Time Immemorial Lodges.

TIME IMMEMORIAL LODGES .

B Y ROBERT FREKE GOULD . The oldest Hnglish Lodges are , present Nos . 2 ( "Antiquity" ); 12 ( " F ' ortitude and Old Cumberland" ); and 4 ( "Somcisct House and Inverness" ) . These Lodges were in existence before 1717 , and together with a . fourth Lodge , long since defunct , formed and created in that year the Grand Lodge of lingland—the earliest Grand Lodge recorded in history .

According to the engraved list of Lodges published in 1729 , wherein Lodges were placed for the first time in order of seniority , the date of constitution of the Lodge of Antiquity is fixed at 1691 . No year is placed opposite the description of present No . 4 ( Somerset House ) , but as this

Lodge appears below another to which the date of 1712 is ascribed , it is clear that in the opinion of the Grand Ollicers deputed to arrange the precedency of the Lodges , the birth of present No . 4 was to be looked for between i / izand 1717 ( 1716 , old style ) . Present No . 12 ( Fortitude and Old Cumberland ) is described in the Hngraved list of 1729 , as

No . 11 , Queen ' s Head , Knave ' s Acre , Feb . 27 , 1723 . Not to linger over details , which 1 have treated at considerable length in my " History of the Four Old Lodges , " * it may be shortly stated , that present No . 12 , although more instrumental perhaps than any other , in creating the " Premier Grand of the World "—the preliminary meeting which /<'

organised by its lineal ancestors—and although trom its ranks was selected the first Grand Master , yet . by the decision of a coterie of Grand Ollicers in 1729 , its position on the list of Lodges was lowered from the sccontl or third place lo the eleventh . I use the expression second or third place , because it is far from clear whether present No . 12 was entitled ( in point of age ) to rank next , or next but one , to the Lodge of Antiquity . It admits of no doubt that ihe existing Lodges—Antiquity , and Somerset House

-were the oldest and youngest respectively of the Four "Old" or " Original " Lodges . But the relative positions of the intermediate Lodges are indeterminable . For present purposes , however , the decision of this question is immaterial . One of the Lodges , younger than " Antiquity , " and older than "Somerset House , " is dead . The other still survives , no matter what its position on the roll , and is unquestionably the second oldest Lodge in South Britain .

Proceeding now with a definition of the term " Time Immemorial , " as employed in Lodge nomenclature , I think Bros . Hughan and Woodford will agree with me that its application has been restricted to Lodges of prior date ( or existence ) to the Grand Body of which they form a part . We find accordingly , that by the practice of the earliest Grand Lodge of Hngland , two Lodges—Antiquity and Somerset House—have ( subsequently to the

Hngraved list of 1729 ) been styled as of " immemorial constitution ' in the official calendars published under its sanction . The Lodge of Fortitude , present No . 12 , has been " dropped out" of this classification—wrongly I think—but I have already referred any curious reader to my fuller argument on this point . I may , however , be " permitted to note before passing to another branch of the general subject , that besides recording an indignant

protest against their deprivation of seniority in 1729 , the members of what is our present No . 12 , made a vigorous effort at the change of numbers in 1756 , to recover their former position on the roll , and were defeated mainly by the opposition of the lodge then standing next below the "Home" ( now Somerset House ) , from whose minutes ( present Friendship , No . 6 ) I derive my information .

" 22 July , 1753 . Letter being [ read ] from the Grand Secy : Citing us to appear att the Committee of Charity to answer the Fish and Bell Lodge to their demand of being plac'd prior to us , Viz ., in No . 3 . Where our R ' . Wqrs ' . Mas' -, attended , and the ( Jucstion being propos'd , was answer'd against [ it ] by him with S p irit and Resolution , well worthy the Charector he assum'd , and being put to Ballot was ( arH in favour of us . Report being made this night of the said proceedings , thanks was Return'd him , and his

health drank with hearty Zeal b y the Lodge present . "—Minutes of the George Lodge , No . 4 [ Now Friendship , No . fi ) . Passing from the "Moderns" to the "Ancients , " I will , first of all , observe that these epithets were invented by the Grand Lodge of 1 753 to lower the prestige of the Grand Lodgeof 1717 . The so-called "Moderns " being the real " Ancients , " and the "Ancients" the actual "Moderns . "

[ Hie titles , however , have stood , and , though very misleading , I shall follow in the wake of my betters , anil allude to the senior Grand Lodge of Hngland [ 1717 ] and its subordinate lodges as the " Moderns ; " giving the junior organisation [ 1753 ] the felicitous title , which , no doubt , contributed greatly to its success , ' viz ., that of " Ancients . "

J he "Ancients" ( like the Grand Lodge of Ireland ) never re-numbered their Lodges , but promoted junior Lodges on payment of a fee . From this practice arose many inconveniences . For instance , assuming that No . 100 purchased the place of No . ¦; . The promoted Lodge would continue its work , under one of three dissimilar warrants :

1 . 4 he warrant of original No . 5 . 2 . The warrant of original No . 100 . 3 . A new warrant dated the day the purchase was approved in Grand Lodge . Many specimens of each class of warrant will be found in the exhaustive collection of "Atholl Warrants , " published b y Bro . John Constable , P . M . No . i 8 v

At the union of the Grand Lodges in 1 S 13 , the Lodges respectively No . 1 on the roll of either , tossed up for first place , and No . 1 " Ancients '' won the toss . The Grand Masters Lodge , No . 1 "Ancients" [ constituted ' 759 > and revived 1787 ] became No . 1 on the roll of the United Grand Lodge , and the Lodge of Antiquity No . I " Moderns , " [ at the lowest computation nearly a hundred years its senior ] became No . 2 . Fidelity

No . 2 "Ancients , '' secured the third p lace ; Somerset House , No . 2 " Moderns , " became No . 4 , and so on alternately throughout the rolls of the amal gamated bodies . It may be observed , parenthetically , that up to the period of the Union i l ' * ates ° ^ constitution of private lodges , whilst given in the lists of the " Moderns , " were omitted from thoscof the " Ancients . " The calendars ° j the United Grand Lodge 1 S 14-80 , continued the practice of the ' Moderns , " so far as their lodges were concerned , but blanks were left

opposite the lodges of the "Ancients . "' Readers were therefore able to determine at a glance whether any one of the " Union " Lodges hailed from the earlier or later parent stem . In making this remark I do not forget one solitary exception to the gensral rule , in the description of the " Ancient " ( or Atholl ) Lodge , " Royal Athelstane , No . 19 , against which , at the request 01 > ts members , was placed the date 1769 .

Time Immemorial Lodges.

In the Calendar of 1 SS 1 the dates of origin—not , it must be ebserved , of constitution—were for the first time affixed lo the descri ptions of the whilom " Ancient" lodges . The uneven numbers from 3 to 15 inclusive , formerly Nos . _ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , and S , ( "Ancients " ) being styled as of " immemorial origin . " Of the above recited numbers , the warrant of the last-named

( S ) , was the first issued by the " Atholl " or " Ancient " organizations , and it was signed by the Masters of Nos . 3 , 4 , 5 , and 6 ( "Ancients" ) in favour of James Bradshaw , Master ; Titos . Blower , S . W . ; and R . D . Guest , J . W ., in 1751 . All the senior lodges on the "Atholl " roll [ present Nos . 3 , 5 , 7 , 9 , 11 , and 131 were represented at the earliest meeting of which any record has come down to us ( 17 th July , 17 ^ 1 )

conse-, quently their exact periods of constitution range beyond historical investigation . Whether , in strictness , present No . 13 , which we know was formed in 1751 , should be bracketted with its elders as a "time immemorial" lodge , is a ( it matter for discussion ; though ,- as we have seen , following the analogy of the " Modern " practice , all lodges formed before the establishment of their Grand Lodge would be entitled lo this designation . Numbers , rather than names

, or dates of formation , were the indications of rank and precedency amongst the Atholl Masons . A lodge moved up to a higher place , and secured as often as not the warrant and senority of constitution , as well as tlie vacant niche of its predecessor . At the Union ( 1813 ) the lodges of both Grand Lodges were guaranteed the retention of privileges enjoyed prior to the fusion .

On applying therefore the test of tlates lo the "Ancient " lodges , for the first time , in 1 SS 1 , it was only practicable to assign a period of origin in conformity with the Atholl registry . The dates , therefore , assigned in the calendars to the" Ancient " Lodges , represent , as nearly as m . iy be , when the places or positions on the Atholl roll , from which they were transferred , were originally created . The calendar

of Grand Lodge , does not attempt to settle the exact measure of antiquity to which each lodge would be entitled , were we to trace upwards and to allow no gaps . Such an endeavour would be productive of infinite confusion . Some lodge ., have , and others in a like position have not , been vested by means of centenary warrants with a " llavour " of age belonging rather to tic numbers they occupy than to the periods of their ori ginal

formation , lo digress ( or ; t moment , I may state , that though in theory the usage of the " Moderns " was dissimilar , in practice it was often the same . A good illustration of my last remark is alforded by the " Amphibious " ledge , No . 23 S . Why the brethren of I Ieckmondwike where this excellent lodge is now situate , should have selected such a title for an inland lodge may well challenge inquiry . The puzzle , however , is solved , when we

discover thai the Amphibious Lodge [ prcscnet number , 258 ] was originally founded in 1787 at Plymouth by tlie ( Royal ) Marines ; that it became delunct , and that the warrant was re-assigned to an entirely new lodge . The Act of Parliament , 39 Geo . 111 ., cap . 79 , * I admit , influenced the practice of both "Ancients" and " Moderns , " but my digression must here terminale . t

Returning to the " Ancients , " if wc examine into the continuous existence of each of the sixteen lodges above cited , many gaps will be found . For example , No . 1 " Ancients " ( Grand Masters ) , though formed in 1759 , was revived , or rather reconstituted in 17 S 7 ; No . 3 ( Fidelity ) was formed in 1754 as No . 32 , and became No . 2 on the Atholl roll , in 17 S 4 , on payment of six guineas ; No . 5 ( St . George anfl Corner Stone ) started on its career as

No . 55 in 175 6 , became No . 3 at a cost of £ . \ 14 s . ( , d . in 1759 , and after the Union ( in 1843 ) , was united with a " Modern " lodge , then No . 37 ( "Corner Stone" ) , warranted 25 th March , 1730 ;! No . 7 ( Royal York ) had ' itsconstitulion renewed in 1774 , and in 1832 absorbed No . 409 ( Moderns ) , constituted 177 6 ; No . 9 ( Albionl was re-constituted in 1774 ; No . 11 ( Hnoch ) was " knocked down " to the brethren of No . 37 , for one guinea , in 1 754 ; No . 13

( Union Waterloo ) , represents many amalgamations . This number was purchased b y the members of No . SO ( constituted l / 6 l ) , for one guinea , in 1788 . The vicissitudes of ihe " Modern " lodges , represented in this article by the even numbers , from 2 to 16 inclusive , have not been quite so varied . No . 2 ( Antiquity ) seceded , became a Grand Lodge , and eventuall y returned to the told . No . 4 ( Somerset House ) was erased from , and restored to , the roll , l ' rescnt No . 0 , meeting in 17 ( 17 at the " Sun and Punch Bowl , " was

" sold , or otherwise illegall y disposed of , " in the same year to certain brethren , who christened it the " Friendship . " Amongst the offenders being the Duke of Beaufort and Thomas French , shortly afterwards Grand Master and Grand Secretary respectively of the Grand Lodge of Hngland ? No . 12 ( Fortitude and Old Cumberland ) was degraded in 1729 , and lifted over the heads ol two seniors in 175 6 . No . 16 ( Royal Al pha ) really dates from 1813 or 1 S 14 , when advantage was taken of a vacant warrant , possessing a high number , lo establish what was virtually a new lody ; e .

It will be seen , therefore , that the onl y Fjighsh lodges which can trace a continuous ancestry from that mylhico-historical period of time ending with the formation of tha Grand Lodge of lingland in 1717 , are the Lodgeof ' Antiquity " ( 2 ); the Lodge of " Fortitude and Old Cumberland " ( 12 ) ; and the " Royal Somerset House and Inverness Lodge " ( 4 ) . It is somewhat remarkable that the histories of these three lodges remains to be written .

The fame of " Old Antiquity , ' the vicissitudes of the Lodgeof " Fortitude , " and the galaxy of worthies in " Somerset House and Inverness " may yet , I venture to hope , suggest the subject matter of lodge-histories , which will interest the universal Craft . It may be observed , in conclusion , that Hngland is not the onl y country where the piece of paper or parchment constituting a lodge charter is held

in superstitious reverence . In one of his able articles in the " Yoice of Masonry , " entitled , I think , " Four Old Lodges , " Bro . Cornelius Moore traces the very intermittent careers of some famous American Lodges . From a common-sense point of view , it seems , indeed , highly ridiculous that a lodge should acquire age by virtue of some mould ) ' diploma granted

to a set of brethren whom its latest possessors can only claim as ancestors b y adoption . I am not aware of any instances in which warrants have been re-issued by the Grand Lodgeof Scotland , but the practice is common in Ireland , and explains the longevity of the Military Lodges on the Masonic registry of the latter kingdom .