-
Articles/Ads
Article ENGLISH AND FOREIGN FREEMASONRY. ← Page 2 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 1 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 1 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 1
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
English And Foreign Freemasonry.
cipe Createur , " and the " Force Superieure , " do not admit any reference to the " true and ever living God Most High . " Here is another and most essential difference as between English and some portions of foreign Freemasonry , and as we always dislike " daubing the wall with untemnpred mortar , " we think it well that we should
realize this fact , and remember distinctly this state of things , otherwise we are like people walking in the dark , and unless we take care , we may be forced by the . ignorant or credulous into a quasi recognition of systems which we are bound to disavow , if true to the great and goodly princip les of our excellent cosmopolitan fraternity .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ We do wot hold ourselves responsible for , or even approving of , the opinions expressed by onr correspondents , but we wish in a spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ]
ROMAN CATHOLIC INTOLERANCE AND INTIMIDATION . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Perhaps you will record the following piece of intolerance and interference with private rights on the part of the Roman Catholic Priesthood . The Freemasons are just commencing to build a
Masonic Hall in Mullingar ( of which they sadly stood in need ) , and as soon as it became known they were about to do so , the Roman Catholic clergy commenced a scries of sermons in their churches against the woik , they prevented the people from working at the building and from supplying materials ; they injured some of the brethren in their business , and directed the greatest ruffians in the town to throw it down when finished , and they held meetings to prevent it being carried on , at which very violent language
was used . They pretend it is an insult to their religion to have a Masonic Hall in a town where nine-tenths of the population are Roman Catholic , but they really wish to show their detestation of civil and religious liberty . However , the work must proceed , and all that we require
are funds , we wish our English brethren would assist us with money , and that you in your valuable paper would advocate our cause . Yours fraterrally , G . J . NORMAN D'ARCY , 31 , Prov . G . Sec . Meatli .
BRO . MURRAY'S LETTER . Dear Bro . Kenning , — I have seen Bro . Murray's letter in the last Freemason , and am struck , as all must be , by the bad taste and worse temper which it betrays from first to last . I was originally induced to call attention to Bro . Murray's " Deliverance , " in consequence both of the presumptuous
ignorance of Masonic law , national and international , which , as you know , I have long carefully studied , for which it was most conspicuous , and asubsequent acquaintance with Bro . Murray ' s peculiar style of writing only convinces me the more how unfit he is to " lay down the law" on a subject of which he is evidently absolutely ignoiant , and of which he has positively to master the ABC . It is one of thc great nuisances of the present day , as you well know , that persons affect to dogmatize on what they do not themselves comprehend , lecturing every one else on a subject which they have not studied , either in its extent , or bearing , or historical reality , or after consequences . Bro . Murray commences his letter on the " abuse—the
plaintiff ' s Attorney" principle , by stating that 1 have " garbled " his arguments . What there was of " argument " I printed in my first letter , and recommended that the whole letter should be printed , which it was . I took the words as printed from the Craftsman , carefully studying text and context , and only leaving out what was not necessary to Bro . Murray ' s argument and did not
affect it in the slightest degree . I sought earnestly not to do him injustice , and any assertion that 1 in any way " garbled" his statement , is alike unmasonic and untrue . I cannot help it , if he does not understand his own argument as he sent it to the Craftsman , that surely is no fault of mine . I deeply regret , as displaying the " animus " which has marked all his correspondence , that he
commences his letter with a statement absolutely contrary to the fact . I repeat my asseition , that no Masonic writer of repute has ever upheld Bro . Murray ' s view of the case . 1 o give us Bro . Haiington's name , as the answer to my Protest , is valueless to us in England who have studied the subject . I was not aware that Bro . Harington was an authority upon anything , except perhaps thc reality of
. Bro . Murray knows as well as I do where thc " shoe p nches . The recognition of the right of thc Grand Lodges " England and Scotland as to " prior occupation , " and in spect of lod ge adherence to its constituting authority by me brand Lodge of Canada , is fatal to all thc claims and I H . anathemala" of the Grand Lodgeof Quebec . indeed , I go further , and say , that so serious is the pi in' 7 stake , that it certainly will not be disposed of by gry threats or illogical and unmasonic circulars , but Prineil * ^[' y and man f" » y ^ S ^ ° "t on Masonic v mcipies . Three , if not four of the American Grand
Original Correspondence.
Lodges , as well as the Grand Lodge of Canada itself , are in favour of the English as opposed to the Quebec view of tbe discussion , and I fancy a good many more will follow suit , when they fully understand the matter at issue . And here I leave the matter to-day , n : > t wishing to go into
" extraneous questions , " and above all unwilling to prolong a controversy , which can only be regarded with feelings of much iegret by all who value the honour and good of Masonry , as above personal int-rrests , or party prepossessions . I am , dear Bro . Kenning , yours fraternally , THE WRITER Of THE ARTICLE .
BRO . EDMONDSTON . Tothe Editor ofthe " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — 1 sent you a few lines last week on the foolish and unprecedented and uncourteous remarks of Bro . Edmondston , to whom you have accorded full and unrestricted space , but think it well to supplement them to-day . I
need hardly point out that the ' * Report" about which Bro . Edmondston seems so " puzzled , " was sent from the London Masonic Charity Association , having been approved at the Committee meeting on the 16 th ult ., and that it was what it professed to be—the First Report of the Association , based on the action and returns of its Sub-Committee appointed to attend the elections . As the drafter of it , I
can safely say that was written without the slightest reference to Bro . Edmondston ' s letter , though it had reference to another correspondence of which 1 have no reason to suppose that Bro . Edmondston knows anything . It was commenced at Freemasons' Tavern , between the close and declaration of the poll , the portion relative to the Girls ' School having been drafted on the Saturday before . The
report was therefore directed to two points ; one , the recent elections , the other , certain objections with which the Committee had been dealing in another correspondence . I beg once more to repeat , to put an end to such unfair remarks , that that report had as much to do with Bro . Edmondston ' s letter as it had to do with any other report in the Freemason , and that now I bave read Bro . Edmonston ' s letter
" in extenso , " which I had not done when I drafted the report , I may add that I certainly should not have alluded to it in any way whatever . I think that Bro . Perceval , the Treasurer , and a " Member of the London Masonic Chaiity Association " have completely executed that duty . 1 only wish to protest against Bro . Edmondston ' s remarks
who , because he sees that the repoit is an answer to all the nonsense which Ira's been spoken about the London Masonic Charity Association , attacks the Freemason , which published his letter in full . It is no doubt true that one of the Secretaries of the London Masonic Charity Association , as everybody knows , is the Editor of the Freemason , but what has that to do with the question ? THE DRAFTER OF THE REPORT .
A QUESTION TO BRO . BEDOLFE . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I note that our intelligent Bro . Bedolfe is now in Paris . Can he tell us in your columns whether the Bible
is still preserved 111 any lodge under the Rite Ecossais . I see that he docs not mention " prayers , " and as he is silent about tbe Bible , I fear that that Sacred Book has no longer any " abiding place" in the Rite Ecossais , just as it has ii tbe lodges under the Grand Orient . Yours fraternally , DILEMMA .
BRO . BEDOLFE AND THE MARK . DEGREE . To the Editor ofthe" Freemason , " Dear Sir and Brother , — When Bro . Bedolfe , P . M . and P . Z ., rushed into print on the 12 th ult ., with a long and laboured diatribe against the degre'e of Mark Master Masons ? , my fixed impulse was to treat his effusion wilh the silent contempt it
merited . As Bio . Bedolfe now exults in the fond imagination that 1 have " failed to reply to his arguments , " I must now , perforce , in self-defence , have a fling at him . Mind , though , Bro . Bedolfe was close upun two months preparing his elaborate critique . First of all , 1 ought to explain to your irascible correspondent , as also to " Ecce Signum , " that I am not in holy
orders , but simply Chaplain of a Mark Lodge , which institution does not make the sacred and learned calling a sine qui non far a Chaplaincy ; neither does the Royal Arch for Third Principal . Again let me explain that I do not intend carrying this communication to the same ridiculous length of verbosity as Bro . Bedolfe . I have not the time , and if I had , I am afraid the matter would be utterly
wasted on a sceptic , who , I grieve to say , has so far committed himself as to hold intercourse with the interdicted Grand Orient of France , forgetful of the resolution passed by thc Grand Lodge ol England some months ago . I trust the members of his lodge and chapter will bring him promptly over the coals for so grave an irregularity . But , revenons a nos moutons . The only point in Bro .
Bedolfe ' s epistles needing any reply is his assertion that the antiquity of the Mark Degree is a myth , and incapable of proof . That 1 willingly admit , in the occular demonstrative sense he drives at ; but , I would ask Bro . Bedolle whether that self-same argument docs not hold equally good with Craft Masonry , including the Royal Arch ? The evidence of antiquity , allowed , is only inferential ; and I opine our brother ' s opposition to the
Mark Degree savours too much of malice . Where can Bro . Bedolfe , or anyone else , produce better evidence as to the origin of Craft and Arch Masonry , than that freely accepted re the Mark Degree . Why , sir and brother , the Royal Arch ( of which I see yourcorrespondent is a P . Z . ) , was comparatively unknown in England till towards the last three decades of thc eighteenth century , and , was , in fact , tabooed and discountenanced for years by the Grand Lodge of Moderns , just in the same way as the
Original Correspondence.
United Grand Lodge refuses acknowledgment of the Mark Degree now . Then again , in Ireland , Scotland , and America , the Mark Degree is the stepping-stone to the Royal Arch , and therein we cannot find a more appropriate corollary to the Fellow Craft and Master Mason ' s Degrees . Bro . Bedolfe ' s sneer at the late Bro . Oliver ' s veracity is amusing , to put the mildest and most charitable
construction upon it , and I will only add , that I think that ninetynine out of every hundred Masonic students in England , where the Mark Degree is presented , will stand the old doctor , in preference to the erratic obscurity Bro . Bedolfe appears to delight in making himself . The fact is , Bro Bedolfe , before you pooh-pooh the history of Mark Masonry , you had better take up Craft Masonry , ab initio ,
and I suspect the task will turn out one beyond your capabilities . Let me lastly assure Bro . Bedolfe , that he will hear no more from me on the subject , which , sir and brother , with all due deference to your editorial self , I may submit , may be carried beyond the bounds of prudence , in even a Masonic newspaper . I am , yours fraternally , W . F . LAMONBY , W . M . Lodge 229 , M . M . M .
MARK MASONRY . To the Editor of the " Freemason " Dear Sir and Brother , — Like many other Mark Masons I have been much amused at the virulence and lack of knowledge displayed by your correspondent " W . Viner Bedolfe , M . D ., & c . " in his attack on Bro . Lamonby , as well as his impatience under
the criticism of " Ecce Signum . " If Bro . Bedolfe had been a Mark Mason his original remarks might have been worth attention , but I persume that Bro . Lamonby regarded with equal indifference and equanimity the not very politely worded assaults of an outsider , if , indeed , he read them at all . It is truly amusing to see one who manifestly takes a piide in being ably to sign himself a P . M . and a P . Z .
expressing disbelief in the history of every branch of Masonry save the " Craft , " and claiming for the " Craft" alone any historic value . We are all as anxious as possible to prove for Masoniy an existence from "time immemorial , " and yet although we have had for a century and a half many able heads and pens engaged in the task we have completely failed to make out a plain case . I can scarcely suppose
lhat Bro . Bedolfe is prepared to affirm the fables of Anderson and Preston , and as far as I can see all the efforts of Fort , Findel , Hughan , and others have proved nothing whatever beyond the beginning of the iSih century , save that the operative Masonic guilds , like all other guilds , received persons as pattons or " honorary " members . It is plain from existing minutes that " Mark Masonry " was
practised very shortly after the " revival" in 1717 ; then why should Bro . Bedolfe call the Ciaft legends , teachings , and workings " noble , " and stigmatise the Mark ditto as untrue , absurd , & c . ? As Bro . Bedolfe has by his dictatorial and pragmatical style taken upon himself to a certain extent the role of censor , it might be well to remind him that the first duty
of the preacher is to appear before his audience with clean hands , and after your correspondent's gross infraction , by his own showing , of the direct commands of our M . W , Grand Master to hold no Masonic communication with the Grand Orient of France , I would respectfully suggest to Bro . Bedolfe , M . D . —Physician heal thyself . Fraternally yours , A P . M . OF A TIME IMMEMORIAL MARK LODGE
ORIGINAL RESEARCH . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — The last memorandum with which you favoured me , having stated that enquiries has been made as to when " Original Research " would be published , I beg to say for their information that it will not be until next spring
when I trust it will appear , not as a pamphlet , but as a book , for presentation , in boards , clear type , good margin , that it will contain about twenty chapters , and the two ancient pictures formerly mentioned . The chapters will of course facilitate references , and give a bird's eye view of its contents . The price should increase with these advantages , but remains stationary at one shilling . This information
should attract subscribers , and all whose sole faith is in God , the Grand Architect of the Universe , will be grati fie d to learn that the science restores the lost knowledge of the keys not only to tha Masonic Order , but to all orders of educated men who have the moral courage to think foe themselves . Fraternally yours . WM . N . CRAWFORD .
The British Consul at Jeddah states that in the season 1877-78 there were 42 , 718 pilgrims landed at that port , an increase of nearly 4000 over the preceding year , but this was more than counterbalanced by a falling off in the number at Yembo and Lcct . The Haj having fallen
on a Friday , thc Mahomedan Sabbath , it was expected tl at the assemblage at Mecca would have eclipsed that of pn - ceding years , but it was not so . The concourse at Mecca on the great feast day was estimated to have exceeded 180 . 000 souls .
A reporter of the New York Herald has visited Mr . Edison , with a view of learning something about tbat gentleman ' s electric light . He says that " the light is to be of thc batwing , fifteen-candle power character . To kindle it a little spring is touched , and instantly the
electricity does its work . The amount of light can be regulated in the same v r ¦ ¦ as can that from gas . To turn off the light the spring 1 ' rain touched , and instantly all is darkness . " The repoi ... ' " says that the present gas fixtures will be used to hold 1 ! ire .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
English And Foreign Freemasonry.
cipe Createur , " and the " Force Superieure , " do not admit any reference to the " true and ever living God Most High . " Here is another and most essential difference as between English and some portions of foreign Freemasonry , and as we always dislike " daubing the wall with untemnpred mortar , " we think it well that we should
realize this fact , and remember distinctly this state of things , otherwise we are like people walking in the dark , and unless we take care , we may be forced by the . ignorant or credulous into a quasi recognition of systems which we are bound to disavow , if true to the great and goodly princip les of our excellent cosmopolitan fraternity .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ We do wot hold ourselves responsible for , or even approving of , the opinions expressed by onr correspondents , but we wish in a spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ]
ROMAN CATHOLIC INTOLERANCE AND INTIMIDATION . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Perhaps you will record the following piece of intolerance and interference with private rights on the part of the Roman Catholic Priesthood . The Freemasons are just commencing to build a
Masonic Hall in Mullingar ( of which they sadly stood in need ) , and as soon as it became known they were about to do so , the Roman Catholic clergy commenced a scries of sermons in their churches against the woik , they prevented the people from working at the building and from supplying materials ; they injured some of the brethren in their business , and directed the greatest ruffians in the town to throw it down when finished , and they held meetings to prevent it being carried on , at which very violent language
was used . They pretend it is an insult to their religion to have a Masonic Hall in a town where nine-tenths of the population are Roman Catholic , but they really wish to show their detestation of civil and religious liberty . However , the work must proceed , and all that we require
are funds , we wish our English brethren would assist us with money , and that you in your valuable paper would advocate our cause . Yours fraterrally , G . J . NORMAN D'ARCY , 31 , Prov . G . Sec . Meatli .
BRO . MURRAY'S LETTER . Dear Bro . Kenning , — I have seen Bro . Murray's letter in the last Freemason , and am struck , as all must be , by the bad taste and worse temper which it betrays from first to last . I was originally induced to call attention to Bro . Murray's " Deliverance , " in consequence both of the presumptuous
ignorance of Masonic law , national and international , which , as you know , I have long carefully studied , for which it was most conspicuous , and asubsequent acquaintance with Bro . Murray ' s peculiar style of writing only convinces me the more how unfit he is to " lay down the law" on a subject of which he is evidently absolutely ignoiant , and of which he has positively to master the ABC . It is one of thc great nuisances of the present day , as you well know , that persons affect to dogmatize on what they do not themselves comprehend , lecturing every one else on a subject which they have not studied , either in its extent , or bearing , or historical reality , or after consequences . Bro . Murray commences his letter on the " abuse—the
plaintiff ' s Attorney" principle , by stating that 1 have " garbled " his arguments . What there was of " argument " I printed in my first letter , and recommended that the whole letter should be printed , which it was . I took the words as printed from the Craftsman , carefully studying text and context , and only leaving out what was not necessary to Bro . Murray ' s argument and did not
affect it in the slightest degree . I sought earnestly not to do him injustice , and any assertion that 1 in any way " garbled" his statement , is alike unmasonic and untrue . I cannot help it , if he does not understand his own argument as he sent it to the Craftsman , that surely is no fault of mine . I deeply regret , as displaying the " animus " which has marked all his correspondence , that he
commences his letter with a statement absolutely contrary to the fact . I repeat my asseition , that no Masonic writer of repute has ever upheld Bro . Murray ' s view of the case . 1 o give us Bro . Haiington's name , as the answer to my Protest , is valueless to us in England who have studied the subject . I was not aware that Bro . Harington was an authority upon anything , except perhaps thc reality of
. Bro . Murray knows as well as I do where thc " shoe p nches . The recognition of the right of thc Grand Lodges " England and Scotland as to " prior occupation , " and in spect of lod ge adherence to its constituting authority by me brand Lodge of Canada , is fatal to all thc claims and I H . anathemala" of the Grand Lodgeof Quebec . indeed , I go further , and say , that so serious is the pi in' 7 stake , that it certainly will not be disposed of by gry threats or illogical and unmasonic circulars , but Prineil * ^[' y and man f" » y ^ S ^ ° "t on Masonic v mcipies . Three , if not four of the American Grand
Original Correspondence.
Lodges , as well as the Grand Lodge of Canada itself , are in favour of the English as opposed to the Quebec view of tbe discussion , and I fancy a good many more will follow suit , when they fully understand the matter at issue . And here I leave the matter to-day , n : > t wishing to go into
" extraneous questions , " and above all unwilling to prolong a controversy , which can only be regarded with feelings of much iegret by all who value the honour and good of Masonry , as above personal int-rrests , or party prepossessions . I am , dear Bro . Kenning , yours fraternally , THE WRITER Of THE ARTICLE .
BRO . EDMONDSTON . Tothe Editor ofthe " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — 1 sent you a few lines last week on the foolish and unprecedented and uncourteous remarks of Bro . Edmondston , to whom you have accorded full and unrestricted space , but think it well to supplement them to-day . I
need hardly point out that the ' * Report" about which Bro . Edmondston seems so " puzzled , " was sent from the London Masonic Charity Association , having been approved at the Committee meeting on the 16 th ult ., and that it was what it professed to be—the First Report of the Association , based on the action and returns of its Sub-Committee appointed to attend the elections . As the drafter of it , I
can safely say that was written without the slightest reference to Bro . Edmondston ' s letter , though it had reference to another correspondence of which 1 have no reason to suppose that Bro . Edmondston knows anything . It was commenced at Freemasons' Tavern , between the close and declaration of the poll , the portion relative to the Girls ' School having been drafted on the Saturday before . The
report was therefore directed to two points ; one , the recent elections , the other , certain objections with which the Committee had been dealing in another correspondence . I beg once more to repeat , to put an end to such unfair remarks , that that report had as much to do with Bro . Edmondston ' s letter as it had to do with any other report in the Freemason , and that now I bave read Bro . Edmonston ' s letter
" in extenso , " which I had not done when I drafted the report , I may add that I certainly should not have alluded to it in any way whatever . I think that Bro . Perceval , the Treasurer , and a " Member of the London Masonic Chaiity Association " have completely executed that duty . 1 only wish to protest against Bro . Edmondston ' s remarks
who , because he sees that the repoit is an answer to all the nonsense which Ira's been spoken about the London Masonic Charity Association , attacks the Freemason , which published his letter in full . It is no doubt true that one of the Secretaries of the London Masonic Charity Association , as everybody knows , is the Editor of the Freemason , but what has that to do with the question ? THE DRAFTER OF THE REPORT .
A QUESTION TO BRO . BEDOLFE . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I note that our intelligent Bro . Bedolfe is now in Paris . Can he tell us in your columns whether the Bible
is still preserved 111 any lodge under the Rite Ecossais . I see that he docs not mention " prayers , " and as he is silent about tbe Bible , I fear that that Sacred Book has no longer any " abiding place" in the Rite Ecossais , just as it has ii tbe lodges under the Grand Orient . Yours fraternally , DILEMMA .
BRO . BEDOLFE AND THE MARK . DEGREE . To the Editor ofthe" Freemason , " Dear Sir and Brother , — When Bro . Bedolfe , P . M . and P . Z ., rushed into print on the 12 th ult ., with a long and laboured diatribe against the degre'e of Mark Master Masons ? , my fixed impulse was to treat his effusion wilh the silent contempt it
merited . As Bio . Bedolfe now exults in the fond imagination that 1 have " failed to reply to his arguments , " I must now , perforce , in self-defence , have a fling at him . Mind , though , Bro . Bedolfe was close upun two months preparing his elaborate critique . First of all , 1 ought to explain to your irascible correspondent , as also to " Ecce Signum , " that I am not in holy
orders , but simply Chaplain of a Mark Lodge , which institution does not make the sacred and learned calling a sine qui non far a Chaplaincy ; neither does the Royal Arch for Third Principal . Again let me explain that I do not intend carrying this communication to the same ridiculous length of verbosity as Bro . Bedolfe . I have not the time , and if I had , I am afraid the matter would be utterly
wasted on a sceptic , who , I grieve to say , has so far committed himself as to hold intercourse with the interdicted Grand Orient of France , forgetful of the resolution passed by thc Grand Lodge ol England some months ago . I trust the members of his lodge and chapter will bring him promptly over the coals for so grave an irregularity . But , revenons a nos moutons . The only point in Bro .
Bedolfe ' s epistles needing any reply is his assertion that the antiquity of the Mark Degree is a myth , and incapable of proof . That 1 willingly admit , in the occular demonstrative sense he drives at ; but , I would ask Bro . Bedolle whether that self-same argument docs not hold equally good with Craft Masonry , including the Royal Arch ? The evidence of antiquity , allowed , is only inferential ; and I opine our brother ' s opposition to the
Mark Degree savours too much of malice . Where can Bro . Bedolfe , or anyone else , produce better evidence as to the origin of Craft and Arch Masonry , than that freely accepted re the Mark Degree . Why , sir and brother , the Royal Arch ( of which I see yourcorrespondent is a P . Z . ) , was comparatively unknown in England till towards the last three decades of thc eighteenth century , and , was , in fact , tabooed and discountenanced for years by the Grand Lodge of Moderns , just in the same way as the
Original Correspondence.
United Grand Lodge refuses acknowledgment of the Mark Degree now . Then again , in Ireland , Scotland , and America , the Mark Degree is the stepping-stone to the Royal Arch , and therein we cannot find a more appropriate corollary to the Fellow Craft and Master Mason ' s Degrees . Bro . Bedolfe ' s sneer at the late Bro . Oliver ' s veracity is amusing , to put the mildest and most charitable
construction upon it , and I will only add , that I think that ninetynine out of every hundred Masonic students in England , where the Mark Degree is presented , will stand the old doctor , in preference to the erratic obscurity Bro . Bedolfe appears to delight in making himself . The fact is , Bro Bedolfe , before you pooh-pooh the history of Mark Masonry , you had better take up Craft Masonry , ab initio ,
and I suspect the task will turn out one beyond your capabilities . Let me lastly assure Bro . Bedolfe , that he will hear no more from me on the subject , which , sir and brother , with all due deference to your editorial self , I may submit , may be carried beyond the bounds of prudence , in even a Masonic newspaper . I am , yours fraternally , W . F . LAMONBY , W . M . Lodge 229 , M . M . M .
MARK MASONRY . To the Editor of the " Freemason " Dear Sir and Brother , — Like many other Mark Masons I have been much amused at the virulence and lack of knowledge displayed by your correspondent " W . Viner Bedolfe , M . D ., & c . " in his attack on Bro . Lamonby , as well as his impatience under
the criticism of " Ecce Signum . " If Bro . Bedolfe had been a Mark Mason his original remarks might have been worth attention , but I persume that Bro . Lamonby regarded with equal indifference and equanimity the not very politely worded assaults of an outsider , if , indeed , he read them at all . It is truly amusing to see one who manifestly takes a piide in being ably to sign himself a P . M . and a P . Z .
expressing disbelief in the history of every branch of Masonry save the " Craft , " and claiming for the " Craft" alone any historic value . We are all as anxious as possible to prove for Masoniy an existence from "time immemorial , " and yet although we have had for a century and a half many able heads and pens engaged in the task we have completely failed to make out a plain case . I can scarcely suppose
lhat Bro . Bedolfe is prepared to affirm the fables of Anderson and Preston , and as far as I can see all the efforts of Fort , Findel , Hughan , and others have proved nothing whatever beyond the beginning of the iSih century , save that the operative Masonic guilds , like all other guilds , received persons as pattons or " honorary " members . It is plain from existing minutes that " Mark Masonry " was
practised very shortly after the " revival" in 1717 ; then why should Bro . Bedolfe call the Ciaft legends , teachings , and workings " noble , " and stigmatise the Mark ditto as untrue , absurd , & c . ? As Bro . Bedolfe has by his dictatorial and pragmatical style taken upon himself to a certain extent the role of censor , it might be well to remind him that the first duty
of the preacher is to appear before his audience with clean hands , and after your correspondent's gross infraction , by his own showing , of the direct commands of our M . W , Grand Master to hold no Masonic communication with the Grand Orient of France , I would respectfully suggest to Bro . Bedolfe , M . D . —Physician heal thyself . Fraternally yours , A P . M . OF A TIME IMMEMORIAL MARK LODGE
ORIGINAL RESEARCH . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — The last memorandum with which you favoured me , having stated that enquiries has been made as to when " Original Research " would be published , I beg to say for their information that it will not be until next spring
when I trust it will appear , not as a pamphlet , but as a book , for presentation , in boards , clear type , good margin , that it will contain about twenty chapters , and the two ancient pictures formerly mentioned . The chapters will of course facilitate references , and give a bird's eye view of its contents . The price should increase with these advantages , but remains stationary at one shilling . This information
should attract subscribers , and all whose sole faith is in God , the Grand Architect of the Universe , will be grati fie d to learn that the science restores the lost knowledge of the keys not only to tha Masonic Order , but to all orders of educated men who have the moral courage to think foe themselves . Fraternally yours . WM . N . CRAWFORD .
The British Consul at Jeddah states that in the season 1877-78 there were 42 , 718 pilgrims landed at that port , an increase of nearly 4000 over the preceding year , but this was more than counterbalanced by a falling off in the number at Yembo and Lcct . The Haj having fallen
on a Friday , thc Mahomedan Sabbath , it was expected tl at the assemblage at Mecca would have eclipsed that of pn - ceding years , but it was not so . The concourse at Mecca on the great feast day was estimated to have exceeded 180 . 000 souls .
A reporter of the New York Herald has visited Mr . Edison , with a view of learning something about tbat gentleman ' s electric light . He says that " the light is to be of thc batwing , fifteen-candle power character . To kindle it a little spring is touched , and instantly the
electricity does its work . The amount of light can be regulated in the same v r ¦ ¦ as can that from gas . To turn off the light the spring 1 ' rain touched , and instantly all is darkness . " The repoi ... ' " says that the present gas fixtures will be used to hold 1 ! ire .