Masonic Notes And Queries.

Masonic Notes and Queries .

OUR ANCIENT CONSTITUTIONS . I have perused with much interest Bro . Norton ' s able paper in your last number , anent the old charges of English Freemasons , and heartily concur in his laudatory remarks on Bro .

Findel ' s efforts and Bro . Hughan ' s services , in the cause of , what may be termed not inaptly , scientific Freemasonry . But I think , that , Bro . Norton in his praise of recent writers unjustly deprecates our older authorities .

Neither can one fail to be struck with Bro . Norton ' s very incongruous grouping of " Anderson , Ramsey , Preston , and Oliver , " as the authors and propagators of , what he terms , " Masonic mysticism ancl fables . "

" Always look carefully to your facts before you deduce assumptions from them ; which , if the facts are incorrect , are critically valueless , " is a piece of advice which may be tendered , as well to Bro . Norton , as to many other writers now-a-days , in all kindness of feeling . We are

rather apt , just now , to indulge in hasty and crude generalities without having paid sufficient attention to these minute particulars , and what a lawyer would term the facts of the case , which go so far to make criticism valuable and history reliable .

V . ith Ramsey , Anderson and Preston had nothing whatever in common ; and I confess I do not understand wh y Bro . Norton should in any way mix up Ramsey ' s views And theories

with Anderson ' s publications , or Preston ' s history . There does not seem to be the slightest connection between Ramsey and these other oldest Masonic writers , except that they were all Freemasons .

From Bro . Norton ' s words one would almost arrive at the conclusion that he believes Anderson , and Ramsey , and Preston , and Oliver , all , to use a rowing term , " pulled in the same boat ;" all were engaged in some mystical development

of Masonic teaching , which he alike rejects and repudiates . Now Anderson was , in truth , the first writer who attempted to collect and systematize the "disjecta membra'' ofthe Masonic legends , and to harmonize the old traditions and ancient

constitutions ot the Operative Guilds . All that Anderson did , was to put into his own language the legendary annals of the the Order , as contained in the ancient charges and constitutions of the Brotherhood .

Where he obtained the historical legend he mainly uses is not quite clear , neither is it as yet certain which particular formulary or constitution he derived the leading features of his epitome from .

It seems to me , that he had seen and used some original MS ., from which both he and Bro . Krause had derived their mutual identity and agreement . It may lie that Anderson drew

up his statement , which is on the face of it a compilation from more MSS . than one ; but to him , at any , rate belongs the credit of being in truth the Masonic pioneer in the pathway of historical study and forgotten archarolosy .

It has been , and still is , the fashion to deprecate Anderson ; but J confess , this disparagement of his labours and efforts always seems to me very unjust , considering the age he lived in , the peculiar prejudices existing on the subject of

such publications at all , the conlessed diliiculty of separating the historical and the authentic from what was but an ancient legend , or a confused tradition in the constitutions themselves . Anderson ' s work is not only a very valuable contribution

and a very praiseworthy beginning of Masonic literature , but is , in truth , a great landmark in the annals of the Craft . All that can fairly be alleged against Anderson is , that he , in his reverence for the old ways and older traditions ,

shrunk from applying that tair criticism to the traditionary statements , which German and English . Masons , have , since his time , thought well to uphold and devclope .

With regard to W . Preston , I can only say , that having spent many years over my contributions under tlie pseudonyms of " Ebor " and a " Masonic Student , " in verifying his statements , I have been astonished at the great

Masonic Notes And Queries.

trustworthiness and punctilious accuracy , both as regards the authorities he quotes and the facts he makes use of . Indeed , later studies and more critical research have only served to bring into greater prominence , his entire truthfulness and honesty of purpose , and praiseworthy

diligence in the collection of data and authorities . Manuscript authority may still be found for almost all his statements ; and making allowance for one or two hasty assumptions from his manuscript authorities , which closer investigation

have found to be untenable , it is wonderful how very little of revision would be found necessary , by ; an editor to-day , of his valuable and wellknown history . With Ramsey , Preston—like Anderson—had nothing whatever in common ; and I cannot profess to understand why Bro .

Norton couples his name with their ' s . They are historians of our order . Ramsey , though an able man and versatile writer , is best known , after all , as the ingenious manipulator of fancy degrees . With respect to Dr . Oliver , in his earlier and

better works he had nothing in common with Ramsey . In his later works he seemed to lean to the " mysticism " of the " hautes grades . " But surely , historically , and as a matter of precise and accurate statement , Ramsey and Oliver ought not to be classed together .

To Ramsey , no doubt may be attributed , I believe , the main arrangement ancl propagation of the " Rite Ecossais " and all the numerous

ancl fantastic progeny which have sprung from the same interesting parentage . But I do altogether protest , on every ground of historical accuracy and Masonic justice , against Anderson and Preston and Oliver , being in any way identified—as they seemingly are b y Bro .

Norton—either with Ramsey ' s views or Ramsey ' s peculiarities . We owe , masonically , a great debt of gratitude , especially to Anderson and Preston ; who pointed out , in the last century , what the present century has accepted and have clearly established—that speculative Freemasonry is but

thc lineal descendant of the Operative Guilds . I think it is a pity also , that Bro . Norton calls Dunckerly a dreamer , and declares that he was ignorant both of history and chronology . Dunckerly was , on the contrary , an able man ; and all that can be alleged against him is , that he was a great favourer of the High Grades .

Others have been the same , and been very good Freemasons notwithstanding ; and , I think it a great pity that Bro . Norton uses such severe words , as he should remember the old saying , " hard words butter no parsnips ; "' and if we seek to write history , we should avoid as far as wc can , all partizan theories and all " calling of

names . ' I say this in all good-will to Bro . Norton , as I am anxious his interesting communications should not bc rendered less valuable than they are by anything like useless personalities and historical inaccuracies .

A MASONIC STUDENT . X ovember 5 th , 1 S 72 .

" NOTES ON THE UNITED ORDERS OF THE TEMPLE AND HOSPITAL . " I have been reading the " Notes " by Pro . Emra Holmes upon the above subject , and with

your kind permission , 1 would make a fewobservations upon them , and confining my remarks to his statements at page 607 . As to Professor Aytoun , having believed " in the present Knight ' s Templar , as the legitimate

descendants of the Crusading Red Cross Knight , " I may observe that a conversation I lately had with an Edinburgh Brother , led me to believe otherwise , and although he wrote that fine song— " The Raising of the Beauseanl "that does not necessarily prove it .

As to the statement that the Secretary of the Royal Order of Scotland had documents upwards of 200 years old , belonging entirely to our " speculative " Freemasonry , that , I fear is

either a mistake or a misprint , as one hundred years' old would be a more reliable antiquity . The statement also that Loiige No . 3 bis , Scottish Constitution , have . 111 indisputable

Masonic Notes And Queries.

charter from AVilliam the Lion , dated 1174 , 1 s another mistake , as they neither have , nor had , any such document . The charter referred to is one granted about A . D . 1190 by William the

Lion to Bishop Joceline , for the encouragement and protection of a fraternity which had been constituted for the purpose of rebuilding or repairing the Cathedral which had been lately burned . And as to whether or not this

" fraternity meant a company of operative Masons , Professor Innes says , " I think not , for many reasons , I think they were a body of zealous Churchmen , zealous Glasgow men , not operatives . But a good guess might be made if you find other such fraternities about that

time over Europe , and I think there were some . However , whatever the character of the "fraternity , " No . 3 bis never held the charter , nor , so far as I ' am aware , did any of its members ever see it . It was lost long ago , and the only knowledge we have of it , is from a copy taken about 600 . years ago , and preserved in the

Register of the Bishopric , which Register belonged to the Catholic Church , nnd is at present , or lately was , in the possession of one of its members . I may also observe , here , that although No . 3 bis has an old sash with the date " 1 . 600 " upon it , yet in the opinion of Professor Innes , who examined it , that date was not put on before the last century .

the statement also is wrong , that on the sill of one ofthe windows in Glasgow Cathedral , we find the " Square and Compass engraved , the All-seeing Ivye above , the sun , moon and stars , and a linger pointing to the three steps ; " for there is no sun there , and the ladder has five

steps , the finger does not point to the ladder . The date 1556 is there , but that date does not appear to be the date ofthe cutting or scratching ofthe emblems on the stone sill , for as is shown by the style of the composition and grouping of the emblems , their proper date is nearer 1756 .

At page 505 of the late J'tremasoii's Magazinewhich appears to have departed this life upon the 4 th November , 1 S 71—under date December 25 th , 1 S 6 9 , I gave a sketch of these emblems . At page 151 , February 19 th , 1870 , I gave a sketch of other emblems dated 1605 . Now while these latter had all the characters of their

era , those with the date 155 6 near them , had not . As to the statement that " The Blue Blanket had its rise about the year 1 , 200 of God , " that is a mere fancy , as it was presented to the trades of Edinburgh by King James III , in 1482 .

In conclusion , I hope that Bro . Holmes has been more fortunate as regards his other statements than in those referred to , for upon examination , we again see , that England—not Scotland—led the van . I am yours fraternally , W . P . HUGH AN .

The Secretaryship Of The Royal Masonic Institution For Girls.

THE SECRETARYSHIP OF THE ROYAL MASONIC INSTITUTION FOR GIRLS .

The following letter , which has been addressed to the Life Governors of the Royal Masonic Institution for Girls , having been forwarded to us for publication , we have great pleasure in calling the attention of our readers to the claims of Bro . Little , which are ably set forth therein * . —

Collier ' s Wood , Merton , S . W ., November 1 , 1872 . Dear Sir and Brother , — Bro . R . Wentworth Little has consented , at the request of several Vice-Presidents ancl

Life Governors of the Freemasons' Girls' School , to be put in nomination for the Secretaryship of that Institution , which has just become vacant by the retirement of Bro . Patten . In the belief that Uro . Little combines in a remarkable degree the qualifications it is our

duty to insist upon in any . Secretary we may appoint , I am acting as Chairman of a Committee for promoting his election . This Committee deems it important in the interests ofthe Charity that the new Secretary should not he of an age which would , in the common course of nature , render his retirement necessary in a few