Original Correspondence.

Original Correspondence .

[ The Editor is not responsible for the opinions expressed by Correspondents . ;] MASONIC MYSTERIES .

( 7 * o the Editor of Thc Freemason . } DEAR SIR ANO BROTHKR , —The letter headed as above , and copied from the Morning Adpertispr . in your , impression of . the 19 th ult ., does not yet seem to have been thoroughly answered ., I can ; inform you that a reply was sent to the Morning Advertise ?; and

it was rejected under the plea , that a reply had preceded it . Iu answer to the said letter ^ it is evident that its author ' s logic was on . the shelf , and notin his brain , when he committed himself in the following flagrant directions , which are the direct deductions of his . arguments . He implies : —

1 . That the principles of religion comprise no secret' ( asserted ) . 2 . That the Masonic secrets , if divulged , would do good to . mankind in general ( assumed ) . ,, 3 . That the said secrets are reserved as a saleable commodity , for the purpose of levying an initiation fee ( malicious ) . 4 . That publication of the secrets would be the

only sign of their inherent goodness ( illogical fallacy ) . ; 5 . That a society publishing any portion of their proceedings , ought to disclose all ( presumption ) . 6 .. That a Freemason ' s degree of benevolence may be reduced to arithmetical terms ( absurd ) .

7 . That Freemasons dread the animadversions of non-Masons ( simple . ) -8 ; That Freemasonry is a society which interferes with the reason and common sense of the nation ( ntterly false ) . . 9 . That Masonic swearing is contrary to religion ,

law , and right ( deficient in classification ) . Considering these nine points seriatim , it may be easily seen : — 1 . That tbe principles of religion are so thoroughly secret in themselves , that no one can comprehend them in the true sense but those who practise them .

The true meaning of the whole religious theory , therefore , is a secret to all except those who have identified themselves with a pious application thereof ; like Freemasonry , whose inner truths and watchwords are familiar only to its votaries . Thus in tins illustration the vituperator comes upon an

image which demolishes the Iconoclast of his own making . 2 . This assumption is a result of the necessary ignorance of a non-mason , at which , hoivever , all but the most saturnine Masons would smile . But , further ; it argues an unreasonable separation of a part from its whole ; for , Freemasonry in its

entirety— -like relig ion—may produce a beneficial influence on the outward world , through the benevolence and integrity of its members ; whereas , if a few isolated facts—under the name of secrets—were published to the world , they would be to the world unmeaning facts .

3 . There seems to be some envy and malice here . Its author should not forget his Horace , however : — Invidus alterius macrescit rebus opimis . Is not an initiation fee , besides defraying expenses , a good test of a man ' s sincerity iu declaring his desire to unite himself to this ancient and noble Order 1 The

most ' valuable commodities are often those for which we have to labour hard and strive arduously . 4 . If all that is uni-evealcd be bad , then our whole mercantile machinery , our arcana imperii , aud every system of occult telegraphy used conservatively to carry on many businesses , arc vicious because they

nee not made generally known . Who could fail to arc the argnmenlnm ad absurduin that exists here ' 5 . If the Freemasons were to publish their secrets along with notices of lodge meetings and chapters ; merchants and tradesmen to disclose the meanings of their trade-marks , letters and words ; bodies

corporate to explain minutely their inner principles of action and springs of success ; they would confer a great pleasure ou him who thinks they ought to do HO '; ou him who is curious to kilow , and not wise enough to see any lot or hindrance . The mental calibre of a child in sufficient to see the

impracticability of such a proceeding . But , to require any sopiety to publish all , because it does so in part , is the highest degree of presumption , and interferes with natural justice and freewill . <> . If Masonic WnevrAenec lie decried because it exists in a coiispicious degree , the inveigher must

be p itied because of his selfishness ; and if he thinks that a Freemason ought to bestow equal charity on all , then lie i . s making himself a would-be master of other men ' s pockets , and would fain measure all by his own bushel , lie conjectures a da _ ree of

beneficence , and ignorantly applies it to the Freemasons , 7 . It is a weak society that cannot withstand the common scandal which the envious and ignorant are ever ready to fulminate against it ; but Freemasonry is especially puissant in that matter , for it is ever maintained in its lofty state through the very cor-

Original Correspondence.

rect process of its own inherent virtues , and its principles rest on , and have their source in , truth . 8 . To assert that the '' Fraternity of Antient Free and Accepted Masons" interferes with the reason and common sense of the nation , is to belie history in all ages and countries . Surely he who

makes such an assertion has never communed with Clio , or has never given the least credence : to her relations ! Freemasons are well-known as being a conservative body iu political matters , not actively engaged in the discussion thereof , but always subservient to , andunwavering in upholding , the powers

that be ; that being one of the especial charges enjoined in the Book of Constitutions . That which interferes with reason must be illogical either in its first principles or in its subsequent procedure , or both . Our calumniator asserts the same , so that his task

of proving is rather an unenvious one . And as for the other point , the common sense of the nation , and the elite of the nation , has been coincident with Freemasonry from time immemorial—from ancient days , from patriarchal eras , yea from the world ' s cradle .

9 . Our friend ' s last hit , respecting Masonic swearing , is as weak as his other attempts at opposition . Freemasonry having its principles based on reli gion , is thus solemnised , receives a qualification of reverence , and identifies itself with the laws of righteousness . How then—it may be asked of our

friend—can the Masonic oath , and the oath taken in a , court of justice be made to differ in respect of moral sanction , seeing that they are equal in all that is grave , good and important I He also avers that it is opposed to law . Then , Freemasonry must also be opposed to law . But , we find that it is sanctioned

by the law , aud that being the case , its laws and regulations must also be so sanctioned , for . the whole comprises every part ; hence what is affirmed-or denied ofthe whole , must be affirmed or denied of the parts contained in that whole . The Masonic fraternity , therefore , being legalised in toto ,

is also in parte truly lawful . If Masonic swearing interferes with right , one is almost at a loss to make the reference . If by right he meant natural justice , then it must be arranged under four heads ? viz . : — The right to personal freedom ; to the common bounty of heaven ; to property ; to good government .

If it can'be shown that the Masonic oath interferes with this or any other domain of political economy , or with the same term construed in any theological sense whatever , it must be the work of the sapient mind that would fain hold up to scorn a society which it may be too unqualified to approach in a more

noble way . In conclusion , our objector thinks that it is irrational and presumptuous to style the Deity " The Great Architect of the Universe , " because , as he says , it is a mechanical title . If he objects to metaphors entirely as used in the title of God , then I

have nothing to say respecting the eccentricity , only that it is a whim of no moment to society . On the other hand , if he have a distaste for anything savouring of mechanism , it may be merely a professional dislike . If he object to the title per se , then he also declares warfare against many titles used in the Scriptures , pointing to mechanism , construction ,

creation . Like many others , this inal-conteiit desires to elicit facts concerning the Craft , would like very much to get to know all for nothing , and offers himself as a sort of would be champion , in the event of

boing favoured . But he is not the sort of pilurim that i . s likely to find the wicket gate , and continue in die narrow path that leads to one of Truth ' s great temples . Yours fraternally , 5 th July , 18 ( 19 . A . CITTH HERTSON .

SOLOMON'S TEMPLE v . EGYPTIAN , ASSYHI AN , & PIKENIC 1 AN AIICHITECTURE . ( To the Editor of Ihe Freemason . ) DUAU Slit AND BltOTlll'lt , —III Till * FltKKMA . SOX ibr May 15 th , page 1 , " The Son of Salathiel " tells us that Solomon ' s Temple served ns " the model" for " nearly all those wondrous palaces and temples of the ancient world of which such

magnificent remains exist even tothe present day . " In THK FIU- RMASON * for May 29 th , page ft , I attempted to prove said statement a mistake , from the fact that Solomon ' s Temple was not built until between 1012 and 1007 years n . c , long after the Augustan age of Egyptian Architecture had passed : consequently

Solomon ' s Temple was n cony <>/ , not a " moiM " fur . In THK Fltt-I-AI / iSoN- of . June •>{) , page 8 , however , ' •The ¦ Son of . Salathiel" returns to the charge , and admitting the great advancement of the Egyptians in architecture , . v'c ., says : — "Let 'Leo' read Layard ' s Discoveries iu Nineveh and Babylon — in which ho finds

many points of resemblance in the plan and general design . The Temple was finished in 7 years , and Sennacherib built his palace at Konyenjik in the samu time . " Now , I have read Layard before this , and the above quotation is found at page Oil of his work ; but , turn it as he will , what can "The Son of Salathiel " make of it ? All Layard ' s remarks merel y show tha

Original Correspondence.

there were certain points of resemblance between Solomon ' s Temple and Sennacherib's Palace ; -bat ' it does not therefore ) follow that ; -Sennacherib took Solomon ' s Temple as " the model" of his Palace . Not so , the style of Sennacherib's Palace was that of the Assyrians , in use before . Solonion was horn ;

consequently Sennacherib b . uilt ¦ his Palace in - accordance with the usual style . of his , own country , and so far , as Solomon ' s Temple agreed with this , it was nearly ,, a copy of the Assyrian practice . But Solomon ' s Temple was not built by Assyrians , it was built by- Phoenicians ; further , Solomon's structure was a Temple , whereas

Sennachorib's was a . Palace , ( of course Solomon had a Palace also , but , we are not speaking . of it . in the meantime ) , and from thje position pf ,-Phoenicia Isliould expect such a structure as Solomon's - Temple to be partly Egyptian and partly Assyrian . Mr . Philjp . Smith says : "There seems to have been a general

resemblance to the Egyptian Temple ; but even this is a matter cf dispute ; " in certain arrangements I am inclined to believe Mr . Smith to be probably correct so far . However we shall be happy to . see if any , new light is to be thrown on the matter by Lieutenant Warren . One thing we do know , the Sidonians cut hjs

timber and a Tyrian superintended the brasswork . These foreign artificers therefore did not require to copy from Solomon ; it was Solomon who required to copy from them . Another remark , which proves the absurdity of placing much reliance upon the " seven years ''" coincidence of time occupied in building Solomon ' s

Temple and Sennacherib's-Palace , is the statement in 1 Kings , vii . chap ., 1 st verse , "But Solomon was building . his own house thirteen years . " I think tlje above shows I justly ridiculed the assertion that "the Temple of Solomon was the model for other ancient

edifices . ' I have read divers works upon the above , and could say more , but I forbear to take up your space , and therefore close this with the remark , that as for the Phoenicians , " their great ; city of Sidon was already built when Abraham lived in Canaan . " I am , yours fraternally , LEO .

THISTLE LODGE , GLASGOW , No . 87 .

( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DjEAit Sin AND BROTIIHU , —I had considered that contempt was the best course to pursue towards the letter appearing in your number of the 29 th May from a malcontent self-baptised by the gastionouiic title of * 'Taties and Tripe . " The former seems to

have soured on his stomach , and the latter stuck in his throat , for he really makes a writhing and walloping , poor fellow , hideous to behold . It gives me . and others , however , much relief that he has so favorably crucified the paragraph from the Herald , and I feel certain , that such of your readers on either side of the Border , as

will ttike the pains to compare his or their original purulent emanation regarding thc occasion , with that report , cannot fail to perceive where the rancorous spirit of acrimony lies . He says he told the truth , and in the proper organ for Masonic news . Your readers will judge whether they or he did so like

gentlemen , or enlightened Freemasons ; and when you understand they were not ofthe guests at all , we must accord them many thanks for their kind solicitation in giving it publicity in your columns . Bro . T . and T . again goes about the bush , and savs : " It would have been more honorable to have acknowledged that it

was a supper to raise a fund to assist a poor old Tyler , ' & c , & c . Here he again most p iteously displays cither his gross ignorance , or wilful disregard of truth . The afliiir was a gratuitous piece of hospitality on the part of the S . W , and the contribution for the old man was altogether an after-thought ; and if instead of

displaying such unniasonic sentiments towards an old worn-out and bed-ridden brother , who had borne the heat and burden of the day , they had sent their inito to the collection , it might have covered a multitude of sins . If 15 ro . T . and T ., and his peers chose to insist on a public supper , and then directly or otherwise

skulk behind the scenes to burk it , and of themselves elect to be disagreeable , they could not surely prevent other social and harmonious souls from meeting together in their own way , and pledging the 107 th anniversary of their lodge ; and I for one , as the weather is hot , am willing to accept of a duplicate of the

same , and drink once more to the prosperity of the Thistle 87 . In conclusion , let me tender your anonymous * correspondent and Co ., a bit of advice ; if they be cleanhanded white-gloved Freem-isons they will no further seek to assimilate themselves with that loathsome type of mankind , the Hibernian agnuian assassin , or

the ruthless uncouth Cell , by hiding toassiul their brother man from behind an ambush of "Taties and Tripe , " but by the light of conscience , and the li ght of day , if they have truth for their cause , conic boldl y to the front and sign themselves honestly , avowedly ,

and masomcally , as I have once more the honor to do and to be , Yours fraternall y , WM- LAWSON , Sec . , Thistle Lodge , No . W . . Glugow , 29 th June , 1869 .