-
Articles/Ads
Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ VVe do not hold ourselves responsible for , or even approving of , he op inions expressed by our correspondents , belt vve wish in aspirit of fa ir play to all to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ]
THE STATUS OF GRAND LODGE OFFICERS . To thc Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — The able and lucid letter of "Lex Scripta " in your last does not , as I venture to think , alter the " facts of the case , " or the " conditions of the argument , " and I , therefore , trouble you only with a very fe iv more lines on
this now well-worn subject . We cannot , as it appears to tne , however interesting the question may be archaeological !}" , go into any " items " of usage or form previously to the Constitutions of 1 S 15 , as such represent the " outcome " of the Union of 1 S 13 . If it vvere permissible to do so , I might use my able opponent ' s own words as to the Constitutions of 17 S 4 , vvhich carefully guarding the "
precedence " of the Prov . Grand Masters , distinctly declares them also " Officers of Grand Lodjge . " And though " Lex Scripta " seems to imply that , by the words he quotes , and which I assume to be correct , there is a position of inferiority assigned to them in respect of the other Grand Officers ; yet he forgets that in expounding laws it is a well known axiom of construction , never to allow a distinct
provision to be overruled by an inferential interpretation . 2 . In 1 S 15 the position of Prov . Grand Officers vvas practically the same as now , inasmuch as their rights were guarded and their precedence established by distinct legislative enactment . 3 . If "Reviresco , " and " Lex Scripta , " and ' Bayard " give up the argument as it affects Prov . Grand Masters , I
am perfectly satisfied . 4 . I see a great deal of force in "Lex Scripta ' s " observations as regards District Grand Masters , and think that vve might well amend thc Book of Constitutions in that respect . 5 . But " Lex Scripta" is aware that the whole of this discussion arises out of two things , first , a quasi-dilemma at
a famous dinner , and , secondly , the view propounded by the Editor of the Freemason when asked his opinion informally on the subject . C . I think that those who have followed this discussion will note that the one point to which the Editor has adhered all along is the simple question of the legal interpretation of the Book of Constitutions .
Originally he stated , perhaps too broadly , and without sufficient explanation of his meaning , that Prov . and District Grand Masters were " Grand Officers " in the sense evidently of the clause in the Book of Constitutions , vvhich regulates thc precedency of members of Grand Lodge , but he never could have meant to contend that they vvere "invested officers . " But as Grand Officers — whether
"Grand Master's Officers" matters nothing—they take precedence in ' all Masonic official gatherings , in Grand Lodge and out of Grand Lodge , and nothing could take away their rank . As the discussion has progressed it is clear that the position of Prov . Grand Masters and District Grand Masters is hardly the same , either in reality or as regards
their position in Freemasonry , and perhaps one result of this animated and friendly contest vvill be to make a difference as between Prov . and District Grand Masters . At the same time 1 say this , I do not shut my eyes to some very serious questions which may arise from such alterations , and which at present do not lie on the surface .
One point is both amusing and refreshing in this extended discussion , that both sides equally appeal to the Book of Constitutions . 1 do not allude to the alleged difference as between " Grand Officers" and "Officers of Grand Lodge , " as my whole contention is satisfied and covered by "Grand Officers . " Yours fraternally , NOT INFALLIBLE .
To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Will you have the kindness to allow me to point out that the Book of Constitutions , at the commencement ofthe " Regulations for the Government of the Craft , " most unambiguously declares Provincial and District Grand Masters and Past Provincial and District Masters to be ,
respectively , "Present and Past Grand Officers ; " in other words , to be members of the class of brethren specially named to succeed , in their specified oreler , to the government of Grand Lodge , whenever the Grand Master may be absent .
The Book of Constitutions at pp . 16 , 17 , and iS , gives a detailed list of the various descriptions of brethren who are members of Grand Lodge . In this list Provincial and District Grand Masters and Past Provincial and District Grand Masters are highly p laced . At p . 16 . we also learn that the members of Grand Lodge consist of four classes , viz : —
1 . A general representation of all private lodges on record . 2 . The Grand Stewards of the year . 3- The Present and Past Grand Officers . 4 . The Grand Master . In one or other of these classes the Book of Constitutions certainl y includes Present and Past Provincial and district Grand Masters . That class cannot be the first
one ; it is neither the second , nor the fourth one ; it must be the third one . Indisputably , therefore , the Book of ^ institutions affirms Present and Past Provincial and district Grand Masters to be Present and Past Grand utticers , with rank and authority before Grand Wardens . .. 'he Book of Constitutions furnished no r / round for the
distinction sought to be set up between officers in Grand L-odge , and officers of Grand Lodge . A Provincial Grand faster or a Grand Sword Bearer is each alike the Grand Master ' s Grand Officer , though the tenure of office be different . Vours fraternally , . PAST DISTRICT GRAND MASTER . Sth November .
THE ANCIENT AND PRIMITIVE RITE . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — th ,. u . i . P r c ^ cusc „ suggestion—Do you not think that "ie letter from Bro . Sandeman should close the correspon-Accept d RT ' and Primitive Rite and Ancien' a ""
Original Correspondence.
I think , in fairness to the Proprietor of the Freemason , that the Ancient and Primitive Rite should no longer be allowed to advertise in the Freemason free of expense . Yours fraternally , 32 ° .
To the Editor of che "Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Had I not been so pointedly referred to by you in your leader of last Saturday , the Gth inst ., in _ reference to the Ancient and Primitive Rite 1 do not think it would have been necessary for me to swell the volume of the correspondence , but I think it as well to set one point right . In
my " Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia I was bound to give as full and faithful an account of both the Ancient and Accepted Rite and the Ancient and Primitive Rite as vvas possible , and the articles containing these accounts vvere submitted , read over , and returned by the respective authorities of these Rites , and , therefore , I regard my impartial duties as having been severally performed .
But if 1 am asked , as I have been , vvhich of these Rites has the greatest authority , I am bound to answer—neither . It is idle for the Ancient and Accepted Rite , founded by an expelled Craft Mason in 1 S 45-6 , to claim sovereignty over this country . And , as the Rites do not resemble each other , it is absurd to say they are infringing upon each other's jurisdiction . How in the case of thc Ancient and Accepted
Rite the pretensions founded on a charter of questionable origin can be maintained I cannot see ; and as to the Ancient . and Primitive Rite , with widel y different and far more perfect ceremonies , it should take its proper place as vvas intended—as a system of educational Masonry . But the latter is quite as respectable as the former , although it does not boast such great names . My uncle , Bro . Hervey ,
thought , like Uncle Toby with the fly , that there vvas room enough for both—and he said so . So let us hope they vvill drop a foolish contention and agree to stand each on their own merits , when these merits are fairly ascertained . 1 remain , dear Sir and Brother , yours sincerely and fraternally , KENNETH R . H . MACKENZIE . Clyde House , Hounslow , Nov . Sth .
To thc Editor ofthe "Freemason .- ' Dear Sir and Brother , — The question may be asked in what way and under what authority the "Ancient and Accepted Rite " claims a sovereign jurisdiction over the Scotch Rite , because it is well known that there are several timeimmemorial chapters and councils in England and
Scotland who ignore this claim of the Golden-square authorrities , and who confer thc same Degrees under their own ancient warrants . It is easy then to understand why the "Ancient and Accepted" view with a jealous eye the advance of the "Ancient and Primitive Rite " to the front ; they know that a large body of Craft Masons have cause to be dissatisfied with thc constitution of their
Rite , and they fear that the Ancient and Primitive Rite , which opens its doors to all learned and worthy Masons , exacting only a belief in the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man , will command the respect and sup-Eort of all who desire advancement in Masonry . Such eing evidently their view of Masonic duty , the less they expose their opinions the more they vvill be
esteemed by the Craft . They are not asked to pay the cost of the Ancient and Primitive system , and so long as its neoph y tes will not have their grades , or belong- to their Rite , and are satisfied with their own , it is difficult to understand why those whom you bespatter with praise in your leader should visit their rheum upon others . Yours fraternally ,
HERMES . [ We publish this letter with some reluctance and more reserve , on account of its exaggerated tone and un-Masonic temper , which have led to the needful excision of several improper passages . Indeed , vve might properly have taken out more . But vve wish to be " open " to all , and allow all a fair hearing , "barrin' personality . "—ED . F . M . 1
THE GRAND LODGES OF SCOTLAND AND QUEBEC . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother . — I have read Bro . J . Nesbit Robertson ' s letter in this day ' s Freemason , but regret he did not wait until the matter had been finally approved of by our Grand Lodges
of Scotland and Quebec . The Quebec official papers only arrived in Edinburgh on the day of the meeting of the last Grand Committee of the Grand Lodge of Scotland . The following are the terms agreed upon at Montreal on the 29 th September last at the meeting of the Joint Committee" The three lodges now working in the Province of
Quebec under warrants from the Grand Lodge of Scotland to resign allegiance to that Grand Bod y , and to come under jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Quebec under the following conditions" The said lodges to retain their present warrants , which shall be endorsed by the Grand Master for the Grand Lodge of Quebec . Their mode of work , the rank of their officers ( who will bear the same titles as officers
holding similar rank in the Grand Lodge of Quebec ) , their clothing anel lodge property , and said lodges to be put to no expense in joining said Grand Lodge of Quebec . A copy of these have been in my possession for nearl y a month , but I did not feel justified in making them public , and do not now intend making any remarks as to the matter , but may add that I am happy to be able to state that the
members of the Scotch and Quebec lodges at Montreal all met as brothers in lodge on the 14 th ult . and afterwards dined together . Yours fraternally , JAMES H . NEILSON , P . P . G . M . G . L . Scotland , Hon . G . S . W . G . L . Quebec . 32 , Leeson-street , Lower , Dublin , November Cth .
THE UNMASONIC TRIAL . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Some little time ago Bro . Voigt stated in your columns that "before even issuing the writ in this action he had the express permission of the Provincial Authorities for doing so , ' and this , he added , he was " ready to prove whenever called upon . " I beg , therefore , now thus publicly to challenge Bro . Voigt to abide b y his words , and to prove the truth of that statement . I have a letter dated
Original Correspondence.
ist inst ., from R . W . Bro . Dr .- Bell , D . P . G . M . for the N , and E . Ridings of Yorkshire , in which he says that " he had in the Hornsea case made every friendly effort to prevent litigation , and that the institution of the late lawsuit received from him neither permission or encouragement , " thus bearing out my surmise on this subject . R . W . Bro . Dr . Bell further adds that "Bro . Voigt declared that he felt his character as a merchant and citizen
to be at stake ; that he had in the printed resolution been termed 'dishonourable ; ' that no Masonic adjudicature could possibly satisfy him , and that he should not be content with anything short of the verdict of a public tribunal . " Whilst thus speaking in his own name , I presume R . W . Bro . Dr . Bell also speaks on behalf of Lord Zetland , the P . G . M ., whose Deputy he is ; and the question naturally arises , therefore , who vvere " the Provincial Masonic
authorities " who gave Bro . Voigt their " express permission" to issue his writ of action against Bros . Carr , Laking , and myself ? Common justice to Lord Zetland and Dr . Bell , and to my co-defendants and myself , as well as the credit of our common fraternity , demands , I think , the instant clearing up of this scandal . The latter part of Bro .
Dr . Bell s letter seems to me a grim commentary on the innocent Masonic forbearance in this matter , which some of Bro . Voigt ' s admirers have attributed to him , and for vvhich , if I mistake not , he has himself publicly taken credit . Your fraternally , TUDOR TREVOR . Kendal , 3 rd November .
LODGE OF INDUSTRY , NO . 4 S . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I observe that Bro . R . F . Gould asks for further particulars respecting the early history of this lodge . It would have been a pleasure to me if I could have given Bro . Gould and your readers any accurate information about the lodge prior to the year 1725 , but unfortunately we have no
written records of the proceedings before that date . What is known anterior to that year is traditional , though we have no ' reason to disbelieve the unwritten traditions or our forefathers , that the lodge existed as an operative one at Swalvvell in the seventeenth century . In 1690 Sir Ambrose Crowley transplanted his Cyclopean Colony from Sunderland to Swalwell and Winlaton , both in the county of Durham , at both of vvhich places he built chapels , schools , and
houses for his workmen . A stone fixed in the milldam at Swalwell , dated 1691 , remained for _ many years to affirm this . Surtees , in his admirable history , states that " a code of laws was drawn up vvhich , in a great measure , superseded the general laws of the land , and became locally established . " In the first minute book of our lodge , which was bound up with the "Constitutions , " printed in the year 1723 , and
dedicated by Deputy Grand Master J . T . Desaguliers to his Grace the Duke of Montagu , Past Grand Master , we have manuscript codes of laws as follows : Orders of Antiquity 21 sections . Apprentices' Orders 8 sections . General Orders 8 sections . Penal Orders 26 sections . which may or may not have been transcripts of this code of
laws . The last entries of these rules are dated in the years ' 733-34-3 S- From this I naturally infer there is reason to expect that the lodge was in active operation from 1690 , the time that Sir Ambrose Crowley established his manufactory at Swalwell , and that it was continued down to 1725 , when our written testimonies commence . Our traditional history points to some privileges which the Lodge of Industry vvas supposed to have in former ages .
for instance , the appointment of P . G . M . ; the wearing of hats at P . G . Lodge ; and it is also asserted that the clothing of the Craft as at present worn was copied from the ancient dress of the members of the Industry Lodge . I mention this , however , with reservation , I regret my inability at present to give Bro . Gould anything more definite about the beginnings of the old lodge , and , in conclusion , I may add that it would be interesting to myself and others if vve could obtain some absolute data as to the time of our birth as a lodge . —Yours fraternally ,
ROBERT WHITFIELD , I . P . M . 48
PERSONALITY IN MASONIC CONTROVERSIES . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I have seen by mere accident a letter in a Scottish paper called the Glasgow Herald , which I regret to have read , feeling sure the evil it will do is very great , as exhibiting a sad want of self control by professed Masons in " controversy " about " things Masonic . "
This discussion is headed " Masonic Rites , " and one long letter appears in the Glasgow Herald of Thursday , the 28 th ult ., signed "John Yarker , " and dated from " Withington , Manchester , " which , as far as I know , is , and I hope will be , " unique " in its use of terms of opprobrium and contempt for those who differ from him . It seems that a Mr . Duncan , ( Bro . ?) , has doubted the validity of the pretensions of the "Ancient and Primitive Rite , " and
prefers those of the " Ancient and Accepted Rite , " and Bro . Yarker proceeds to pour forth his ardent indignation against the said Duncan and a good many others , contemners of the " sacred sanctuary . " Judging from the opening sentences , Bro . Yarker ' s previous remarks in respect to Bro . Duncan must have been " rather lively , " for he withdraws gracefully " any imputations" on his " character , " ( all this in a controversy ) , and then proceeds to fall foul of
Dr . Mackay in America . Albert Mackay is well known to many in England as the Editor of the " Masonic Encyclopedia , " a very strikingwork , and certainly does not merit such a "bespattering of "hard words" and unpleasant epithets as he is favoured with . Bro . Yarker says , on an American-alleged authority , that he is " peddling Masonry , " for which pursuit , whatever it may be , he has " given up medicine ; " and then he
mentions his disgusting mendacity , " terms him a " pirate , " and makes use of this most unjust expression — "Of Masonic liars a Yankee unquestionably bears the palm unblushingly . " 1 might quote many other singularly violent and incoherent remarks , but I forbear , for fear of exhausting your patience , and hurting the feelings of your readers . But I ask you , " Is this Masonry ? " Cap the sublime and charitable precepts of Freemasonry be rightly understood b y any one , be he who he may , "Sublime Sage of the Shrine , Sic .,
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ VVe do not hold ourselves responsible for , or even approving of , he op inions expressed by our correspondents , belt vve wish in aspirit of fa ir play to all to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ]
THE STATUS OF GRAND LODGE OFFICERS . To thc Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — The able and lucid letter of "Lex Scripta " in your last does not , as I venture to think , alter the " facts of the case , " or the " conditions of the argument , " and I , therefore , trouble you only with a very fe iv more lines on
this now well-worn subject . We cannot , as it appears to tne , however interesting the question may be archaeological !}" , go into any " items " of usage or form previously to the Constitutions of 1 S 15 , as such represent the " outcome " of the Union of 1 S 13 . If it vvere permissible to do so , I might use my able opponent ' s own words as to the Constitutions of 17 S 4 , vvhich carefully guarding the "
precedence " of the Prov . Grand Masters , distinctly declares them also " Officers of Grand Lodjge . " And though " Lex Scripta " seems to imply that , by the words he quotes , and which I assume to be correct , there is a position of inferiority assigned to them in respect of the other Grand Officers ; yet he forgets that in expounding laws it is a well known axiom of construction , never to allow a distinct
provision to be overruled by an inferential interpretation . 2 . In 1 S 15 the position of Prov . Grand Officers vvas practically the same as now , inasmuch as their rights were guarded and their precedence established by distinct legislative enactment . 3 . If "Reviresco , " and " Lex Scripta , " and ' Bayard " give up the argument as it affects Prov . Grand Masters , I
am perfectly satisfied . 4 . I see a great deal of force in "Lex Scripta ' s " observations as regards District Grand Masters , and think that vve might well amend thc Book of Constitutions in that respect . 5 . But " Lex Scripta" is aware that the whole of this discussion arises out of two things , first , a quasi-dilemma at
a famous dinner , and , secondly , the view propounded by the Editor of the Freemason when asked his opinion informally on the subject . C . I think that those who have followed this discussion will note that the one point to which the Editor has adhered all along is the simple question of the legal interpretation of the Book of Constitutions .
Originally he stated , perhaps too broadly , and without sufficient explanation of his meaning , that Prov . and District Grand Masters were " Grand Officers " in the sense evidently of the clause in the Book of Constitutions , vvhich regulates thc precedency of members of Grand Lodge , but he never could have meant to contend that they vvere "invested officers . " But as Grand Officers — whether
"Grand Master's Officers" matters nothing—they take precedence in ' all Masonic official gatherings , in Grand Lodge and out of Grand Lodge , and nothing could take away their rank . As the discussion has progressed it is clear that the position of Prov . Grand Masters and District Grand Masters is hardly the same , either in reality or as regards
their position in Freemasonry , and perhaps one result of this animated and friendly contest vvill be to make a difference as between Prov . and District Grand Masters . At the same time 1 say this , I do not shut my eyes to some very serious questions which may arise from such alterations , and which at present do not lie on the surface .
One point is both amusing and refreshing in this extended discussion , that both sides equally appeal to the Book of Constitutions . 1 do not allude to the alleged difference as between " Grand Officers" and "Officers of Grand Lodge , " as my whole contention is satisfied and covered by "Grand Officers . " Yours fraternally , NOT INFALLIBLE .
To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Will you have the kindness to allow me to point out that the Book of Constitutions , at the commencement ofthe " Regulations for the Government of the Craft , " most unambiguously declares Provincial and District Grand Masters and Past Provincial and District Masters to be ,
respectively , "Present and Past Grand Officers ; " in other words , to be members of the class of brethren specially named to succeed , in their specified oreler , to the government of Grand Lodge , whenever the Grand Master may be absent .
The Book of Constitutions at pp . 16 , 17 , and iS , gives a detailed list of the various descriptions of brethren who are members of Grand Lodge . In this list Provincial and District Grand Masters and Past Provincial and District Grand Masters are highly p laced . At p . 16 . we also learn that the members of Grand Lodge consist of four classes , viz : —
1 . A general representation of all private lodges on record . 2 . The Grand Stewards of the year . 3- The Present and Past Grand Officers . 4 . The Grand Master . In one or other of these classes the Book of Constitutions certainl y includes Present and Past Provincial and district Grand Masters . That class cannot be the first
one ; it is neither the second , nor the fourth one ; it must be the third one . Indisputably , therefore , the Book of ^ institutions affirms Present and Past Provincial and district Grand Masters to be Present and Past Grand utticers , with rank and authority before Grand Wardens . .. 'he Book of Constitutions furnished no r / round for the
distinction sought to be set up between officers in Grand L-odge , and officers of Grand Lodge . A Provincial Grand faster or a Grand Sword Bearer is each alike the Grand Master ' s Grand Officer , though the tenure of office be different . Vours fraternally , . PAST DISTRICT GRAND MASTER . Sth November .
THE ANCIENT AND PRIMITIVE RITE . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — th ,. u . i . P r c ^ cusc „ suggestion—Do you not think that "ie letter from Bro . Sandeman should close the correspon-Accept d RT ' and Primitive Rite and Ancien' a ""
Original Correspondence.
I think , in fairness to the Proprietor of the Freemason , that the Ancient and Primitive Rite should no longer be allowed to advertise in the Freemason free of expense . Yours fraternally , 32 ° .
To the Editor of che "Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Had I not been so pointedly referred to by you in your leader of last Saturday , the Gth inst ., in _ reference to the Ancient and Primitive Rite 1 do not think it would have been necessary for me to swell the volume of the correspondence , but I think it as well to set one point right . In
my " Royal Masonic Cyclopaedia I was bound to give as full and faithful an account of both the Ancient and Accepted Rite and the Ancient and Primitive Rite as vvas possible , and the articles containing these accounts vvere submitted , read over , and returned by the respective authorities of these Rites , and , therefore , I regard my impartial duties as having been severally performed .
But if 1 am asked , as I have been , vvhich of these Rites has the greatest authority , I am bound to answer—neither . It is idle for the Ancient and Accepted Rite , founded by an expelled Craft Mason in 1 S 45-6 , to claim sovereignty over this country . And , as the Rites do not resemble each other , it is absurd to say they are infringing upon each other's jurisdiction . How in the case of thc Ancient and Accepted
Rite the pretensions founded on a charter of questionable origin can be maintained I cannot see ; and as to the Ancient . and Primitive Rite , with widel y different and far more perfect ceremonies , it should take its proper place as vvas intended—as a system of educational Masonry . But the latter is quite as respectable as the former , although it does not boast such great names . My uncle , Bro . Hervey ,
thought , like Uncle Toby with the fly , that there vvas room enough for both—and he said so . So let us hope they vvill drop a foolish contention and agree to stand each on their own merits , when these merits are fairly ascertained . 1 remain , dear Sir and Brother , yours sincerely and fraternally , KENNETH R . H . MACKENZIE . Clyde House , Hounslow , Nov . Sth .
To thc Editor ofthe "Freemason .- ' Dear Sir and Brother , — The question may be asked in what way and under what authority the "Ancient and Accepted Rite " claims a sovereign jurisdiction over the Scotch Rite , because it is well known that there are several timeimmemorial chapters and councils in England and
Scotland who ignore this claim of the Golden-square authorrities , and who confer thc same Degrees under their own ancient warrants . It is easy then to understand why the "Ancient and Accepted" view with a jealous eye the advance of the "Ancient and Primitive Rite " to the front ; they know that a large body of Craft Masons have cause to be dissatisfied with thc constitution of their
Rite , and they fear that the Ancient and Primitive Rite , which opens its doors to all learned and worthy Masons , exacting only a belief in the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man , will command the respect and sup-Eort of all who desire advancement in Masonry . Such eing evidently their view of Masonic duty , the less they expose their opinions the more they vvill be
esteemed by the Craft . They are not asked to pay the cost of the Ancient and Primitive system , and so long as its neoph y tes will not have their grades , or belong- to their Rite , and are satisfied with their own , it is difficult to understand why those whom you bespatter with praise in your leader should visit their rheum upon others . Yours fraternally ,
HERMES . [ We publish this letter with some reluctance and more reserve , on account of its exaggerated tone and un-Masonic temper , which have led to the needful excision of several improper passages . Indeed , vve might properly have taken out more . But vve wish to be " open " to all , and allow all a fair hearing , "barrin' personality . "—ED . F . M . 1
THE GRAND LODGES OF SCOTLAND AND QUEBEC . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother . — I have read Bro . J . Nesbit Robertson ' s letter in this day ' s Freemason , but regret he did not wait until the matter had been finally approved of by our Grand Lodges
of Scotland and Quebec . The Quebec official papers only arrived in Edinburgh on the day of the meeting of the last Grand Committee of the Grand Lodge of Scotland . The following are the terms agreed upon at Montreal on the 29 th September last at the meeting of the Joint Committee" The three lodges now working in the Province of
Quebec under warrants from the Grand Lodge of Scotland to resign allegiance to that Grand Bod y , and to come under jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Quebec under the following conditions" The said lodges to retain their present warrants , which shall be endorsed by the Grand Master for the Grand Lodge of Quebec . Their mode of work , the rank of their officers ( who will bear the same titles as officers
holding similar rank in the Grand Lodge of Quebec ) , their clothing anel lodge property , and said lodges to be put to no expense in joining said Grand Lodge of Quebec . A copy of these have been in my possession for nearl y a month , but I did not feel justified in making them public , and do not now intend making any remarks as to the matter , but may add that I am happy to be able to state that the
members of the Scotch and Quebec lodges at Montreal all met as brothers in lodge on the 14 th ult . and afterwards dined together . Yours fraternally , JAMES H . NEILSON , P . P . G . M . G . L . Scotland , Hon . G . S . W . G . L . Quebec . 32 , Leeson-street , Lower , Dublin , November Cth .
THE UNMASONIC TRIAL . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Some little time ago Bro . Voigt stated in your columns that "before even issuing the writ in this action he had the express permission of the Provincial Authorities for doing so , ' and this , he added , he was " ready to prove whenever called upon . " I beg , therefore , now thus publicly to challenge Bro . Voigt to abide b y his words , and to prove the truth of that statement . I have a letter dated
Original Correspondence.
ist inst ., from R . W . Bro . Dr .- Bell , D . P . G . M . for the N , and E . Ridings of Yorkshire , in which he says that " he had in the Hornsea case made every friendly effort to prevent litigation , and that the institution of the late lawsuit received from him neither permission or encouragement , " thus bearing out my surmise on this subject . R . W . Bro . Dr . Bell further adds that "Bro . Voigt declared that he felt his character as a merchant and citizen
to be at stake ; that he had in the printed resolution been termed 'dishonourable ; ' that no Masonic adjudicature could possibly satisfy him , and that he should not be content with anything short of the verdict of a public tribunal . " Whilst thus speaking in his own name , I presume R . W . Bro . Dr . Bell also speaks on behalf of Lord Zetland , the P . G . M ., whose Deputy he is ; and the question naturally arises , therefore , who vvere " the Provincial Masonic
authorities " who gave Bro . Voigt their " express permission" to issue his writ of action against Bros . Carr , Laking , and myself ? Common justice to Lord Zetland and Dr . Bell , and to my co-defendants and myself , as well as the credit of our common fraternity , demands , I think , the instant clearing up of this scandal . The latter part of Bro .
Dr . Bell s letter seems to me a grim commentary on the innocent Masonic forbearance in this matter , which some of Bro . Voigt ' s admirers have attributed to him , and for vvhich , if I mistake not , he has himself publicly taken credit . Your fraternally , TUDOR TREVOR . Kendal , 3 rd November .
LODGE OF INDUSTRY , NO . 4 S . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I observe that Bro . R . F . Gould asks for further particulars respecting the early history of this lodge . It would have been a pleasure to me if I could have given Bro . Gould and your readers any accurate information about the lodge prior to the year 1725 , but unfortunately we have no
written records of the proceedings before that date . What is known anterior to that year is traditional , though we have no ' reason to disbelieve the unwritten traditions or our forefathers , that the lodge existed as an operative one at Swalvvell in the seventeenth century . In 1690 Sir Ambrose Crowley transplanted his Cyclopean Colony from Sunderland to Swalwell and Winlaton , both in the county of Durham , at both of vvhich places he built chapels , schools , and
houses for his workmen . A stone fixed in the milldam at Swalwell , dated 1691 , remained for _ many years to affirm this . Surtees , in his admirable history , states that " a code of laws was drawn up vvhich , in a great measure , superseded the general laws of the land , and became locally established . " In the first minute book of our lodge , which was bound up with the "Constitutions , " printed in the year 1723 , and
dedicated by Deputy Grand Master J . T . Desaguliers to his Grace the Duke of Montagu , Past Grand Master , we have manuscript codes of laws as follows : Orders of Antiquity 21 sections . Apprentices' Orders 8 sections . General Orders 8 sections . Penal Orders 26 sections . which may or may not have been transcripts of this code of
laws . The last entries of these rules are dated in the years ' 733-34-3 S- From this I naturally infer there is reason to expect that the lodge was in active operation from 1690 , the time that Sir Ambrose Crowley established his manufactory at Swalwell , and that it was continued down to 1725 , when our written testimonies commence . Our traditional history points to some privileges which the Lodge of Industry vvas supposed to have in former ages .
for instance , the appointment of P . G . M . ; the wearing of hats at P . G . Lodge ; and it is also asserted that the clothing of the Craft as at present worn was copied from the ancient dress of the members of the Industry Lodge . I mention this , however , with reservation , I regret my inability at present to give Bro . Gould anything more definite about the beginnings of the old lodge , and , in conclusion , I may add that it would be interesting to myself and others if vve could obtain some absolute data as to the time of our birth as a lodge . —Yours fraternally ,
ROBERT WHITFIELD , I . P . M . 48
PERSONALITY IN MASONIC CONTROVERSIES . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I have seen by mere accident a letter in a Scottish paper called the Glasgow Herald , which I regret to have read , feeling sure the evil it will do is very great , as exhibiting a sad want of self control by professed Masons in " controversy " about " things Masonic . "
This discussion is headed " Masonic Rites , " and one long letter appears in the Glasgow Herald of Thursday , the 28 th ult ., signed "John Yarker , " and dated from " Withington , Manchester , " which , as far as I know , is , and I hope will be , " unique " in its use of terms of opprobrium and contempt for those who differ from him . It seems that a Mr . Duncan , ( Bro . ?) , has doubted the validity of the pretensions of the "Ancient and Primitive Rite , " and
prefers those of the " Ancient and Accepted Rite , " and Bro . Yarker proceeds to pour forth his ardent indignation against the said Duncan and a good many others , contemners of the " sacred sanctuary . " Judging from the opening sentences , Bro . Yarker ' s previous remarks in respect to Bro . Duncan must have been " rather lively , " for he withdraws gracefully " any imputations" on his " character , " ( all this in a controversy ) , and then proceeds to fall foul of
Dr . Mackay in America . Albert Mackay is well known to many in England as the Editor of the " Masonic Encyclopedia , " a very strikingwork , and certainly does not merit such a "bespattering of "hard words" and unpleasant epithets as he is favoured with . Bro . Yarker says , on an American-alleged authority , that he is " peddling Masonry , " for which pursuit , whatever it may be , he has " given up medicine ; " and then he
mentions his disgusting mendacity , " terms him a " pirate , " and makes use of this most unjust expression — "Of Masonic liars a Yankee unquestionably bears the palm unblushingly . " 1 might quote many other singularly violent and incoherent remarks , but I forbear , for fear of exhausting your patience , and hurting the feelings of your readers . But I ask you , " Is this Masonry ? " Cap the sublime and charitable precepts of Freemasonry be rightly understood b y any one , be he who he may , "Sublime Sage of the Shrine , Sic .,