Original Correspondence.

Original Correspondence .

*—The Editor is not responsible for the opinions expressed by Correspondents .

THE MARK DEGREE AND THE MARK CHAIR .

( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) SIR AND BROTHER , —In the letter of a D . Prov . G . M . M ., at page 282 , there are two statements which it would be highly interesting to have proved .

The first is , that the secrets of the Master's chair have a claim to antiquity . The second is , that the Mark degree is not independent , but "as dependent on the second degree as the Royal Arch is on the third . "

As regards the first point , I find no mention in any of the old records of 1717 and the following years of a AV . M . being installed in the absence ofhis lodge . On the contrary , every account of an installation leads the reader to suppose that the W . M . was installed "with certain significant ceremonies "

in ihe presence of his lodge . If I am correct , then , the chair secrets are , as now given , an innovation , and a new degree , which may be very proper to be given , but have no necessary connection with the installation of a W . M . As regards the second point , if the Mark is a part

of the Fellow-Craft ' s degree , how comes it that it is altogether unknown in England , Sweden , Germany and France , and that where known and recognised , as in America , Scotland and Ireland , it is part not of the Fellow Craft , but of the Royal Arch system ? Wherever the Mark is worked independently , as

in England ( and for its own sake I am most thankful that it is independent of Great Queen-street ) , it seems to me that the good of Mark lodges ought alone to be considered in deciding the question of the qualifications for the Master's chair ; and as

regards this , the well-considered and yet incisive reforms that have hitherto been carried out , give us every reason to place the most implicit reliance in the wisdom of the G . M . M . and the G . M . L . Yours fraternally , A MARK P . M .

( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I have read with attention the correspondence in your pages on this subject , and have had my first impressions strengthened by the remarks of your several correspondents . Agreeing with those who feel regret that they

cannot adopt the opinions of Bro . Hughan ( than whom there are few better able to decide on questions of Masonic propriety ) , I have from thc first considered it singular that that worthy brother cannot observe the absolute misplacement of the chair of K . S . before that of A m .

It is quite true that "a regulation has been made in the Craft" that thc degree of M . M . shall precede that of Mark Master , but that appears to be the result of a concession made by one Order of Masonry towards the other for the sake of preserving that unity and good-fellowship which both profess

and desire to practise . Beyond the reservation thereby made , there is nothing that in the present order of things affects the independent working of the respective degrees . If the Mark degree were , as was no doubt originally intended , the intermediate stage between the

F . C . and the M . M . degrees , it might be reasonably expected that the chair of K . S . should be the onl y position of absolute power . Even then there would be no reason why the superior ofiiccr of thc Mark degree should not occupy the chair of a representative subordinate to that of K . S . But it has been

decided , whether wisely or not is for more experirienced Masons than myself to determine , that the Craft and Mark degrees shall be kept separate and distinct . And , therefore , beyond thc obligation to observe that regulation which 1 have before mentioned , there can be but one argument in favour of

the objection to instal a Mark Mason not already an Installed Craft Master into the Mark chair . Even this one argument— which I take to be the possibility of giving a brother an insight into the secrets ofthe chair of K . S . before he can be legally entitled to them — can be soon disposed of , for

there is nothing in the ceremony of installation observed in the one degree ( beyond the O . B ., and that is a most important exception ) , which is not in the other shared in by the brethren generally , and no Installed Master of a Mark Lodge , not already installed in the Craft , is nearer the

possession of the secrets of the chair of K . S . than any other Master Mason . The many reasons why a zealous Mark Master should not be hindered in his progress and be prevented from ruling a Mark lodge must be obvious

to all members of the Order , and scarce require discussion . In my opinion , it only remains to obtain thc admission that the above presumed objection is founded on error lo exhaust the subject . There seems to be an absurdity in making the chair of K . S . precede that of the Mark degree , and

Original Correspondence.

so reversing what should be the proper order of merit . For if the Mark had been , as in years gone by it could have been , adopted in the Craft between the F . C . and M . M . degrees , surely every portion of its working and its several offices must have been subordinated to what would then have been the

higher degree . But it is now an independent Order , and as such should not be trammelled by any requirement of another body , beyond what has already been agreed to . With every respect for blue Masonry , towards which I remain as loyal and zealous as I ever have been , I think the degree with which it would

not concern itself has now assumed such proportions as justify its assumption of a right to act without restraint from that source . The Mark Lodge " Macdonald , No . 104 , " lias elected its Senior Warden ( not yet or soon likely to be a Master of a Craft Lodge ) as their next AA ' . M .

and he will , under the authority of the M . W . Grand Mark Master , be installed into that office on the 10 th proximo . To have refused the worthy brother his preferment because his good qualities had not been properly recognised elsewhere , would have been an act of injustice to him and discouragement

to other zealous Mark Master Masons , of such a nature as I trust will never be sanctioned in the Mark Degree . Yours fraternally , JAMES STEVENS , P . M . & P . Z ., AV . M . Macdonald Mark 104 , and G . J . O . Clapham , May 15 , 1871 .

( To the Editor of Thc Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER . — " A D . P . G . M . M . " finds fault with my assertion that the Mark is an independent degree . By " independent" I meant that it was independent in its government , i . e ., that the body claiming exclusive authority over the

degree in this country is totally distinct from and independent of the Craft Grand Lodge ; it is dependent on the 2 ° and also on the 3 ° to this extent , that none but Master Masons can receive the Mark . This is however the case with all Masonic and chivalric degrees , e . g ., the Red Cross ; yet I am

not aware that the M . P . S . of a conclave must necessarily be a P . M . It appears to me that were the present restriction carried out to its legitimate issue , the G . M . ofthe Mark ought previously to have presided over the whole Craft ! With the Royal Arch the case is entirely different ; the two systems are

closely connected in their working , for example , ihe G . Sec . and G . Reg ., if R . A . Masons , arc ex officio entitled to the same offices in the Grand Chapter , and it is notorious that thc subordinate and dependent position occupied by the Supreme Grand Chapter is extremely distasteful to the

upholders of the Order . As to the threat of secession in the event of the alteration being carried out , I cannot believe that any honourable body of men would hold so lightly a solemn O . B ., voluntarily entered into , as to break it merely because some measure was passed of which they individually might not approve .

In conclusion , 1 must still say that as a friend to the Mark degree , I believe I am consulting its best interests in wishing to see the alteration carried out ; that there is no inseparable objection to it is evident from the very fact that thc matter has been under the consideration ofthe General Board . Apologising for again troubling you , Believe me , fraternally yours , A CRAFT P . M .

THE 1717 THF . ORA ' . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER— I have no intention to prolong this discussion . I only desire to remark that Bro . Buchan forgets that thc Carpenters and the Freemasons are jointly referred to in very many

ancient fabric rolls and other historic documents , and that the Magister Carpcntarius is mentioned frequently as a person of importance . 1 have no doubt that these guilds were allied , ancl hence their joint mention in the Statute of Laborers , in which your readers will have observed that no other

association is specified by name , although thc statute applied to thc whole of these trading combinations . It must therefore be apparent to any unprejudiced reader that the carpenters and masons had within their organisation more important elements than the other trade-fellowships . I may remind Bro . Buchan

that it was to the Tailors he compared thc Masons ; not to the Carpenters . If by " playing into his hands" Bro . Buchan means thc affording him information , I am very glad to contribute such as my humble stock will supply ; but I think if Bro . Buchan was so well

acquainted with the early statutes on the subject of Masons , it was unnecessary for him to specially challenge me to produce one referring to that craft alone before 1717 , and still more unnecessary for him to imply that I had suppressed Chapter ii . That the Masonic craft has existed , in some form , for centuries at least , wc all well know from

Original Correspondence.

innumerable MS . as well as printed sources ; consequently , when Bro . Buchan thinks it right to assert that its present constitution was invented in 1717 , it is not asking him to prove a negative when I suggest that he shall show some evidence for his

statement . I may give an example of this by myself asserting that it was founded in 1450 : would Bro . Buchan refrain from asking me to prove this because it would in his view be proof of a negative ? Yours fraternally , LUPUS .

The Little Testimonial.

THE LITTLE TESTIMONIAL .

We did not intend to have alluded to the services of our Bro . Robert Wentworth Little , towards the English Craft , but since The Freemasons' Magazine and Masonic Mirror ( London ) has been so contemptible as to allow disparaging remarks relative to him to appear in its columns under certain noms

de plume , because he advocates certain Masonic orders , of which we dare to say , the learned (?) editor of The Freemasons' Magazine is entirely ignorant , then we deem it our duty to say a word or two regarding the testimonial , with which certain members of the Craft propose to present him .

Bro . Little we look upon as one of the advanced members of the English Fraternity . He may only be assistant to the Grand Secretary , but , certainly , for energy he is excelled by few . We do not know him either personally or by correspondence , but we are aware that he is a good ritualist ( a somewhat

rare thing in some parts of England ) an earnest worker , and a true lover of the Masonic Fraternity . Such being the case , we are pleased to note that his services are to be rewarded by a testimonial worthy of the Brotherhood whom he has so long and so faithfully served .

The cry against him is that the said testimonial is for his services in the Order of the Red Cross of Rome and Constantine . Such , we believe , is not altogether the case . Bro . Little has devoted his time also to the Craft and Capitular Masonry , and although he has been most energetic in his efforts

to spread that branch of which he is Grand Recorder , he has not , to our knowledge , been remiss in his duties to those other bodies to which he also owes allegiance . We think , moreover , that through him to a great extent will be accomplished the bringing together , under thc one sovereignty , the various

Masonic branches not now recognised by the Grand Lodge of England . ' For example there are now in England a Supreme Grand Council of the A . and A . Rite 33 , a Grand Mark Lodge , a Grand Ark Lodge , a Grand Commandery of Knights Templar , a General Grand •Conclave of the Red Cross of

Rome and Constantine , which last-named body has also authority over the Rite of Misraim . The Grand Mark Lodge and Grand Ark are also uniting , and wc hope that all thc other bodies will unite in forming a Grand Council of Rites , so as to systematise this Babel of Masonic languages . Bro . Little has

worked to accomplish this , and we join with him in the movement , heart and hand . AVe want a system . Let the Freemasons of England be liberal in their subscriptions towards a testimonial for one , who has devoted his time , his talents , and his

energies to the welfare of the English Craft , its Orders and its benevolent institutions . Such a brother wc believe our frater to be , and the Gavel sends him its best and most fraternal good wishes . — The Gavel , Orillia , Ont ., Canada , May , 1871 .

The "Little" Testimonial Fund.

THE "LITTLE" TESTIMONIAL FUND .

ADDITIONAL SUBSCRIPTIONS . £ s . d . The Right Hon . the Earl Bective ... 10 o o Sir 1 ' . M . AVilliams , Bart ., M . P . ... S S ° The Rose of Denmark Lodge , No . 975 5 5 ° St . Mark ' s Lodge of Mark Masters , No . I 5 5 ° T . AA . Barrett ( additional ) 440

M . J . Jennings 220 J . Freeman , P . M . iS 220 The Right lion , the Earl of Jersey ... 200 Lodgeof Asaph , No . 1319 220 Yillier ' s Lodge , No . 1194 220 C . Rogers Harrison I I o Major-General Munbee I I o

Joseph Armstrong 1 I o G . A . Ibbetson I I o V . G . Bailey I I O Major Scndey 110 John Kirk I I o

T . McGovern P . M . ( Dublin ) IIO Thc Stockwell Lodge , No . 1339 ... I I o James Abbott 100 AV . Biggs ( Reading ) o 10 6 Dr . AV . C . Lucey o 10 6 Dr . J . S . Bulmer o 10 o

SMALL-POX , FEVERS , AND SKIN DISEASES . — The predisposition to is prevented by Lamplough ' s Pyretic Saline . A'italis ' mg and invigorating , its effects are remarkable in their cure and prevention . Take it as directed . Sold by chemists and the maker , H . Lamplough , 113 , Holhorn-hill . —[ Advt . ]