A Masonic Address To Her Majesty From The U.S.A.

The following reply has graciously been sent by her Majesty to our indefatigable Bro . Gen . J . C . Smith . Its warm appreciation of the good wishes from the Veterans of Illinois , leaves nothing to be " desired , so that communication is certain to be widely read and treasured by the brethren concerned , as well as highly valued by the Craft in America .

" Windsor Castle , " ' 12 th July , 1897 , " Dear Sir , " I am commanded to convey to you and to the

members of the Masonic Veteran Lodge of Illinois , the sincere thanks of the Queen , for the kind expressions of congratulation and goodwill contained in the address which was forwarded by you through H . R . H . the Prince of Wales , for submission to her Majesty .

" I am also commanded to thank you for the photograph of yourself which was enclosed with the address .

" I am , dear Sir , " Yours very faithfully , " ARTHUR ' BIGGE , " Gen . J . C . Smith , " 65 , Sibley-street , " Chicago , U . S . A . "

Ancient Freemasonry

ANCIENT FREEMASONRY

That Freemasonry may of right be called Ancient admits of no doubt . It is often called the oldest Society in the world , and its claim to be thus regarded cannot well be contradictec . But when we affirm the ancient character of Freemasonry , and declare that it ori ginated in a remote past , there is need of some

care in definition and explanation , if we would avoid a misleading statement . There are distinctions to be kept in mind ; there are interpretations and limitations to be set forth , and processes of change and development to be noted , if we undertake to follow along the lines of Freemasonry and to trace the beginnings of its life in a period far distant from our own ,

Something more than a word , or a date , or a sentence , is required to answer the question , " How old is Freemasonry ?" It is not enough to say Freemasonry is old as the creation , its life runs parallel with the life of the human race ; or , with something more of modesty to declare that it dates from the time

when the pyramids were erected , or when King Solomon ' s Temple was builded , or when the Crusades were entered upon . Such responses may have an element of truth in them , but they ; ire inadequate and misleading ; they do not satisfy the careful enquirer , they do not go to the heart of the question , they need amplification and explanation .

. It is essential at the outset that we should agree as to the meaning of the word Freemasonry , Does it stand for a system or an organisation , or both ? Does it represent no more than a sentiment or idea belonging to the unfoldings of related life , and showing itself in the associations by which men have united

their strength and augmented the zest of living from the early days until now ? Interpreting Freemasonry thus broadly , as referring to principles and tendencies potent in bringing men together , and causing them to walk together and work together

as brethren , we shall be justified in maintaining the proposition that it belongs to the remotest period of the past , being identified with all systems and associations which , by their expression of the fraternal sentiment , have exercised a benign mission in the human world .

Freemasonry , however , as commonly understood , has a more restricted meaning . It represents a system of teaching and of service ; it has a symbolism of its own ; it has rites and observances that stamp it with individuality ; and thus it constitutes a close and helpful bond of kindredness to those who come within

its fellowship . In this view of the Masonic system , and of an organisation with which such a system must be connected , and through which it must manifest itself , we certainly find it difficult to justily the assertion that Freemasonry has existed from time immemorial , or that it was known and practised in the days of

King Solomon . When ue enter upon an historical examination of the rise and progress-of Freemasonry , restricting the term as just now indicated , we shall find ourselves obliged very likely to abate somewhat the claims we may have put forward as to the antiquity of our cherished Institution . In an intelligent search to reach the truth as to the past of

Ancient Freemasonry

Freemasonry wc must draw the lines between tradition and history—between ^ legends and facts . Tradition is by no means worthless as bearing upon the age of Freemasonry ; it has great value ; but it does not take the place of history . ' Traditionally

there is considerable evidence to show that Freemasonry originated with the Ellusinians , the disciples of Pythagoras , the the Essenes , or the Druids ; but there is no actual , historic proof sufficient to establish such a line of descent for the modern Craft

organisation . It must be allowed that it does not establish the antiquity of Freemasonry to cite its legends and ceremonies associated with distinguished personages and memorable events of a former age . Masonic ritual still refers to Moses , Joshua , Aholiab ,

Bczaleel , and other ancient worthies , but such reference does not warrant the assumption that these famous Hebrews were members of or leaders in any society to which the name Masonic could properly be applied . Nor may like references to King Solomon and the two Hirams be accepted as showing that

symbolic Freemasonry existed in their day , and that " our three Most Excellent Grand Masters " governed a Craft organisation such as we know the modern Fraternity to be . The legends , symbols , ceremonies , familiar to modern Craftsmen , which seem to connect Freemasonry with King Solomon ' s time and

specially with the building of the Temple at Jerusalem do no harm . There is not the slightest call to eliminate them from the work and the ritual , for they are wholesome object lessons , giving character and impressiveness to the ceremonies and teachings of the Order ; but further than this we need not go . Wc involve ourselves in difficulties the

very moment we attempt to maintain the proposition that there is an historic chain of continuity between the workmen in King Solomon ' s Temple and the members of the Masonic Fraternity as it exists to-day . It is unwise to claim too much for our venerable

organisation in respect to age . The finding of so-called Masonic marks on stones taken from ruins in the valley of the Nile , does not show conclusively that Freemasonry was known and practised by the ancient Egyptians . It is certainly suggestive , in a broad range of enquiry , to find the All-Seeing Eye , the Blazing

Star , the Square , and numerous other emblems familiar to the modern Craftsman , displayed upon the stones that have been covered by the earth for thousands of years . But these interesting relics do not prove that the men who carved the symbols on Egyptian tablets or Temple walls were Masons . They are

witnesses to the fact that these distinguishing emblems of our Order were held in high regard in the time of the Phaiaohs , that they had meaning , and the inference is a reasonable one that some Association existed which laid special stress on these signs and symbols , and most likelv enacted peculiar rites in

connection with ( heir use . All this is probable , and the field of conjecture is broad and inviting . But that the Masonic Institution existed then and there , that there were Masonic lodges in those ancient days , conferring Degrees and obligating members ,

is by no means proven . 1 here is no sufficient warrant for the assumption that Freemasonry originated in Egypt , and that an organisation of Masonic Craftsmen directed the building of cities and temples in the Valley of the Nile .

How old is Freemasonry historically considered ? It is somewhat difficult to answer this question , We know the history of the Masonic Institution since the establishment of the Grand Lodge of England in-the year 1717 . But to affirm that the organic life of Freemasonry began at that date would be not

only to disregard traditions and a mass of inferential testimony , but to s . l aside documentary evidence that points to a very different conclusion . Distinctive Freemasonry was known before the eighteenth century . The proof is ample that there were Masonic lodges in England and Scotland in the

seventeenth century , while before that period there were organisations both in Great Britain and in Germany , which in many of their leatures bore the stamp ol the Masonic Fraternity as it became better known and more prominent in the early part of the eighteenth century .

Historical Freemasonry can clearl y trace the line of its descent to organisations bearing the name Masonic , which existed in the 17 th century , back of which appear the societies of builders and skilled workmen—the German , Sleinnietzen , and other Operative Guilds—with wLich there is also a line of

connectiod more or less clearl y revealed . These mediawal societies present a worthy type of brotherhood from which modern Freemasonry is evolved . It is well that modern Freemasonry can refer to such an orimn and establish its relation with the

Operative Masonry of the Middle Ages . It is a matter of congratulation that so much of . the ancient character and prestige ol F > ecmasoj } ry is made clear by historical evidence —Free * mason ' s Repository .