-
Articles/Ads
Article DISCONTINUE THE "FREEMASON." ← Page 2 of 2 Article THE COMPARATIVE COST OF THE BOYS' SCHOOL. Page 1 of 1 Article THE COMPARATIVE COST OF THE BOYS' SCHOOL. Page 1 of 1 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.
Discontinue The "Freemason."
Hy amused by these little acts , which for some jfy cause , or at no cause at all , evidence , that ^ some minds a delusion exists , that by their patronage or their opposition , by the continuance or discontinuance of their subscription ,
they can in any meast . re , affect either the pro-( rress or the prosperity of the " Freemason , " or rnanifest their approval , or exhibit their displeasure . Let all such , whoever they may be , be good enough to bear in mind that strong in the public op inion of a kindly and discerning Craft ,
the " Freemason intends to go on its way , relying alike on that judicious and business like management which has given to it its solidity
and its success , as well as on that free , impartial , and honest , and independent tone of thought and teaching which has characterized its past annals , marks its present material well doing ,
and has earned for it the good will , approval , fraternal confidence and cheerful countenance , not only of the Order in Great Britain , but of the Anglo-Saxon brotherhood , nay of Cosmopolitan Freemasonry .
The Comparative Cost Of The Boys' School.
THE COMPARATIVE COST OF THE BOYS' SCHOOL .
This question , which is a very important question in itself , had hardly full justice done to it at the recent discussion at Freemasons' Hall . The orig inal accusations brought against the School in the pamphlets of unpleasant ami un-Masonic memory were , that there was gross
mismanagement , grosser . extravagance ; that the accounts were kept slovenly , and that Bro . Binckes arrogated too much to himself . But when at Sheffield , the province of Yorkshire , worked upon by there utterly misleading , and we feel bound to add rtalevolent statements of personal animosity ,
however much it might be affected to be denied , endeavoured to frame the articles of impeachment , the whole venue was changed at once . The original allegations amount , alike in open and suppressed pamphlets , to deliberate charges of malappropriation and embezzlement , and the
suppressed pamphlet was , in our humble opinion , libellous and actionable . Think of any brother Mason putting into print with regard to a miserable 8 s . 9 d ., or 9 s . 4 d ., of a savings bank account for the boys " who has got the money ? " in this way implicating the honour of brethren in every way
distinguished by long service and high character . But , as we said , all the charges of the previous pamphlets were abandoned at Sheffield , and the point put forward was the excessive cost of the school , and comparisons were made with otherinstitutions . Now it is on this point clear , that those
who affected to lead West Yorkshire were utterly ignorant of the subject , and did not really understand anything practically about the matter . For it had been shown in 186 9 that the question of comparative cost could hardly be fairly entered into , as , owing to its peculiar " status , " the
Masonic Boys' School was a school " sui generis , and must have in many things an exceptional standard , alike of cost , and even education . But supposing that a comparison was made , the Boys ' School came well out of it , and so far from there being any real cause of complaint , the truth of
the case required that proper eulogium should be passed upon the managers of the School . And in 1 876 we apprehend that the same state of things is to be found , and it is very amusing to note that these inculpstors of the School are " hoist " u y their own " petard , " actually silenced by
their own figures . Take the Commercial Travellers' School , which we all know is a very Wt'H managed institution , economically administered . It had , according to its repoit , at the close ° * ' 87 . 5 i 288 boys and girls . Its office expenses were £ 1301 os . 4 d . against Masonic Boys
* ' 59 [ os . with 156 boys . The report of the West Yorkshire Committee ma le the office expenses J I 2 74 'os . 9 d . ( Bro . Binckes puts them at *> 59 'os . iod . ) , but even bytheir own reckoning their statement that the average is ^" us . 11 . V . absolutel y incorrect . If £ 1274 t 8 s . 9 d . is divided
by 156 , the product will be £ 8 3 s ., and a few fractions per head . We invite the attention of brethren in West Yorkshire to the subject , as it is a very serious blot on the calculations of the committee . The school salaries of tne Commercial Travellers' are £ 1317 8 s . iod ., those of the Masonic Boys' School to the end of
The Comparative Cost Of The Boys' School.
1875 , Bro - Bi » ckes , £ 1286 2 s . 8 d . We may note here that the West Yorkshire Comnvttee only deals with the accounts to the close of J 874 , and , according to their report , the accounts for wages and education to the close of 1874 , amounted
to—Educational , £ 833 16 s . ; Wages , s £$ 2 i is ., in all , se ? i 354 17 s . As regards food , the averages of the Royal Medical Benevolent , Clergy , Orphan , and British Orphan , amounted to i £ i 6 14 s . per head , that of the Masonic Boys' to £ ii 1 is . 9 d . Is anv further comparison needful ? The truth is ,
the whole agitation is a personal one , and based on no reliable data of any kind whatever . The annual cost per school , as no one knows better than Bro . Gill , and many of the brethren who signed the Report , is no ciiterion as to the comparative cost . For this reason , that each school
has to be judged by its own details of work , standard , and arrangement . In some schools the children , for instance , do net have meat daily . In this school or that school meat is only given three or four times a week , while the allowance of clothing is scantier than with us . It is idle for
any one to say " we can educate at Sidcote for £ 33 I 9 $ - ; or at Ackwotth , £ 3 r 103 . 6 d . ; or Yorkshire Boys' School , £ 33 ; and . jtherefore , the Royal Masonic Institution for Boys is extravagantly managed , and must be reduced to their minimum . " It is neither reasonable nor , in truth ,
Masonic so to argue ! Vve apprehend that the question of comparative cost of the . School has been often considered by the House Committee and the Quarterly Court , and that those best competent to form an opinion on the subject have long since carefully arranged the present scale of
expenditure . Any life-governor can give notice of a committee to enquire into such a question , but from our experience of schools generally we do not fancy that in London much , if any , saving could be made . Bro . Gill fairly admitted that the proper
course for the malcontents was to have gone originally to the Quarterly Court , and we hope that now it is admitted that there is no foundation for any of these statements or charges , this unseemly agitation and un-Masonie irritation may cease , and that our good friends in West Yorkshire will return to their normal condition
of activity and zeal , of kind feeling and brotherl y love , of geniality ^ and goodwill , of constitutional progress , and of Masonic feeling . Of their earnestness and energy we are all aware , as well as of their many good qualities , and we have been much grieved to have seen them led into the " Caudine Forks " of a hopeless cause , and
of unavoidable defeat . It is a most serious thing to lower West Yorkshire in ths good opinion of the other provinces , and , above all , to weaken or take away the normal and well-earned character of our good West Yoikshire brethren for sobriety of mind and common sense , for Masonic fairness and fraternal good feeling , for all the graces , in fact , of the true Craftsman ' s character .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
t \ Ve do not hold ourselves responsible tor , or even as approving o ! the opinions expressed by ourcorrespondcnls , but vve wish , ix a spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . — lip . ]
REGALIA . T 11 the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir anil Brother , — I regret that while the question of " Master Masons' Jewels " was recently passing through your columns 1 had not ai opportunity of making one or two remarks thereon , but I take this as a fitting place , though
under a more general head . I agree with " A Past Master" ( Feb . 26 th ) that " the compasses and square only" belong absolutely to Past D . G . M . ' s "—vide Constitutions , page 119 . The "fivepointed star" I take to be in accordance with Article 2 , page 118 , and because it is not otherwise specially appropriated .
There are , however , other points at issue on the Regalia question . I low is it that ( say ) ninety-nine out of every hundred Past Mastcrj wear a gold or gilt jewel when the Constitutions distinctly say it shall be in silver?—( vide pages 1 21 and 122)— " except , " it goes on to say , " in the Lodge of Aniiquity , No . 2 , and the British Lodge , No . 8 , which are golden or gilt . " Why don't these two lodges
look after their privileges ? This is really an important point and worth following up . I would make a passing remark that although a neat , artistic , and symbolical design is provided for a Past Master's jewel—{ vide plate 12 ) —is it not strange that so very many brethren should disport themselves in over-ornamented and tawdry specimens of " Brummagem . "
Original Correspondence.
Page 125 says that the " three several sets of two right angles " worn by W . M . ' s and P . M . ' s in place of the three rosettes on the M . M . 's apron shall be of ribbon " of same colour as the lining and edging of the apron . " Then how is it so very many W . M . ' s and P . M . 's wear those emblems in silver instead of blue ribbon ?
Are nst the answers to these questions to be found in the old tale—general ignorance of that most concise yet comprehensive Book of Constitutions ; but when we find so many Past Masters violating the rules they pledged themselves to support there should be a little allowance made to young M . M . ' s seeking to decorate themselves . In
conclusion , I would venture to recommend both classes to read up this subject ( there are only 8 pages ) ; those who have read it may benefit by re-ptrusing it ; there are pearls to be found for those who pride themselves on being quite " au fait , " as on page r 24 it says that " officers and past
officers of lodges may have the emblems of their offices in silver or white in the centre of the apron ; " such is , to my taste , an improvement , for it fills up what otherwise appears a meaningless blank . Fraternally yours , " AD'REM . "
MEMBERSHIP OF A PROVINCIAL GRAND LODGE . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In answer to Brother T . F ., we will find by reference to the Book of Constitutions that " the actual and Past Provincial Grand Officers , whilst they remain
subscribing members to a lodge in the province , with the actual Provincial Grand Stewards , and the Masters , Past Masters , and Wardens of all lodges within the province , are members of the Provincial Grand Lodge . " Brother T . F . is anxious to know by what right , law , or constitution a Mason not qualified as before-mentioned
can be appointed to an office in a Provincial Grand Lodge ? The right for the Provincial Grand Master to appoint a brother not officially a member of the Prov . G . L ., owing to his being neither a Master , Past Master , nor Warden of a lodge in the province ( though a contributing Master
Mason therein ) , is conferred by the Book of Constitutions . All ofiicers of a Provincial Grand Lodge ( as also of the Grand Lodge ) below that of Provincial Grand Deacon may be filled by Master Masons who are eli gible by reason of contributing to a lodge in the province , hence the Provincial Grand Master may appoint such brethren accordingly ,
and thus constitute those members of the Prov . G . Lodge who were not officially so before . It is plain also by the reading of the law on the subject , that Provincial Chaplains , Treasurers , Registrars and Secretaries may be selected from contributing Master Masons , and I believe are so appointed or elected in small provinces frequently ,
though the fewer officers elected by such means the better . In large provinces it is usual to select the provincial officers from Masttrs and Past Masters only , some also making it the rule for brethren to serve as Provincial Grand Stewards prior to being appointed to the " purple . " The judicious use of such a privilege by the Provincial
Grand Master , by conferring honours when deserved , and only then , is often the means of stimulating worthy Masons to continue their services for the welfare of the Order , but the raising to the " purple " of the drones and Masonic shams in a province is an abuse of the office . WILLIAM J AMES HIICIIAN .
MASONIC JURISPRUDENCE . To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Am I right in assuming that ofiicers of private lodges in visiting other lodges , as well as Grand Lodge ,
cannot be cjnsidered properly clothed unless wearing their collar and jewel of office ? I take my ground on the first section in the Book of Constitutions , under the head of Regalia . I remain , yours fraternally , SKIII . I . IIM .
MASONIC PREFIXES . To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — The last paragraph of my communication respecting Masonic Prefixes is unfortunately spoilt in the " Freemason " by the omission of the word not between
are and entitled . To complete the letter as intended I will again write it . 1 . Provincial Officers , not Present or Past Masters , are not entitled to the prefix . Worshi pful . All Provincial Grand Officers ( being actual or Past Masters ) , excepting the Provincial Grand Master , are to be styled
Worshipful . 2 . The Provincial Grand Master being designated Right Worshipful . 3 . Grand Officers below the rank of Grand Secretary are to be styled Worshipful . 4 . Grand Officers below the rank of Grand Warden and
above the rank of orand Deacon are entitled to the prefix Veryj Worshipful , and such officers only . 5 . Deputy Grand Master and Pro Grand Master are to be styled Most Worshipful . These particulars , obtained from the circular issued by the authority of the M . W . G . M . ( the lamented Earl of Zetland ) , are more fully noted in my communication in last
week ' s " Freemason ; ' and as that letter is the only official guide issued for Masoaic prefixes it should be carefully studied by all concerned . I may also state that the titles as above are those invariably used to designate the Grand Officers in all the Quarterly Communications from 1813 according to my examination of the whole series . These prefixes are to be observed either in Provincial
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Discontinue The "Freemason."
Hy amused by these little acts , which for some jfy cause , or at no cause at all , evidence , that ^ some minds a delusion exists , that by their patronage or their opposition , by the continuance or discontinuance of their subscription ,
they can in any meast . re , affect either the pro-( rress or the prosperity of the " Freemason , " or rnanifest their approval , or exhibit their displeasure . Let all such , whoever they may be , be good enough to bear in mind that strong in the public op inion of a kindly and discerning Craft ,
the " Freemason intends to go on its way , relying alike on that judicious and business like management which has given to it its solidity
and its success , as well as on that free , impartial , and honest , and independent tone of thought and teaching which has characterized its past annals , marks its present material well doing ,
and has earned for it the good will , approval , fraternal confidence and cheerful countenance , not only of the Order in Great Britain , but of the Anglo-Saxon brotherhood , nay of Cosmopolitan Freemasonry .
The Comparative Cost Of The Boys' School.
THE COMPARATIVE COST OF THE BOYS' SCHOOL .
This question , which is a very important question in itself , had hardly full justice done to it at the recent discussion at Freemasons' Hall . The orig inal accusations brought against the School in the pamphlets of unpleasant ami un-Masonic memory were , that there was gross
mismanagement , grosser . extravagance ; that the accounts were kept slovenly , and that Bro . Binckes arrogated too much to himself . But when at Sheffield , the province of Yorkshire , worked upon by there utterly misleading , and we feel bound to add rtalevolent statements of personal animosity ,
however much it might be affected to be denied , endeavoured to frame the articles of impeachment , the whole venue was changed at once . The original allegations amount , alike in open and suppressed pamphlets , to deliberate charges of malappropriation and embezzlement , and the
suppressed pamphlet was , in our humble opinion , libellous and actionable . Think of any brother Mason putting into print with regard to a miserable 8 s . 9 d ., or 9 s . 4 d ., of a savings bank account for the boys " who has got the money ? " in this way implicating the honour of brethren in every way
distinguished by long service and high character . But , as we said , all the charges of the previous pamphlets were abandoned at Sheffield , and the point put forward was the excessive cost of the school , and comparisons were made with otherinstitutions . Now it is on this point clear , that those
who affected to lead West Yorkshire were utterly ignorant of the subject , and did not really understand anything practically about the matter . For it had been shown in 186 9 that the question of comparative cost could hardly be fairly entered into , as , owing to its peculiar " status , " the
Masonic Boys' School was a school " sui generis , and must have in many things an exceptional standard , alike of cost , and even education . But supposing that a comparison was made , the Boys ' School came well out of it , and so far from there being any real cause of complaint , the truth of
the case required that proper eulogium should be passed upon the managers of the School . And in 1 876 we apprehend that the same state of things is to be found , and it is very amusing to note that these inculpstors of the School are " hoist " u y their own " petard , " actually silenced by
their own figures . Take the Commercial Travellers' School , which we all know is a very Wt'H managed institution , economically administered . It had , according to its repoit , at the close ° * ' 87 . 5 i 288 boys and girls . Its office expenses were £ 1301 os . 4 d . against Masonic Boys
* ' 59 [ os . with 156 boys . The report of the West Yorkshire Committee ma le the office expenses J I 2 74 'os . 9 d . ( Bro . Binckes puts them at *> 59 'os . iod . ) , but even bytheir own reckoning their statement that the average is ^" us . 11 . V . absolutel y incorrect . If £ 1274 t 8 s . 9 d . is divided
by 156 , the product will be £ 8 3 s ., and a few fractions per head . We invite the attention of brethren in West Yorkshire to the subject , as it is a very serious blot on the calculations of the committee . The school salaries of tne Commercial Travellers' are £ 1317 8 s . iod ., those of the Masonic Boys' School to the end of
The Comparative Cost Of The Boys' School.
1875 , Bro - Bi » ckes , £ 1286 2 s . 8 d . We may note here that the West Yorkshire Comnvttee only deals with the accounts to the close of J 874 , and , according to their report , the accounts for wages and education to the close of 1874 , amounted
to—Educational , £ 833 16 s . ; Wages , s £$ 2 i is ., in all , se ? i 354 17 s . As regards food , the averages of the Royal Medical Benevolent , Clergy , Orphan , and British Orphan , amounted to i £ i 6 14 s . per head , that of the Masonic Boys' to £ ii 1 is . 9 d . Is anv further comparison needful ? The truth is ,
the whole agitation is a personal one , and based on no reliable data of any kind whatever . The annual cost per school , as no one knows better than Bro . Gill , and many of the brethren who signed the Report , is no ciiterion as to the comparative cost . For this reason , that each school
has to be judged by its own details of work , standard , and arrangement . In some schools the children , for instance , do net have meat daily . In this school or that school meat is only given three or four times a week , while the allowance of clothing is scantier than with us . It is idle for
any one to say " we can educate at Sidcote for £ 33 I 9 $ - ; or at Ackwotth , £ 3 r 103 . 6 d . ; or Yorkshire Boys' School , £ 33 ; and . jtherefore , the Royal Masonic Institution for Boys is extravagantly managed , and must be reduced to their minimum . " It is neither reasonable nor , in truth ,
Masonic so to argue ! Vve apprehend that the question of comparative cost of the . School has been often considered by the House Committee and the Quarterly Court , and that those best competent to form an opinion on the subject have long since carefully arranged the present scale of
expenditure . Any life-governor can give notice of a committee to enquire into such a question , but from our experience of schools generally we do not fancy that in London much , if any , saving could be made . Bro . Gill fairly admitted that the proper
course for the malcontents was to have gone originally to the Quarterly Court , and we hope that now it is admitted that there is no foundation for any of these statements or charges , this unseemly agitation and un-Masonie irritation may cease , and that our good friends in West Yorkshire will return to their normal condition
of activity and zeal , of kind feeling and brotherl y love , of geniality ^ and goodwill , of constitutional progress , and of Masonic feeling . Of their earnestness and energy we are all aware , as well as of their many good qualities , and we have been much grieved to have seen them led into the " Caudine Forks " of a hopeless cause , and
of unavoidable defeat . It is a most serious thing to lower West Yorkshire in ths good opinion of the other provinces , and , above all , to weaken or take away the normal and well-earned character of our good West Yoikshire brethren for sobriety of mind and common sense , for Masonic fairness and fraternal good feeling , for all the graces , in fact , of the true Craftsman ' s character .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
t \ Ve do not hold ourselves responsible tor , or even as approving o ! the opinions expressed by ourcorrespondcnls , but vve wish , ix a spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . — lip . ]
REGALIA . T 11 the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir anil Brother , — I regret that while the question of " Master Masons' Jewels " was recently passing through your columns 1 had not ai opportunity of making one or two remarks thereon , but I take this as a fitting place , though
under a more general head . I agree with " A Past Master" ( Feb . 26 th ) that " the compasses and square only" belong absolutely to Past D . G . M . ' s "—vide Constitutions , page 119 . The "fivepointed star" I take to be in accordance with Article 2 , page 118 , and because it is not otherwise specially appropriated .
There are , however , other points at issue on the Regalia question . I low is it that ( say ) ninety-nine out of every hundred Past Mastcrj wear a gold or gilt jewel when the Constitutions distinctly say it shall be in silver?—( vide pages 1 21 and 122)— " except , " it goes on to say , " in the Lodge of Aniiquity , No . 2 , and the British Lodge , No . 8 , which are golden or gilt . " Why don't these two lodges
look after their privileges ? This is really an important point and worth following up . I would make a passing remark that although a neat , artistic , and symbolical design is provided for a Past Master's jewel—{ vide plate 12 ) —is it not strange that so very many brethren should disport themselves in over-ornamented and tawdry specimens of " Brummagem . "
Original Correspondence.
Page 125 says that the " three several sets of two right angles " worn by W . M . ' s and P . M . ' s in place of the three rosettes on the M . M . 's apron shall be of ribbon " of same colour as the lining and edging of the apron . " Then how is it so very many W . M . ' s and P . M . 's wear those emblems in silver instead of blue ribbon ?
Are nst the answers to these questions to be found in the old tale—general ignorance of that most concise yet comprehensive Book of Constitutions ; but when we find so many Past Masters violating the rules they pledged themselves to support there should be a little allowance made to young M . M . ' s seeking to decorate themselves . In
conclusion , I would venture to recommend both classes to read up this subject ( there are only 8 pages ) ; those who have read it may benefit by re-ptrusing it ; there are pearls to be found for those who pride themselves on being quite " au fait , " as on page r 24 it says that " officers and past
officers of lodges may have the emblems of their offices in silver or white in the centre of the apron ; " such is , to my taste , an improvement , for it fills up what otherwise appears a meaningless blank . Fraternally yours , " AD'REM . "
MEMBERSHIP OF A PROVINCIAL GRAND LODGE . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In answer to Brother T . F ., we will find by reference to the Book of Constitutions that " the actual and Past Provincial Grand Officers , whilst they remain
subscribing members to a lodge in the province , with the actual Provincial Grand Stewards , and the Masters , Past Masters , and Wardens of all lodges within the province , are members of the Provincial Grand Lodge . " Brother T . F . is anxious to know by what right , law , or constitution a Mason not qualified as before-mentioned
can be appointed to an office in a Provincial Grand Lodge ? The right for the Provincial Grand Master to appoint a brother not officially a member of the Prov . G . L ., owing to his being neither a Master , Past Master , nor Warden of a lodge in the province ( though a contributing Master
Mason therein ) , is conferred by the Book of Constitutions . All ofiicers of a Provincial Grand Lodge ( as also of the Grand Lodge ) below that of Provincial Grand Deacon may be filled by Master Masons who are eli gible by reason of contributing to a lodge in the province , hence the Provincial Grand Master may appoint such brethren accordingly ,
and thus constitute those members of the Prov . G . Lodge who were not officially so before . It is plain also by the reading of the law on the subject , that Provincial Chaplains , Treasurers , Registrars and Secretaries may be selected from contributing Master Masons , and I believe are so appointed or elected in small provinces frequently ,
though the fewer officers elected by such means the better . In large provinces it is usual to select the provincial officers from Masttrs and Past Masters only , some also making it the rule for brethren to serve as Provincial Grand Stewards prior to being appointed to the " purple . " The judicious use of such a privilege by the Provincial
Grand Master , by conferring honours when deserved , and only then , is often the means of stimulating worthy Masons to continue their services for the welfare of the Order , but the raising to the " purple " of the drones and Masonic shams in a province is an abuse of the office . WILLIAM J AMES HIICIIAN .
MASONIC JURISPRUDENCE . To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Am I right in assuming that ofiicers of private lodges in visiting other lodges , as well as Grand Lodge ,
cannot be cjnsidered properly clothed unless wearing their collar and jewel of office ? I take my ground on the first section in the Book of Constitutions , under the head of Regalia . I remain , yours fraternally , SKIII . I . IIM .
MASONIC PREFIXES . To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — The last paragraph of my communication respecting Masonic Prefixes is unfortunately spoilt in the " Freemason " by the omission of the word not between
are and entitled . To complete the letter as intended I will again write it . 1 . Provincial Officers , not Present or Past Masters , are not entitled to the prefix . Worshi pful . All Provincial Grand Officers ( being actual or Past Masters ) , excepting the Provincial Grand Master , are to be styled
Worshipful . 2 . The Provincial Grand Master being designated Right Worshipful . 3 . Grand Officers below the rank of Grand Secretary are to be styled Worshipful . 4 . Grand Officers below the rank of Grand Warden and
above the rank of orand Deacon are entitled to the prefix Veryj Worshipful , and such officers only . 5 . Deputy Grand Master and Pro Grand Master are to be styled Most Worshipful . These particulars , obtained from the circular issued by the authority of the M . W . G . M . ( the lamented Earl of Zetland ) , are more fully noted in my communication in last
week ' s " Freemason ; ' and as that letter is the only official guide issued for Masoaic prefixes it should be carefully studied by all concerned . I may also state that the titles as above are those invariably used to designate the Grand Officers in all the Quarterly Communications from 1813 according to my examination of the whole series . These prefixes are to be observed either in Provincial