfactorily the various points in dispute ,- for , having examined everything that was likely to assist him in his labours , he cannot now have it laid to his charge that he has performed them hastily or perfunctorily . We can very well
understand the great interest taken by our American brethren , and especially by those hailing from Ph . ladelphia and Boston , in all that relates to the rise and progress of the Craft in their country . Freemasonry is so popular in the States , and has grown to be so powerful an institution , that every attempt to set at rest the doubts and difficulties by whicli its introduction vvas sunounded vvill command our
sympathy . Bro . Gould appears to have done more in this direction than any previous Masonic writer , and , in our opinion , it only remained for him to grasp the effect of the circumstances as they are now presented to us , instead of observing Lord Keeper Bridgman ' s custom , and his sketch of eatly Freemasonry in the United States would have been pertect , or as nearly perfect as ever any sketch is likely to be .
It may be that in following the course he has adopted Bro . Gould has had before his eyes the fear of offending that class of critics who insist on having chapter and verse for every statement that is made , and who , forgetting that even in matters relating to our own time there are often discrepancies of statement vvhich it is difficult to account tor , decline to accept anything vvhich is not proved up to the very hilt . These critics take no account of reasonable probabilities . It is nothing to
them , for instance , that as Price , when he constituted the first lodge in Boston , in August , 1733 , exercised the functions of a Provincial Grand Master , it is reasonable to suppose he obtained the powers of a Provincial Grand Master from some competent authority , and that his statement about the deputation granted to him by Viscount Montague , G . M ., must have had in ita foundation of truth , or it would not have been accepted by his contemporaries . There is no recordof the deputation having
been granted , and , therefore , in the opinion of these critics , we must reject his statement . And , again , as regards Coxe , there is evidence as to his deputation , but none to show that he ever exercised his powers under it . Consequentl y , we must look upon the St . John's Lodge of Philadelphia , whencesoever it came , as having been an irregular or clandestine lodge , and as being on that account outside the main question as to how , when , and where Freemasonry made its first start in what
are now the United States ot North America . For ourselves , if we meet a man who is exercising the faculties and functions of a human being , vve do not dismiss his existence as a myth , because he may happen to have been born into the world wrong side uppermost ; it is enough for us that he vvas born and lives . So vve find a Masonic lodge working in Philadelphia in 1731 , and Price constituting a lodge in Boston in 1733 . 'They may have been born into the Masonic world
" wrong side uppermost , " but , for all their irregularity in this respect , these lodges represent the foundations of Freemasonry in the States , and it is to be regretted that , dismissing all minor considerations from his mind , Bro . Gould has not seen his way to accepting facts , the existence of which , so far as our knowledge goes , is incontrovertible . We applaud him for his close and critical inquiry into thecircumstances ; but vve think he vvas bound to go a step further than he appears to have done , and accepted the legitinute result of those inquiries .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The So Called Inigo Jones Ms. Of The Old Charges Of British Freemasons.
I could not make out up till now the sources of the three paragraphs following , about Aururiagus , Claudius , the Monastery near Glassenbury , the Trajan Column ; perhaps one of our learned English brethren will be able to trace them . The paragraph on the introduction of Masonry into France and Charles
Martell has been omitted , though it is to be found in all versions of the Old Charges . The paragraph then following begins : " Anno Christi 300 . In St . Alban ' s Time , the King of England , that was a Pagan , did wall the Town about , and that was called Verulam . And St . Alban was a worthy Knight , " and goes on as usual .
I was struck by the name of " Verulam , " but I found it also in the speech of Drake held at York in 1726 , where we read : "And tho' Old Verulam , since call'd St . Albans , may justly claim Precedency , " etc . ( Cole ' s edition of 1734 , page 19 ) . Now , Bro , Drake tells us of an old Record preserved in the Lodge of York , from which he took some other particulars not found in any of the MSS . extant , and as we know that one of the
ancient York MSS . of the Old Charges ( No . 3 ) is missing , Bro . Drake is likely to have got his information from this MS ., now unfortunately lost . At first I thought the compiler of the Spencer version might have seen Bro . Drake's speech , but it not being delivered before the 27 th of December , in 1726 , and the Spencer MS . being dated of 1726 also , the compiler cannot possibly have made use
of the speech . Wherefore I now believe the compiler had a copy of the Old Charges , wherein he found the passage s " Did wall the towne about that was called Verulam , and is now called St . Albans ; " for this must have been the original reading , as I shall show in another place . Or the compiler ' s copy contained only the words— " Did wall the town about that was called Verulam , " omitting the latter half of the sentence . The copy
was of the Grand Lodge Branch , but none of the three we know ( Grand Lodge MS ., Wilson MS ., and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MS . ) . There aie some peculiarities of the Grand Lodge Branch that occur also in the Spencer version , but not in any other . Almost in the beginning , in the address to the brethren , we find the sentence— "And also to those that be here , we will charge by the charges that belong to every Free-Mason , " being
verbatim the same in the three copies just mentioned . The sentence next following has been somewhat altered : " lor in good Faith , Free-Masonry is worthy to be kept well ; it is a worthy Craft and a curious Science , " instead of : " For in good faithe , and they take good heed to it , it is vvoorthy to be well kepte , for it is a worthy Crafte and a curious Science / ' ( Grand Lodge and Wilson MSS . ) In this passage the Inigo Tones MS . has better
preserved the orit * inal text : " * For in good Faith ^ if they take Good heed to it , it ' s worthy to be well kept . For Masonry is a Worthy Craft and a Curious Science . " But immediately after this the Inigo Jones MS . has only : "And One of the Liberal Sciences , " whilst the Spencer MS . affords the original text * . " For there be seven Liberal Sciences , of which seven it is one of them , " verbatim as in the Grand Lodge Branch .
From these different manners of changing , we must conclude that there was another MS . of the Spencer version , probably the original , which agreed more with the Grand Lodge Branch , and both of the transcripts taken from that ori ginal made alterations of their own . So at the end of the prayer the Inigo Jones MS . had the original reading : " that never shall have ending , " whilst the Spencer MS . and Cole have : "that never shall have an End . "
In the whole , the Spencer MS . has better preserved the traditional version , though in some cases the Inigo Jones MS . kept the old words , where the Spencer MS . had made slight alterations . Wherefore I believe it more correct to call this group of copies the " Spencer version . " The
Inigo Jones MS . always has added numbers where there vvas an opportunity of numbering , in the list of the seven liberal sciences as well as in the different charges , excepting the Euclid charges ; besides , the text of the charges has been very often altered , whilst the Spencer MS . agrees almost verbatim vvith the Grand Lodge Branch .
Now 1 go on in making up the peculiarities that are to be found in the Spencer version , as well as in the Grand Lodge Branch , especially the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS ., which differ in some points from the Grand Lodge MS . I shall omit the conformities that are not absolutely striking .
r " The second is Rhetorick , and that teacheth a Man lo speak fair in soft Terms ; " the same as the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS . " And they had no competent Livelyhood to find their Children ; " the same as the Grand Lodge , Wilson , and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS ., besides only the Aberdeen MS ., which belongs to the same family , but not in all to the same branch , and the Harris MS . of the Bedford Lodge .
"And then did they proclaim "—Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS . —the word " proclaime " being omitted in the Grand Lodge MS . " Under Condition that ye will grant them , and that I may have Power lo rule them ; " the original reading is : " Under a condition that ye vvill grant me and them a commission , that I may have power to rule them ; but the Grand Lodge Branch omits the words " a commission , " and so does the S pencer version .
, " And then this worthy Clerk Hermes took to him these Lords' Sons ; " Clerke " also in the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS ., the Grand L ° Q ^ ' omMln S tile word . Instead of " Hermes " the Inigo Jones MS . has " Euclide ; " also in the other passages where Euclid is named , < 7 p ' . Spencer MS . has altered the name , putting "Hermes" for Euclid . " This is another proof that the Inigo Jones MS . is not a transcript of the Spencer MS ., but of another original .
"And that they should truel y deserve their Pay of the Lord , or the Master of the Work that they serve ; " the words " of the worke " being ° n ' y in the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS . ' And he ordained for them a reasonable Pay , whereby they might live nonestl y ; " the same as the Wilson and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS .
" And that worthy Clerk Hermes ( Euclede , Inigo Jones MS . ) gave it ^ e name of Geometry ; " " Clerke Euclide" also in the Grand Lodge branch ; all other copies having "Master Euclide , " only the Aberdeen MS . agrees also here with the Grand Lodge Branch . „ " So that he had Fourscore thousand Workmen , that were Workers of ¦ ¦
-unes the words " workemen that were " are only in the Grand Lodge ranch , the words " workemen" also in the Aberdeen MS ., and in the vv ° od MS . We read " workemen of stones . " .. ' He gave them two Shillings a Week , and three Pence to their Chear ; " sh * ii * ° pies but the Wl , son and Edinburgh-Kilwinning MSS . have "two uiings six pence , " and " cheer " is only to be met with in the same MSS , and ihe Grand Lodge MS . ( To be continued ) .
Review.
REVIEW .
SECOND NOTICE . THB HISTORY OF FREEMASONR 7 . By Bro . ROBERT FREKE GOULD , Vol . VI . London : Thomas C . Jack , 45 , Ludgate Hill . 188 7 . We remarked in our general notice of the concluding volume of Bro . Gould ' s " History of Freemasonry " that it was our intention to treat more fully of thc views he has expressed in portions , and especially in the chapter devoted to " Freemasonry in the United States of America . " When that notice appeared , the
volume had been in our possession only a few days , and all we felt justified in stating at the time vvas that Bro . Gould , "in his researches and the conclusions he has seen fit to adopt therefrom , " seemed to have '' traced the history of the Craft in this portion of North America with clearness and precision , and most assuredly with every desire to play the part of a strictly impartial historian . " A careful study of the contents has confirmed us in this opinion , and vve now hasten to redeem our promise , so far as it relates to Freemasonry in the United States .
Most of the leading events connected vvith the early history of the Craft in these parts are tolerably well-known to the majority of our readers , and we need not trouble to repeat them here . Bro . Gould has stated the case on the whole very fairly when , speaking with reference to Daniel Coxe and Henry Price , he says : " The former received a deputation as Provincial Grand Master , but there is hardly 3 . scin-Tilla of evidence to show that he ever exercised any authority under it . The latter ,
on the other hand , exercised all the authority of a Provincial Grand Master , though no absolute proof is forthcoming that he vvas at an ) time in lawful possession of a deputation . " It vvould be rash to a-isume that the constitution of the St . John ' s Lodge , Philadelphia , whose ' * Libre B " has been brought to light within the last three or four years through the fortunate labours of Bro . MacCalla , vvas the act of Daniel Coxe , done by virtue of the deputation granted to him by the Duke of Norfolk ,
G . M ., in Jane , 1730 ; or that Henry Price did receive , as alleged , the deputation from Viscount Montague , G . M ., dated 30 th April , 1733 , because he constituted the " First Lodge in Boston , " or " Holy Lodge of St . John , " on 31 st August , 1733 . Both propositions seem reasonable enough in their way , though neither of them , in the present state of our knowledge , is perhaps capable of direct proof . Yei , having regard to the circumstances which are known , it strikes us that , in dealing with the
rival claims of precedency of Philadelphia and Boston , Bro . Gould need not have followed the example of Lord Keeper Bridgman , who , " if a case admitted ol divers doubts , what the lawyers call points , " " vvould never give all on one side , but either party should have somewhat to go away vvith . " In his very natural desire to be strictly impartial , as between the claims of Philadelphia on the one hand , and those of Boston on the other , he seems not to have given sufficient wei ght to the
position of those claims as they stand to each other now since Bro . MacCalla ' s discovery of the aforesaid " Libre B . " We doubt if he has made sufficient allowance for the effect of this discovery . We do not mean as to whether Coxe did anything in Masonry by virtue of his deputation , or Price had the authority of a deputation when he constituted the "First Lodge in Boston , " but whether in dealing with the rival claims of Philadelphia and Boston to precedency , we are not
justified , or indeed compelled , to give a verdict in favour of the former , It is on record that a deputation vvas granted to Coxe as Prov . Grand Master of New York , New Jersey , and Pennsylvania , in 1730 , and " Libre B . " discloses the fact that a Lodge ot St . John was working in Fhiladelphia in June , 1731 . The two need not be associated together as cause and effect , but for the present , at all events , the existence
of a lodge in Philadelphia in regular working disposes of any claim on the part of Boston , which had no constituted lodge till August , 1733 , to be the mother city of American Freemasonry . Coxe may never have performed a single duty as Prov \ Grand Master , yet , unless this " Libre B . " is a forgery , Philadelphia had its Masonic lodge in full working order at least two years before Boston .
Bro . Gould is to be commended for the patience vvith which he has sifted all the different scraps of evidence vvhich bear upon this question . It is better that he should have bestowed too much rather than too little time and pains in his endeavours to settle satisfactorily the various points in dispute ,- for , having examined everything that was likely to assist him in his labours , he cannot now have it laid to his charge that he has performed them hastily or perfunctorily . We can very well
understand the great interest taken by our American brethren , and especially by those hailing from Ph . ladelphia and Boston , in all that relates to the rise and progress of the Craft in their country . Freemasonry is so popular in the States , and has grown to be so powerful an institution , that every attempt to set at rest the doubts and difficulties by whicli its introduction vvas sunounded vvill command our
sympathy . Bro . Gould appears to have done more in this direction than any previous Masonic writer , and , in our opinion , it only remained for him to grasp the effect of the circumstances as they are now presented to us , instead of observing Lord Keeper Bridgman ' s custom , and his sketch of eatly Freemasonry in the United States would have been pertect , or as nearly perfect as ever any sketch is likely to be .
It may be that in following the course he has adopted Bro . Gould has had before his eyes the fear of offending that class of critics who insist on having chapter and verse for every statement that is made , and who , forgetting that even in matters relating to our own time there are often discrepancies of statement vvhich it is difficult to account tor , decline to accept anything vvhich is not proved up to the very hilt . These critics take no account of reasonable probabilities . It is nothing to
them , for instance , that as Price , when he constituted the first lodge in Boston , in August , 1733 , exercised the functions of a Provincial Grand Master , it is reasonable to suppose he obtained the powers of a Provincial Grand Master from some competent authority , and that his statement about the deputation granted to him by Viscount Montague , G . M ., must have had in ita foundation of truth , or it would not have been accepted by his contemporaries . There is no recordof the deputation having
been granted , and , therefore , in the opinion of these critics , we must reject his statement . And , again , as regards Coxe , there is evidence as to his deputation , but none to show that he ever exercised his powers under it . Consequentl y , we must look upon the St . John's Lodge of Philadelphia , whencesoever it came , as having been an irregular or clandestine lodge , and as being on that account outside the main question as to how , when , and where Freemasonry made its first start in what
are now the United States ot North America . For ourselves , if we meet a man who is exercising the faculties and functions of a human being , vve do not dismiss his existence as a myth , because he may happen to have been born into the world wrong side uppermost ; it is enough for us that he vvas born and lives . So vve find a Masonic lodge working in Philadelphia in 1731 , and Price constituting a lodge in Boston in 1733 . 'They may have been born into the Masonic world
" wrong side uppermost , " but , for all their irregularity in this respect , these lodges represent the foundations of Freemasonry in the States , and it is to be regretted that , dismissing all minor considerations from his mind , Bro . Gould has not seen his way to accepting facts , the existence of which , so far as our knowledge goes , is incontrovertible . We applaud him for his close and critical inquiry into thecircumstances ; but vve think he vvas bound to go a step further than he appears to have done , and accepted the legitinute result of those inquiries .