Original Correspondence.

Original Correspondence .

The Editor is not responsible for the opinions expressed by Correspondents . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —The publication in

your columns of the two documents emanating from the " Grand Lodge of Royal Ark Mariners " is deemed , I presume , to be of essential service to the interests of the influential brethren by whom the affairs of that mysterious body are administered . For their

self-deception I have nothing to say , and do not even envy them the delusive gratification they enjoy in the shelter of their own " vessel . " ' My faith in the work of the " chief constructor " is but weak , and I rather fancy that of many of his coadjutors

is of the same diluted description , and will , I should think , be further weakened by his indulgence in unwarranted assumptions . For the childish impertinences in the epistles addressed to myself I have only—forgiveness ; for the misrepresentation

sought to be conveyed in the heading to the second document I have—pity . By whomsoever ths insertion of that document was authorised , it was with , the full knowledge that it was not—nor ever was considered or termed—a " treaty . " It was a

memorandum drawn up as a possible basis upon which terms of agreement might be arranged , and with reference to which the representatives of this G . L . expressed themselves , at ihe time of signing it , as , in their opinion , little likely to be adopted . The

result proved this apprehension to be well-founded , as the General Board , with the G . M . M . at its head , rejected the claims of the soi-disant G . L . of R . A . M ., and with them the conditions sought . The object of the publication in question is

evidently to be found in the desire to encourage a belief in the want of bona fides on the part of this G . L . Of this , I fearlessly assert , it is impossible * to' produce a tittle of evidence . We have , from the commencement of the negociations between the

two bodies , been willing to make concessions more liberal than the circumstances would justify , for the sakeof peace and unity . When we ascertained , however , that underlying every offer from the " G . L . of

R . A . M . " wasastudied attempttomaintain a supreme authority and an independent jurisdiction , this G . L ., with its inherent right to the control of the Ark Degree , had no alternative but to withdraw , and to decline any further consideration of

disingenuous propositions . I shall not permit myself to bc led into controversy , nor is it necessary , as it is satisfactory to know that the majority of those who have accepted office , or who have paid their passage-money for a

contemplated voyage in the newly-launched vesselcither from distrust of her scaworthincssor for some equally good reason—have declined further participation in her fortunes . I am , dear Sir and Brother ,

FREDERICK BINCKES , G . S . Office ofthe G . L . of M . M ., 2 , Red Lion-square , High Holborn , 14 th August , 1 S 71 . BOYS' SCHOOL FETE .

To the Editor of the Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , — I have been engaged , more or less , for nearly thirty years in newspaper and other controversies , and have never yet understood that it was incumbent on any

oneor the duty of any official , no matter by whom "his services may be retained "—to reply to , or in any way to notice , anonymous communications . Lest , however , silence may be misconstrued , and as I happen to know the brother who writes under

the nom de plume " Plantagcnet , " 1 trouble you with an explanation of the grievance under which , I regret to see , he labours . The fixing a charge for admission to proceedings such as those occurring

at our Annual Summer Fete is neither new with us , nor is it exceptional as regards this Institution , as abundance of advertisements and circulars from other institutions , announcing similar events , will amply testify . Large as is our accommo-

Original Correspondence.

dation , it has a limit , and experience has proved that , in the absence of a qualification for admission , the hall in which the distribution of prizes takes place has been taken possession of by visitors from the immediate locality , and

others , to the injury of those who have taken and paid for tickets for the collation , which is an integral portion of the proceedings . A rule , therefore , has been laid down that precedence shall be given to the latter , and no complaint has been made until

now , so self-evident appeared the justice of the regulation . The rule , however , is not an arbitrary one , but one necessary for general guidance and for the exercise of supervision . Had " Plantagenet , ' on being made acquainted with our requirements

appealed to me , and stated his wishes , I—acting under the instructions , and endeavouring to carry out the wishes of , the committee—would have met him fairly and fraternally , on being convinced of the soundness of his claim for admission .

Brethren and friends should be good enough to bear in mind that we have expenses to meet , and a large constituency to provide for , and to give us credit for framing regulations , not for the purposes of harass

ov vexation , but for the good of the Institution as a whole , and for the decently and orderly caring for the comfort and accommodation of those who favour us with their attendance .

If " Plantagenet" will address me privatelyorofficially , I doubt not but that some remedy may be found for the annoyance I so sincerely regret he has suffered .

I am , dear Sir and Brother , Yours faithfully and fraternally , FREDERICK BINCKES , Secretary . Office Royal Masonic Institution for Boys , 6 , Freemasons' Hall , W . C , 14 th Aug ., 1 S 71 .

COMMITTEE OF ENQUIRY . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —In your impression ofthe sth inst ., a letter appears , signed " Cryptonymus , " on the subject of a " Committee of Enquiry , "

in which he calls attention to a particular instance that occurred no later than a month ago . In the defence of that lodge to which he alludes , I beg to state that by the express desire of " Cryptonymus , " he having previously vouched for the

trustworthiness and good character of the candidate both to the proposer and seconder , the initiation took place . Trusting you will excuse me for intruding so far on your valuable space , 1 am , dear Sir and Brother , yours fraternally , HENRY FAULKNER . Northumberland Hotel , Northumberlandstreet , Strand , W . C .

THE MARK DEGREE . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER . —In continuation of my remarks upon this subject at page 474 , I am sorry to have to observe that the further evidence brought forward by Bro . Kerr , as recorded by your contemporary , or as it is also contained in a .

pamphlet entitled " Proceedings at a Conference of Delegates , " & c , held on April 3 rd , 1 S 71 , is , in my opinion , also full of mistakes , as I shall proceed to show . The old operative lodges , or Masonic Friendly Societies , were not unwilling " to commit anything

to writing / for we have laws and statutes , minutes , & c , still extant which were written between one hundred and fifty and three hundred years ago , and from their contents wc find no evidence that our system of degrees and ceremonies was practised then , but , instead , proof to the contrary .

When saying so , I of course mean that brethren are to read them as they actually stand in the old books , not as they may wish them to stand . E . g ., Bio . Kerr says : — "The minute of 159 8 says ' that no E . A . or F . C . be received or admitted into the lodge without the number of six Masters and two

E . Apprentices , the Wardens of that lodge being two of the same six Masters . '" Now , upon turning to page 442 of Lawrie ' s " History of Freemasonry , " where a copy of this " minute " occurs , we find that Bro . Kerr has quite misrepresented matters , for it

there reads : " Item , That na Maister or Fnllow-of-Craft be ressavit nor admittit wt . out the numcr of six Maisteris and tua enterit Prenteisses , the Wardane of that Lodge being one of the said six . " So we here see that Bro . Kerr has substituted E . P . ' s for " Maisteris , " and two Wardens where there is

Original Correspondence.

only " one " mentioned ! He , of course , I suppose ,, wished to keep up the idea that the present system of Senior and Junior Wardens was in vogue then , but such was not the case , as the above helps to prove . Further , Bro . Kerr ' s idea that the E . P . ' s were not present is simply groundless , as the " minute"

distinctly shows thoy were bound to be present in order to make Avhat was done legal ; seeing therefore that Apprentices were present when " Maisters or Fallows-of-Craft" were " ressavit or admittit , " it follows that what was being done then was , not the giving of " degrees" as with us now , but the

granting oi privileges . Bro Kerr also ' gives a description of certain emblems which are cut on the stone sill of the second window on the south side of the choir of Glasgow Cathedral , which " symbols , " he says , were cut in " 1559 , " as that date is cut below them .

Now , he is all wrong again in his description here , for the date cut is " 1556 , " and there is no " sun ;" the ladder also has Jive steps , not " three ; " and the finger does not point to it , but to the eye . But be that as it may , although the date " 1556 " be there , the true time when these Masonic symbols

were cut is nearer 1756 , and perhaps they are no older than the present century , as their style is quite modem ; consequently , whatever Bro . Kerr builds upon them as being cut in the sixteenth century falls to the ground . They look as if some one had drawn a circle about six inches in diameter

and , after dividing it into six portions , cut an eye at the top , compasses and square at the bottom , the moon and a hand on the one side , and three stars and a five-stepped ladder on the other ; then below all stuck the figures " 1556 . " He might about as well have said " 1956 " when at it , and been

equally near the truth . Our Mark Master degree and ritual was neither known to nor worked by either the Mary ' s Chapel Lodge or the Edinburgh Journeymen so early as 1707 . The Rev . Bro . G . R . Portal comes nearer the truth when he styles a Mark lodge which existed

in the year 1800 a time-immemorial Mark lodge , and one of about 1780 an old time-immemorial lodge . Marks were used by merchants as well as by Masons and other Craftsmen , and although a fee was eligible for giving or recording it , there were

no more extra secrets about it then than there is about the trade marks at present used by manufacturers , & c . Bro . Kerr ' s statement that the " Mark Master was the Master ofthe Fellow Craft's Lodge , " and " the Master Mason presided over the entire lodge of three degrees , " is , in my opinion ,

pure imagination . As to " these Rules of 159 S " being promulgated while the head of the Rosslyn family was " Hereditary Grand Master Mason , " that is another mistake , for no evidence has ever appeared to prove that any Rosslyn ever possessed such a title at any

time . The present Earl of Rosslyn , I am happy to say , is " Grand Master Mason , " but as for hereditary G . M ., that is another matter . At page 46 of the pamphlet I perceive it stated that the Scottish G . L . and G . R . A . C . Committees in i 860 considered that the " Mark Master ' s

Degree " was wrought by operative lodges " before the institution of Grand Lodge of Scotland ; " but that is a mistake , and if either the Grand Lodgeof Scotland or the Grand Lodge of England were to follow the precedent ofthe Aberdeen lodge in 1670 " the Entering Prentcise" would get his marie " on

payment of ane mcrk piece ( thirteen pence half-penny ) for his Mcassone mcrk . " The notions hitherto promulgated for a considerable time as to Fellow Crafts being the recipients of the " Mark degree " in olden times being simply the result of misapprehension or misrepresentation .

There is one remark of Bro . Kerr's at page 17 ofthe pamphlet which amused me very much , viz ., " As representing the ancient builders of Glasgow Cathedral , they ( the brethren of No . 3 bis ) only now practise the traditional Masonry received at that early period . " Thus implying that as the three

degrees were wrought in St . John ' s Lodge in i 860 , so were they wrought six centuries before then by their predecessors ! Now , that is pure folly , for , not to speak of other things , even in i 860 , with all the aids to help then extant , tlie members of St . John's were quite unable to work these degrees

themselves , and had to depend upon outsiders to come and do them for them . Although I have examined their books , & c , 1 can find no evidencebut the opposite—of any member of No . 3 bis ever working the three degrees before 1866 ; and when , about that time , one of their own members , by

taking an interest 111 the working , began to make it independent of assistance from others , the phenomenon was so wonderful that it is hard to say what the " coming man " might have attained to had he not been so foolish as to consider that a legend was

of little historical value unless it could stand investigation . What is also curious , this lodge can only point to one of its Masters who ever worked the ceremonies , and he was R . W . M . some years ago . Such is the difference betwum fact and fiction .