-
Articles/Ads
Article Original Correspondence. ← Page 2 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 2 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 2 of 2
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Original Correspondence.
can venture to give my personal assurance . This is the first communication , relative to the Temple Order , which I have addressed to a public print , or in which I have been , directly or indirectly concerned , for the past two years , and I wish now to say no one word which may give offence to any brother interested in the subject . I desire the true interests of the Temple Order , and I here aver that I
am , and have been , and willing to give my humbl * influence and aid to such arrangements as may , if possible , heal those differences which seem unhappily to have existed , provided thc arrangements secure the just , honourable , and kindly treatment of all who may be willing to give their meed of help to the Order , whether their views may , or may not , accord with the opinions of their
superiors in office . For my own strivings to do the best in my power as a Commissioner under the uniformity treaties I have no self reproach . 1 arn , dear Sir and Brother , faithfully yours ,
RICHARD WOOF , Sub . Prior of Worcestershire , Honorary Deputy Grand Commander , Canada . [ This pamphlet , it appears , being non-official , though we understood the contrary , will appear in our Christmas number , merely as an ordinary communication . ]
LODGE TRUTH , BOMBAY . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir , and Brother , As I see that a Punjab P . M . has called public attention in the issue of the " Masonic Record of Western India " for November ( which came to hand by last mail ) , to the fact that the Second and Third Degrees were lately
conferred at one meeting on the same individual in Lodge Truth , Bombay , under dispensation of the Deputy D . G . M ., will you allow me to say in your widely-circulating columns that I was obliged by severe illness to leave Bombay in March last , and that I was , therefore , in no
way personally responsible for this obvious breach of the Constitutions of our Order . I think this disclaimer is in justice due to myself , and I hope the editor of the " Masonic Record of Western India , " with whom doubtless you exchange , will re-publish it in his well-known journal .
Yours fraternally , TunoR TREVOR , W . M . Lodge Truth , Bombay , No . 044 , E . C
PAST MASTERS . To the Editor of thc Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In signing myself as a Past Master at the foot of the note I addressed to you on the 22 nd of November , 1 had no thought er intention of provoking the criticism of any one , especially that of Bro . Jim Sheard , whose zeal , I
fear , is running riot on his reason . Presuming that Bro . Sheard bases his opinion on the first rule in the Book of Constitutions , I would advise that he engage some one to read it for him whose mind is less prejudiced and better capable of understanding its meaning . Had I attempted as a non-subscribing Past Master to
lay claim to a rig ht of membership of the Grand or Provincial Grand Lodge th ; re would have been some apparent consistency in Bro . Sheard ' s remarks . Apparent consistency , I say , for even then I should have objected to the dictum of Bro . Sheard , on the ground that those who appeal to the law ought to submit to be governed by thc law , and Bro . Jim Sheard and his confreres in the
Trafalgar Lodge have for a considerable period persisted in violating the constitutions of the fraternity and the bye-laws of the Provincial Grand Lodge ; their conduct has already formed the subject of an enquiry before the late Deputy Provincial Grand Master , Bro . Bentley Shaw , and a board of Provincial Officers , at which enquiry the award was given against them •, and the fact that Bro . Sheard and his confreres have for more than twelve months
persistently refused to comply with the conditions of that award wil ! not , I venture to think , advance them in the good opinion uf loyal Masons . For fear any of your readers should think that this is mere verbiage I quote the following letter , addressed to the present W . M . of the Trafalgar Lodge : — " 52 , New Street , Huddersfleld , 13 th April , 1875 . " Dear Sir and Brother , —
"I am directed by the Worshipful Deputy Provincial Grand Master , Bro . Bentley Shaw , J . P ., D . L ., to ask if you have received any application , under Provincial Byelaw No . 48 , from the W . M . or Secretary of the Scarborough Lodge , ^ No . 1214 , Batley , with respect to Bro . P . M . Henry Ingham , and if you have received any application I am further directed to instruct you to answer thc
same immediately . " Thc W . D . P . G . M . also instructs mc to inform you that at a board of enquiry , duly convened and held on the 15 th of August last , it was proved and decided that Bro . Henry Ingham was not indebted to the Trafalgar Lodge for contributions or otherwise . " Your immediate compliance with this letter is directed . " Yours fraternally , ( Signed ) " J . BOTTOM LEV ,
" Prov . G . Reg . "The W . M ., Trafalgar Lodge , 971 , Batley . " On the 20 th of April , six days after the receipt of the above letter , the form of enquiry required and provided under the above-named bye-law was returned , thc
answers being filled in , the document signed and delivered by " Bro . Jim Sheard , at 2 . 45 p . m . on the very day that my candidature for affiliation to the Scarborough Lodge was to be brought forward . The first question on the above-named form , and the one which gave rise to the before-mentioned enquiry , is as
Original Correspondence.
follows : —Have all contributions , subscriptions , and fees due been paid ? No , is thc answer they give in the face of the above letter . Is there a greater insult that can be offered to a . gentleman by any man than to give him the lie ? And whea we see this from those who call themselves Masons , who profess to be ptaceable , loyal , observant , and obedient members of our time-honoured
society—see this , and consider to whom it is rendered , we are constrained to hide our heads in shame for those vrho have no shame for themselves . One would have imagined , after listening to the beautiful admonitory remarks which fell from the lips of Bro . Bentley Shaw at the conclusion of the before-mentioned enquiry , that the veriest ingrate in creation would not have been capable of such wanton
outrage . Great clemency has been shown to the Trafalgai-in this matter , but I am yet to be convinced that the Province of West Yorkshire will suffer the action of its officers to be thus insolently disregarded with impunity , andunlesi they repent of the evil , and obtain grace , they may speedily find
themselves in a less enviable position than that of a non subscribing Pas Master . I remain , yours fraternally , HENRY INGHAM , P . M ., P . Z . 258 , II . 1214 . Batley , 6 th Dec , 18 75 .
THE LODGE OF TRUTH 1458 . 7 b the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In answer to the letter appearing in your columns of to-day , signed " The Writer of the so-called Report , " such letter referring to the report of the meeting of the above lodge on November 6 th , ( a curtailed account of
which appeared in your issue of the 20 th ult . ) , I beg to say that I think the letter signed " Henry Smith , W . M . 145 8 , " appearing in your paper of to-day , fully confirms that the remarks I made in my letter of last week , signed a " J unior Member , " were not uncalled for . The ruler of the lodge ( at the time of the report ) in his correspondence in yours of to-day endorses my opinion .
1 st . That a very important fact with reference to the election of W . M . was omitted from thc said report and was calculated to mislead ; not showing " the reason why " the J . W . was elected W . M ., instead of the S . W . I therefore contend that the report has justly merited the definition " so railed . " 2 nd . That the junior membrrs of the lodge were taxed
with a serious charge , unmerited by them , viz ., that they did not study the interests of the lodge , but simply their own preferment . 3 rd . That the result of the election could be a surprise to many was impossible , the J . W . having 17 and the S . W . three votes out of 22 members present . 4 th . That thc strong remarks in reference to the junior
members also reflected upon thc W . M . elect , and which reflection I termed " disparaging" in my letter , signed " A Junior Member . " I am pleased to see that " The Writer of the so-called Report " did not intentionally wish to wound the feelings of any member ; but I think if the writer will review his report , he will agree with me , that the tone of it could not
possibly do otherwise . I regret that I cannot comply with the request of your correspondent to communicate with him privately on this subject ; a grave charge has been laid upon the junior members of the lodge , and sent forth to the Masonic and outside world , through a newspaper . Your
correspondent declines to enter into a newspaper correspondence upon the matter ; considering he was the promoter of such , I think a second thought will convince him that the same medium employed to send forth the charge , should also be used to prove or withdraw the same . I am , dear Sir , and Brother , fraternally yours , •oils EtiWMtii It . irr . Manchester , December 4 th , 1875 .
ELECTION OF PROVINCIAL GRAND MASTERS . To thc Editor of Ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — The Grand Lodge yearly elects its Master , and so do all private lodges , and why is that privilege kept from the members of the P . G . Lodge ? This is a question I have , through your kindness , heretofore asked through
your paper , and have never received a satisfactory answer . I sincerely wish that some member of Grand Lodge would endeavour to passa law that we should have the privilege , and he would very much oblige the members of the P . G . Lodge in general as well as , Yours fraternally , As OLD P . M ., ONK , & C . [ Our brother evidently misunderstands the whole spirit of our Masonic system . —En . ]
ROYAL . MASONIC INSTITUTION FOR BOYS . To the Editor of ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — 1 am much indebted to you for having brought my letter before thc notice of the subscribers of the Boys ' School . The stiictures you have made on several points I feel bound to answer . With the report of the Committee
of 1868 I have nothing to do , but will just mention that in that year the London Orphan cost £ 3 12 s . 3 d . ; last year's report states £ 2 8 s . Commercial Travellers in 1868 , you say , cost £ 7 7 s . 5 d . ; last year they were £ 4 4 s . for office expenses per head . You charge me with being guilty of hasty and fallacious assumptions ; I merely called attention to the facts that are issued by the committees of
the various schools mentioned . You further say that I know full well that provincial schools are carried on 35 per cent , less than London schools . I maintain that meat is cheaper in Leadenhall , flour in Mark Lane , groceries in Mincing Lane , than in any provincial town in the kingdom , and clothing can be had cheaper of several firms in London , than of country makers . As to the
Original Correspondence.
quality of education , I have before me a letter from the Secretary of the London Orphan School , and 1 quote his words , " The education given to our children will bearcomparison with that imparted to any middle-class or commercial school in the world . I am greatly obliged for your enquiries . " I did not state the cost of our boys was twenty pounds too much , but that our expenditure was
twenty pounds above that of others , and I considered £$ ( , per boy ample for all charges . \' ou state there were 17 - boys in thc School last year , the Committee ' s report at page 12 gives the average number at i ; 6 . In your concluding remarks you desire the brethren not to be led
away by questionable statements and untenable propositions . My conclusions have been arrived at from tlic reports of the various schools , and are offered to the Committee in the best possible spirit , I beg to remain , yours fraternally , CHARLES PEGLEH .
YORK . MASONRY . To the Editor ofthe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I do not care to waste time in supporting any high grade system as now constituted . I have given our worthy Bro . Hughan the sources , whence he can ascertain for himself that the Degree of Templar Priest was an old
York degree ; but my time is of too much importance to seek out chapter and verse . I have examined a great quantity of old rituals , and have taken thc Degree of Templar Priest myself , and know the truth of what 1 am now stating . The Templar Priest was the second ceremony in No . 1 Encampment at Edinburgh , at its commencement , about
179 8 . It was an old Irish Templar Degree ; further , it i < found in the system of both Bath and Bristol , and I have perhaps four or five different and varying rituals of it . I ; seems to have been suppressed in Ireland for some political reason—at least it is said so . The " Masonic Student" once gave the draft of a warrant of the degree found at York , dated 1780 . The
York Masonry , at tbe close of last century , consisted or seven degrees . He received a certificate with the formula : " Wisdom hath builded her House . She hath hewen out her Seven Pillars . " These seven refer to the signs of these seven degrees , and this was old York , Irish , and Scottish Templary . Having proof somewhere of so much , I quite willingly
admit that it was but a modem system at York . Bro . Francis Drake clearly proves that in 1725 only the three Degrees of E . A ., F . C , and M . M . were known and practised at York . The Grand Lodge became dormant for above twenty years about 1740 , and when revived after 1760 the Masons composing it adopted three more degrees , for which they required the ceremony if P . M .
There are now quite sufficient documents to prove that pre-i 717 Masonry was an operativcand speculative system , embracing all the knowledge of our present three first degrees opcratively , and something more , but that Royal Arch , Templar , and Templar Priest , or any secret belonging to them , were equally unknown . Mark , Red
Cross , Ark Mariners , and Cryptic . Masonry arc simply too contemptible for enumeration , because they all pretend to be what they are not . If they please any one , let them practice them , however . Truly and fraternally yours , J Y AUK Kit .
LODGE JEWELS . To the Editor of Ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In the controversy which has been raging on this question one important point has been overlooked in the statements made as to the rights of members of particular lodges to wear jewels . This point is , that at the
" Union" in 1813 all lodges then existing were confirmed in the privileges they enjoyed respectively under the " Grand Lodge of England , " and the " Grand Lodge of All England . " My lodge , for instance , was a York Lodge , and holds thc charter from the Grand Lodge of all England , and it was known or distinguished by a jewel , which every member has a right to wear . To deny
this right would be equal to denying the legality of the charter under which the lodge is held , for the one has the same right of existence as the other . The value of thc jewel was shown some six years ago , when a poor old woman came to thc lodge bringing one . She had traced the lodge by the jewel , and it bore the date 1812 . Her husband left the lodge in 1814 . He died in 1830 , leaving
his widow well provided for ; but 39 years had robbed her of friends and means , and she had to fall back upon her husband ' s Masonic brethren , to whom she appealed with her husband ' s jewel and " discharge , " as a good brother who had paid his dues . The jewel , in this instance , gave the lodge a means of assisting the long widowed sister , and was therefore useful as well as ornamental . Yours fraternally , W . M .
MASONIC JEWELS . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I have before me a copy of the " Constitutions of the Antient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons , published by the authority of the United Grand Lodge , by John Hervey as Grand Secretary , " and dated
MDCCCI . XXIII ., which devotes the whole of page 137 to " Centenary Jewels . " The appendix , which professes to give " drawings of the various jewels , " exhibits in plate 14 a " Centenary Jewel . lam bad at descriptions , but a twisted cord , a serpent with its tail in its mouth , and thc letter C . are plainly visible . —Yours fraternally , IAMES A . HAYES .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Original Correspondence.
can venture to give my personal assurance . This is the first communication , relative to the Temple Order , which I have addressed to a public print , or in which I have been , directly or indirectly concerned , for the past two years , and I wish now to say no one word which may give offence to any brother interested in the subject . I desire the true interests of the Temple Order , and I here aver that I
am , and have been , and willing to give my humbl * influence and aid to such arrangements as may , if possible , heal those differences which seem unhappily to have existed , provided thc arrangements secure the just , honourable , and kindly treatment of all who may be willing to give their meed of help to the Order , whether their views may , or may not , accord with the opinions of their
superiors in office . For my own strivings to do the best in my power as a Commissioner under the uniformity treaties I have no self reproach . 1 arn , dear Sir and Brother , faithfully yours ,
RICHARD WOOF , Sub . Prior of Worcestershire , Honorary Deputy Grand Commander , Canada . [ This pamphlet , it appears , being non-official , though we understood the contrary , will appear in our Christmas number , merely as an ordinary communication . ]
LODGE TRUTH , BOMBAY . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir , and Brother , As I see that a Punjab P . M . has called public attention in the issue of the " Masonic Record of Western India " for November ( which came to hand by last mail ) , to the fact that the Second and Third Degrees were lately
conferred at one meeting on the same individual in Lodge Truth , Bombay , under dispensation of the Deputy D . G . M ., will you allow me to say in your widely-circulating columns that I was obliged by severe illness to leave Bombay in March last , and that I was , therefore , in no
way personally responsible for this obvious breach of the Constitutions of our Order . I think this disclaimer is in justice due to myself , and I hope the editor of the " Masonic Record of Western India , " with whom doubtless you exchange , will re-publish it in his well-known journal .
Yours fraternally , TunoR TREVOR , W . M . Lodge Truth , Bombay , No . 044 , E . C
PAST MASTERS . To the Editor of thc Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In signing myself as a Past Master at the foot of the note I addressed to you on the 22 nd of November , 1 had no thought er intention of provoking the criticism of any one , especially that of Bro . Jim Sheard , whose zeal , I
fear , is running riot on his reason . Presuming that Bro . Sheard bases his opinion on the first rule in the Book of Constitutions , I would advise that he engage some one to read it for him whose mind is less prejudiced and better capable of understanding its meaning . Had I attempted as a non-subscribing Past Master to
lay claim to a rig ht of membership of the Grand or Provincial Grand Lodge th ; re would have been some apparent consistency in Bro . Sheard ' s remarks . Apparent consistency , I say , for even then I should have objected to the dictum of Bro . Sheard , on the ground that those who appeal to the law ought to submit to be governed by thc law , and Bro . Jim Sheard and his confreres in the
Trafalgar Lodge have for a considerable period persisted in violating the constitutions of the fraternity and the bye-laws of the Provincial Grand Lodge ; their conduct has already formed the subject of an enquiry before the late Deputy Provincial Grand Master , Bro . Bentley Shaw , and a board of Provincial Officers , at which enquiry the award was given against them •, and the fact that Bro . Sheard and his confreres have for more than twelve months
persistently refused to comply with the conditions of that award wil ! not , I venture to think , advance them in the good opinion uf loyal Masons . For fear any of your readers should think that this is mere verbiage I quote the following letter , addressed to the present W . M . of the Trafalgar Lodge : — " 52 , New Street , Huddersfleld , 13 th April , 1875 . " Dear Sir and Brother , —
"I am directed by the Worshipful Deputy Provincial Grand Master , Bro . Bentley Shaw , J . P ., D . L ., to ask if you have received any application , under Provincial Byelaw No . 48 , from the W . M . or Secretary of the Scarborough Lodge , ^ No . 1214 , Batley , with respect to Bro . P . M . Henry Ingham , and if you have received any application I am further directed to instruct you to answer thc
same immediately . " Thc W . D . P . G . M . also instructs mc to inform you that at a board of enquiry , duly convened and held on the 15 th of August last , it was proved and decided that Bro . Henry Ingham was not indebted to the Trafalgar Lodge for contributions or otherwise . " Your immediate compliance with this letter is directed . " Yours fraternally , ( Signed ) " J . BOTTOM LEV ,
" Prov . G . Reg . "The W . M ., Trafalgar Lodge , 971 , Batley . " On the 20 th of April , six days after the receipt of the above letter , the form of enquiry required and provided under the above-named bye-law was returned , thc
answers being filled in , the document signed and delivered by " Bro . Jim Sheard , at 2 . 45 p . m . on the very day that my candidature for affiliation to the Scarborough Lodge was to be brought forward . The first question on the above-named form , and the one which gave rise to the before-mentioned enquiry , is as
Original Correspondence.
follows : —Have all contributions , subscriptions , and fees due been paid ? No , is thc answer they give in the face of the above letter . Is there a greater insult that can be offered to a . gentleman by any man than to give him the lie ? And whea we see this from those who call themselves Masons , who profess to be ptaceable , loyal , observant , and obedient members of our time-honoured
society—see this , and consider to whom it is rendered , we are constrained to hide our heads in shame for those vrho have no shame for themselves . One would have imagined , after listening to the beautiful admonitory remarks which fell from the lips of Bro . Bentley Shaw at the conclusion of the before-mentioned enquiry , that the veriest ingrate in creation would not have been capable of such wanton
outrage . Great clemency has been shown to the Trafalgai-in this matter , but I am yet to be convinced that the Province of West Yorkshire will suffer the action of its officers to be thus insolently disregarded with impunity , andunlesi they repent of the evil , and obtain grace , they may speedily find
themselves in a less enviable position than that of a non subscribing Pas Master . I remain , yours fraternally , HENRY INGHAM , P . M ., P . Z . 258 , II . 1214 . Batley , 6 th Dec , 18 75 .
THE LODGE OF TRUTH 1458 . 7 b the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In answer to the letter appearing in your columns of to-day , signed " The Writer of the so-called Report , " such letter referring to the report of the meeting of the above lodge on November 6 th , ( a curtailed account of
which appeared in your issue of the 20 th ult . ) , I beg to say that I think the letter signed " Henry Smith , W . M . 145 8 , " appearing in your paper of to-day , fully confirms that the remarks I made in my letter of last week , signed a " J unior Member , " were not uncalled for . The ruler of the lodge ( at the time of the report ) in his correspondence in yours of to-day endorses my opinion .
1 st . That a very important fact with reference to the election of W . M . was omitted from thc said report and was calculated to mislead ; not showing " the reason why " the J . W . was elected W . M ., instead of the S . W . I therefore contend that the report has justly merited the definition " so railed . " 2 nd . That the junior membrrs of the lodge were taxed
with a serious charge , unmerited by them , viz ., that they did not study the interests of the lodge , but simply their own preferment . 3 rd . That the result of the election could be a surprise to many was impossible , the J . W . having 17 and the S . W . three votes out of 22 members present . 4 th . That thc strong remarks in reference to the junior
members also reflected upon thc W . M . elect , and which reflection I termed " disparaging" in my letter , signed " A Junior Member . " I am pleased to see that " The Writer of the so-called Report " did not intentionally wish to wound the feelings of any member ; but I think if the writer will review his report , he will agree with me , that the tone of it could not
possibly do otherwise . I regret that I cannot comply with the request of your correspondent to communicate with him privately on this subject ; a grave charge has been laid upon the junior members of the lodge , and sent forth to the Masonic and outside world , through a newspaper . Your
correspondent declines to enter into a newspaper correspondence upon the matter ; considering he was the promoter of such , I think a second thought will convince him that the same medium employed to send forth the charge , should also be used to prove or withdraw the same . I am , dear Sir , and Brother , fraternally yours , •oils EtiWMtii It . irr . Manchester , December 4 th , 1875 .
ELECTION OF PROVINCIAL GRAND MASTERS . To thc Editor of Ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — The Grand Lodge yearly elects its Master , and so do all private lodges , and why is that privilege kept from the members of the P . G . Lodge ? This is a question I have , through your kindness , heretofore asked through
your paper , and have never received a satisfactory answer . I sincerely wish that some member of Grand Lodge would endeavour to passa law that we should have the privilege , and he would very much oblige the members of the P . G . Lodge in general as well as , Yours fraternally , As OLD P . M ., ONK , & C . [ Our brother evidently misunderstands the whole spirit of our Masonic system . —En . ]
ROYAL . MASONIC INSTITUTION FOR BOYS . To the Editor of ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — 1 am much indebted to you for having brought my letter before thc notice of the subscribers of the Boys ' School . The stiictures you have made on several points I feel bound to answer . With the report of the Committee
of 1868 I have nothing to do , but will just mention that in that year the London Orphan cost £ 3 12 s . 3 d . ; last year's report states £ 2 8 s . Commercial Travellers in 1868 , you say , cost £ 7 7 s . 5 d . ; last year they were £ 4 4 s . for office expenses per head . You charge me with being guilty of hasty and fallacious assumptions ; I merely called attention to the facts that are issued by the committees of
the various schools mentioned . You further say that I know full well that provincial schools are carried on 35 per cent , less than London schools . I maintain that meat is cheaper in Leadenhall , flour in Mark Lane , groceries in Mincing Lane , than in any provincial town in the kingdom , and clothing can be had cheaper of several firms in London , than of country makers . As to the
Original Correspondence.
quality of education , I have before me a letter from the Secretary of the London Orphan School , and 1 quote his words , " The education given to our children will bearcomparison with that imparted to any middle-class or commercial school in the world . I am greatly obliged for your enquiries . " I did not state the cost of our boys was twenty pounds too much , but that our expenditure was
twenty pounds above that of others , and I considered £$ ( , per boy ample for all charges . \' ou state there were 17 - boys in thc School last year , the Committee ' s report at page 12 gives the average number at i ; 6 . In your concluding remarks you desire the brethren not to be led
away by questionable statements and untenable propositions . My conclusions have been arrived at from tlic reports of the various schools , and are offered to the Committee in the best possible spirit , I beg to remain , yours fraternally , CHARLES PEGLEH .
YORK . MASONRY . To the Editor ofthe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I do not care to waste time in supporting any high grade system as now constituted . I have given our worthy Bro . Hughan the sources , whence he can ascertain for himself that the Degree of Templar Priest was an old
York degree ; but my time is of too much importance to seek out chapter and verse . I have examined a great quantity of old rituals , and have taken thc Degree of Templar Priest myself , and know the truth of what 1 am now stating . The Templar Priest was the second ceremony in No . 1 Encampment at Edinburgh , at its commencement , about
179 8 . It was an old Irish Templar Degree ; further , it i < found in the system of both Bath and Bristol , and I have perhaps four or five different and varying rituals of it . I ; seems to have been suppressed in Ireland for some political reason—at least it is said so . The " Masonic Student" once gave the draft of a warrant of the degree found at York , dated 1780 . The
York Masonry , at tbe close of last century , consisted or seven degrees . He received a certificate with the formula : " Wisdom hath builded her House . She hath hewen out her Seven Pillars . " These seven refer to the signs of these seven degrees , and this was old York , Irish , and Scottish Templary . Having proof somewhere of so much , I quite willingly
admit that it was but a modem system at York . Bro . Francis Drake clearly proves that in 1725 only the three Degrees of E . A ., F . C , and M . M . were known and practised at York . The Grand Lodge became dormant for above twenty years about 1740 , and when revived after 1760 the Masons composing it adopted three more degrees , for which they required the ceremony if P . M .
There are now quite sufficient documents to prove that pre-i 717 Masonry was an operativcand speculative system , embracing all the knowledge of our present three first degrees opcratively , and something more , but that Royal Arch , Templar , and Templar Priest , or any secret belonging to them , were equally unknown . Mark , Red
Cross , Ark Mariners , and Cryptic . Masonry arc simply too contemptible for enumeration , because they all pretend to be what they are not . If they please any one , let them practice them , however . Truly and fraternally yours , J Y AUK Kit .
LODGE JEWELS . To the Editor of Ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In the controversy which has been raging on this question one important point has been overlooked in the statements made as to the rights of members of particular lodges to wear jewels . This point is , that at the
" Union" in 1813 all lodges then existing were confirmed in the privileges they enjoyed respectively under the " Grand Lodge of England , " and the " Grand Lodge of All England . " My lodge , for instance , was a York Lodge , and holds thc charter from the Grand Lodge of all England , and it was known or distinguished by a jewel , which every member has a right to wear . To deny
this right would be equal to denying the legality of the charter under which the lodge is held , for the one has the same right of existence as the other . The value of thc jewel was shown some six years ago , when a poor old woman came to thc lodge bringing one . She had traced the lodge by the jewel , and it bore the date 1812 . Her husband left the lodge in 1814 . He died in 1830 , leaving
his widow well provided for ; but 39 years had robbed her of friends and means , and she had to fall back upon her husband ' s Masonic brethren , to whom she appealed with her husband ' s jewel and " discharge , " as a good brother who had paid his dues . The jewel , in this instance , gave the lodge a means of assisting the long widowed sister , and was therefore useful as well as ornamental . Yours fraternally , W . M .
MASONIC JEWELS . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I have before me a copy of the " Constitutions of the Antient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons , published by the authority of the United Grand Lodge , by John Hervey as Grand Secretary , " and dated
MDCCCI . XXIII ., which devotes the whole of page 137 to " Centenary Jewels . " The appendix , which professes to give " drawings of the various jewels , " exhibits in plate 14 a " Centenary Jewel . lam bad at descriptions , but a twisted cord , a serpent with its tail in its mouth , and thc letter C . are plainly visible . —Yours fraternally , IAMES A . HAYES .