The "Cosmo." For 1889.

THE " COSMO . " FOR 1889 .

Those of us who can remember when there was no " Cosmo . ' wonder now that the want of such a trusty guide for the " higher degrees " was not sooner provided . This very useful publication is in its nineteenth year of issue , and I may venture to say that there is no other work of the kind so well known throughout tbe Masonic world .

Its information respecting other Grand Lodges , particularly those situated in Europe , not forgetting our close neighbours , Ireland and Scotland , is invaluable , and though less is furnished of the Grand Lodges in the United States , there is no lack as to the subordinates , under the

rule of governing bodies in our Colonies . All Masonic Degrees and Grand Lodges , & c , wherever located , are duly attended to , so that brethren on carefully studying the contents of the " Cosmo . " may arrive at a correct notion as to the widespread ramifications of the Society of Free and Accepted Masons .

I have , however , now but to consider the Degrees considered as beyond , or perhaps a better term would be , additional to , those of the recognised Craft ceremonies , & c . The Grand Mark lodge leads off , as the largest body , with 39 8 subordinates . The extraordinary increase of this organisation may be tested in several ways , particularly when it is remembered that

its formation dates from some 33 years ago ! lake , however , my own case . I was advanced in St . Aubyn Lodge , No . 64 , Devonport , in 1863 , on the formation of that body , so that it was then the last on the roll . Now , including the " Time Immemorial " lodges ( rather a fanciful title for some of the 13 ) there are close on 400 lodges , or over six times the number that were in existence 26 years ago !

Often enough the Grand Wardens of the Grand Lodge of England are content with similar positions in the Mark , and the roll of Prov . Grand Masters of the latter Grand Lodge is almost on a par with its august

superior . Several of the Mark Provinces are very large , and do their full share in preserving and fostering a continued interest in the Fraternity , not a few of the lodges promoting a love for the study of Masonic history , by

considering the arguments in favour of " additional degrees ; " and beyond question , causing a more united spirit , Masonically , in towns and neighbourhoods where conflicting interests tend at limes to friction amongst the members of competing Crait lodges .

The Benevolent Funds of the Grand Mark Lodge ( annuities , grants , and educational agencies , & c ) , are rapidly becoming of value and importance , and are excellent supplemental aids to the regular " Board of Benevolence , " and our great central Masonic Charities . The education of children

in an especial manner calls for warm approval and generous support , and those conversant with the practical aspects of these Mark Funds are loudest in their praise , their quiet unostentatious work being of the best possible character .

Some 80 Ark Mariners' lodges are attached to as many Mark Bodies , and the "Grand Council of the Royal and Select Masters , " with 12 subordinates , and the •¦ Grand Council of the Allied Masonic Degrees , " with 25 councils , are wisely or unwisely under the wing of the Mark Grand Lodge ; the " Order of the Secret Monitor " being possibly a future

candidate lor absorption , when it has been long enough unrecognised to constitute a claim for such patronage ! For my part , I am old fashioned enough to prefer the Mark Grand Lodge , without any additions , and regret much the need there was for the incorporation of other Degrees , Mason ic only in name , and of admittedly very modern fabrication .

The " A . and A . Rite" for the 4 to the 33 has already been exhaustively considered in the columns of the Freemason , but it may not be amiss to state that this select and well managed Body is doing a noble work in its own particular way , and its prosperity is so well assured , that any remarks on that score are quite superfluous . Like the Mark , it has no lack

of distinguished support , from the greatest Freemason in the land to those who are of the most zealous and enthusiastic of the Brotherhood . About ioo active chapters of the Rose Croix testify to the vitality of the Society , and a visit to Golden-square , the grand library , & c , will amply prove the

extent , character , and conspicuous usefulness of this fine organisation . The " Royal Order of Scotland , " worked in part under its wing , is , of course , controlled from headquarters at Edinburgh , as the other Provincial branches , but these , and all other Degrees , are amply represented in the " Cosmo . "

The United Orders of the Temple and Malta , with 122 preceptories ( a great number of which work the K . of Malta ) , is under most distinguished management , and , doubtles ? , by a few wise concessions would resume its popularity in the provinces as heretofore . The courtesy at Headquarters , as with the other Degrees , is all that could be desired ; and if " Past Rank " were allowed , a modern grievance would at once disappear .

The "Red Cross of Constantine , K . H . S , & c , is becoming more popular again , with over 75 active conclaves , but it will take no little labour and management to bring it up to its old experience and position . Its antiquity or age goes back to some hundred years or more , and its ceremonies are of an interesting character .

The " Rosicrucian Society of England , " vvhich draws its members horn the Masonic Fraternity , is also duly described , and hence it will be found that the " Cosmo . " is a " friend in need" as to all necessary Masonic details , whether at Home or Abroad , Craft , Arch , Mark , and all other Degrees worked . throughout the Universe . W . J . HUGHAN .

Masonic Facts Versus Fictions.

MASONIC FACTS versus FICTIONS .

BY H . SADLER . Bro . Lane will , I trust , pardon the liberty I have taken with the title of his communication to the Freemason of the 2 nd inst . Being rather busy just now , it seemed to me hardly necessary to waste time by hunting for a new heading , when by exchanging one little word for another the same

title would do for both of us , especially as nearly one half of what he is pleased to designate " Facts" are , in my opinion , pure " Fictions . " I have not to my knowledge ever disputed the accuracy of the first four of his statements , three of which are historical facts , and the truth of the fourth is self-evident ; I shall therefore dismiss them without further comment . A

"fact , " if I rightly understand the word , is something that has actually occurred , and of which there exists reliable evidence . I need hardly remind Bro . Lane that assertion is not evidence , and that mere conjecture cannot possibly establish a fact . As he has taken it upon himself , evidently after mature deliberation , to dispute my theory , I have a perfect right to call for

the evidence on which he founds the assertion " That with such knowledge these Freemasons undoubtedly sought and obtained membership with one or more of the lodges then working in London , " When this evidence is forthcoming , I shall be prepared to admit the probability of there being

some truth in his sixth assertion , " That one of the results of their membership was the acquisition of the knowledge that some variation , either in ceremonial or in some other important particulars , existed between the London lodges and those to which they formerly belonged . " Bro . Lane ' s seventh assertion will not , in my opinion , withstand the test of criticism .

"That these Freemasons could never have been in a position to say that the Mother Grand Lodge ( subsequently styled ' Moderns ') or its subordinate lodges , did not practise what they tei med ' Ancient' Masonry , unless they

had previously , by becoming members of the ' Modern' organisation , made themselves acquainted vvith their peculiar and distinctive methods , and that these methods were contrary to , or different from , those to which they had been elsewhere accustomed . "

Now , according to my " common- sense " view of the subject , it is quite possible for a knowledge of certain differences to have been obtained by the simple process of visiting " one or more of the lodges then working in London , " or even by the still easier method of Masonic intercourse . Bro . Lane's Sth article is partly fact and partly fiction , unless he is in

possession of evidence of which I am in ignorance , and , as I have never disputed the former , I shall only ask for his authority for saying " That consequently , finding the ' Modern ' methods were unlike theirs , and possibly being unable to obtain any footing for their own theories or practices , these Freemasons left the ' Modern ' lodges . "

So far as I know , there is not a particle of evidence in existence to justify the assumption that a single member of the body that met on the 17 th July , 1751 , to organise a rival Grand . Lodge , had ever belonged to a lodge under the Grand Lodge of England . I must beg to differ most strongly with Bro . Lane when he says that his

" way of looking at the subject' violates no principle , it ignores no evidence , and it strains at no ' facts . ' It , moreover , coincides with what their own Grand Secretary , Laurence Dermott , himself wrote , as early as 6 th December , 1752 , when the *• Ancient' organisation had not been 17 months in existence , and when the circumstances must have been better known than now . "

Now , in my humble opinion , Bro . Lane ' s " way of looking at the subject '' does everything which he says it does not do , and , moreover , it does not coincide with what Dermott wrote on the 6 th December , 1752— " That many

manuscripts were lost amongst the lodges lately modernised , where a vestige of the Ancient Craft was not suffered to be revived or practised , and that it was for this reason so many of them withdrew from lodges ( tinder the Modem sanction ) to support the true Ancient system . "

It is with the greatest reluctance that I give expression to opinions so diametrically opposite to those of a brother for whom , as a Mason , I have the highest possible regard , and whose enormous labours , as evinced in the compilation of the most difficult , as well as one of the most useful , books to be found in the catalogue of Masonic publications , no one can more appreciate than I do . *

I take this opportunity ol assuring him , although I feel that such assurance is hardly necessary , that it is not from any feeling of antagonism or love of contradiction that I oppose so strongly the theory which he has undertaken to defend . Nothing but the firm conviction , arrived at after

long and careful consideration , that the history of Freemasonry in England has not been a true history , would have induced me to take the stand I have taken on this question of the origin of the " Ancient Grand Lodge . " I infer from Bro . Lane ' s third assertion— " That numbers of Freemasons ,

many of whom had , undoubtedly , been members of lodges in Ireland , were resident in London in 1751 ; " he imagines that in the year mentioned a secession from the Grand Lodge of England , of IrUh Masons strong enough to make five distinct lodges , took place . If that be really his opinion , I vvould ask him for the evide nee of a secession at that particular

period . And I appeal to his " common se nse " it such an event occurred at that time , how is it that no mention of a secession is to be found in the records of the body from which they are supposed to have seceded until

twenty-four years afterwards , when the oiiginator of the secession story p laces the period of the schism about five or six years further back than Bro . Lane does , and the same authority subsequently recedes still another five or six years ? The natural and " common sense" inference , I think , must be