Comments On Bro. Jacob Norton's Masonic History.

well-filled purse . Taken generally , they were certainly not the sort o people to be found in the ranks of the rival Society . " On page 345 , Bro . NORTON mentions the earliest Minute Book of the Chapter to which allusion has been made as being in a flourishing condition in 1765 , as he states the book begins with a record of the transactions at a

meeting held on the 22 d of March , 1765 . It must not , however , be inferred that this date marks the earliest existence of the Chapter , —the manuscript has all the appearance of a continuation , not a beginning ; but whether or not minutes of the transactions had been hitherto kept , there must have been one or more meetings prior to that on the 22 d of March , as a balance of 12 s . is paid over by the brother at whose house the meeting was held .

It is to be regretted that the names of those present are not given with the exception of those of four candidates for exaltation and the name of the proprietor of the house . " The most Excellent Grands and Brethren met at Mr . Ingcs , " is all that we have to guide us as to the number that attended . On the 12 th of June following , the names of all present are recorded , making a total of 34 , of which number three were exalted on the 22 d March , two on

the Sth of April , and four on the day the meeting was held . Only one of this number can I trace as having been at any lime connected with Dermolt ' s party . On the Sth of January , 176 ( 1 , the celebrated Thomas Dunckerley joined the Chapter ; he was exalted at Portsmouth in 1 754 . Bro . John Turner was also admitted a member , gratis . On the 12 lh of March following , a Br . John Allman , whose name is not in the list of members , petitioned for

charity , and received 10 s . fid . On the 16 th of May another petitioner was relieved with a like amount . On the nth of June Br . Power , of Plymouth , visited the Chapter . On the 22 d of July , Br . Mathews , whose Chapter is not stated , was a visitor . On the 30 IV 1 of July , Bros . Berkeley and Spencer , the Treasurer and Secretary of the Grand Lodge , visited and joined the

Chapter . Several other visitors are mentioned at this period , but the records give nothing but their names . In 1 7 6 7 this Chapter was formed into a Grand Chapter , with power to issue charters , after the manner of the Grand Lodge , [ although independent of that body ; and in 17 61 ) eight Chapters were constituted in different parts of the country .

It will thus be seen that while the Royal Arch Degree of the " Ancients " was practically dormant , or existed only in name , that of the " Moderns " was in a flourishing condition , and was warmly supported by the leaders of that body who would have been most unlikely to have taken it up , had it , as has been asserted , emanated from their despised rivals .

On page 338 , Bro . NORTON mentions Dassigny ' s pamphlet , published in Dablin in 1744 , but as he does not state what that writer had to say on the subject of Royal Arch Masonry I shall be obliged if you will re-print the following from page 32 of the work in question :

" Now as the land marks of the constitution of Freemasonry are universally the same throughout all kingdoms , and are so well fixt that they will not admit of removal , how comes it to pass that some have been led away with ridiculous innovations , an example of which I shall prove by a certain propagator of a false system some few years ago in this city , who imposed on several very worthy men , under a pretence of being Master of the Royal

Arch , which he asserted he had brought from the city of York ; and that the beauties of the Craft did principally consist of the knowledge of this valuable piece of Masonry . However he carried on his scheme for several months , and many of the learned and wise were his followers , till at length his fallacious art was discovered by a brother of probity and wisdom , who had some small space before attained that excellent part of Masonry in London ,

and plainly proved that his doctrine was false ; whereupon , the Brethren justly despised him , and ordered him to be excluded from all benefits of the Craft , and altho ' some of the fraternity have expressed an uneasiness at this matter being kept a secret from them ( since they had already passed thro ' the usual degrees of probation ) , I cannot help being of opinion that they have no right to any such benefit until they make a proper application , and

are received with due formality , and as it is an organiz'd body of men who have passed the chair , and given undeniable proofs of their skill in Architecture , it cannot be treated with too much reverence , and more especially since the charactersof the present members of that particular Lodge are untainted , and their behaviour judicious and unexceptionable ; so that there cannot be the least hinge to hang a doubt on , but that they are most excellent Masons .

" I cannot help informing the Brethren that there is lately arrived in this city a certain itinerant Mason , whose judgment ( as he declares ) is so far illumin'd , and whose optics arc so strong that they can bear the view of the most lucid rays of the sun at noon-day , and altho' we have contented ourselves with three material steps to approach our Sitinmuiu Bottum , the immortal God , yet he presumes to acquaint us that he can add three more , which when properly plac'd may advance us to the highest heavens . "

Here wc have the earliest distinct and reliable mention of Royal Arch Masonry known to be in existence in which that Degree is said to have been imported into Ireland from the North and South of England , under two different systems , several years prior to Dermotl ' s exaltation , if not before he was made a Mason , and yet we are asked to believe that he brought the Degree from Dublin and established it in London " somewhere between 1746 and 1750 . "

I have said that two systems of Royal Arch Masonry were taken to Ireland—one from York and the other from London—one orthodox , the other heterodox ; or , the one that Bro . Dassigny belonged to , and the one he didn ' t belong to ; however , it would appear from the last paragraph quoted , wherein the writer refers to " a certain itinerant Mason lately arrived in this city , " that cither a third system of Royal Arch Masonry , or some fresh off-shoot , is alluded to , as having been introduced several years subsequent to the importations from Yotk and London .

An excellent work , just published , " The History of the Lodge of Fidelity , Leeds , " contains a copy of a petition for a new lodge in that town ; this petition which is dated 121 I 1 November , 17110 , is ornamented with Royal Arch emblems , and in it is a reference to that Degree , which , in my opinion , is unmistakable , although it is not mentioned by name .

It will thus be seen that Koyal Arch Masonry was practised by the adherents of the regular Grand Lodge of England from about 1740-44 , and we have every reason for believing that it was continued , as Dunckerley , their great luminary , was exalted at Portsmouth in 175 | ; then there is the

reference in the Leed ' s petition in 17 O 0 . VVe have evidence that it was flourishing in York in 1762 , ami that a K . A . Chapter was working in London early in 1765—a fairly strong chain uf proofs , all things considered , that Dermott had nothing whalevci lo do wilh the introduction of the Koyai Arch Degree into lingland .

I must also take exceptions to another statement of Bro . NORTON ' , on page 335 ' wherein he says : " Now , about that time , some Masons seceded fiom the Grand Lodge of England aid formed a new Grand Lodge . " In the legal profession 1 believe it is the invariable practice , when a statement

Comments On Bro. Jacob Norton's Masonic History.

is made by counsel , for or against his client , he is called upon to produce evidence in support of such statement ; in like manner I call upon Bro . NORTON for evidence in support of his assertion , that a secession from the Grand Lodge of England led to the formation of a new Grand Lodge in

London abiut the middle of the 1 Sth century . Bro . NOR ION and I have already had a friendl y haul or two over this question , and I had fondl y hoped that , though I mi g ht not have convinced him , I had done something towards modifying his opinions ; however , it seems lo be a case of " Love ' s labour lost , " so far as he is concerned .

Now , 1 maintain that nollrng in the nature of a secession occurred at tl ) e period indicated—that a very great majority of the brethren who formed the organisation of 1731 were Irish Masons who had never belonged to properl y constituted English Lodges ; and , further , that there is not a particle of evidence in existence tending to prove that a single one of them had ever owed allegiance to the Grand Lodge of England ; moreover , I challenge Bro .

NORTON , or anyone else , to produce , or even indicate , a document , either written or printed , prior to the year 1775 . which contains the faintest hint of these people having seceded . It is the simplest thing in the world to make an assertion , anyone can do it quite as easily as Bro . NORTON , but to properly analyse the assertion and show its utter worthlessness , requires time and much more space than I can expect to be allowed to monopolise in the columns of your journal ; I must , therefore , content myself for the present

with simply referring your readers to my previous writings on this subject for evidence in support of my theory— " Masonic Facts and Fictions , " published in London , 1 SS 7 ( now out of print ) , The Freemason , London , December , 1 SS 7 , January , iSSS , and February and March , 18 S 9 ; The Freemasons ' Chronicle , London , from December , tSHS , to April , 188 9 —wherein I took considerable pains to answer Bro . NORTON ' " Comments on Masonic Facts and Fictions . "

Since the publication of the foregoing other confirmatory evidence has come lo li ght in the shape of a pamphlet of 64 pages , Svo , entitled , " A Defence ol Free-Masonry asiPracticed in the Regular Lodges , Both Foreign and Domestic , under the Constitution of the English Grand-Master , " London , 176 s .

A ; brief notice of this pamphlet must suffice for present purposes , but I hope shortly to be able to reproduce it in full . It is by an anonymous writer ( who doubtless had good reasons for not disclosing his name ) , and is avowedly " A Refutation of Mr . Dermolt's absurd and ridiculous account o ( Free-masonry in his Book entitled Ahiman Rezon ; and the several Queries therein , reflecting on the regular Masons , briefly considered and answered . "

Dermolt ' s book referred to was published in 1764 , and in it appeared a jo . ular description of the ori g in of "Modern Masonry , " of which Bro . NORTON has given you a small specimen . It was probably written more for the amusement of Dermolt ' s admirers than for any other purpose and is never taken seriously in the present day , unless by Bro . NORTON . When I first directed attention to the question of the "Ancients , " I was not aware of

the existence of this pamphlet ^ the only one , I believe , in this country—and the English fraternity generally are much indebted to Bro . W . J . Hughan for having added it to the Grand Lodge collection . I will not now attempt to criticise it in any way , but will simply quote a few paragraphs _ and leave the reader to form his own conclusions . I may , however remark , in passing , that there is nol a word in it pointing to secession , although abuse of the " Ancients " in general , and Dermott in particular , is one of its

distinguishing features . On page iS , the writer says : "But the English Masons should be cautious with whom they converse , as there are many irregular Masons , i . e . made in Lodges under the title of Ancient or York , who sometime ago pretended to be constituted or authorised by the Grand-Master of Ireland , who ( bye the bye ) , I am credibly informed , refused to countenance them , as it would be highly absurd for one Grand Master to constitute Lodges in the Territories ot another . "

On page 26 , he says : " And it is certain , that the Lvdgcs at York approved the conduct of those at London in the choice of a Grand Master , Is :., since we have no account of their choosing one , neither have wc heard of their having a Grand Master of their own , till of late years , when some

Brethren of Ire / a / id , who affect singularity , being refused the countenance of their own Grand-Master , and for other reasons too well-known , were glad to assume the title of Ancient York Masons , and under that character have influenced sonic Noble Brethren ( whom we may reasonably conclude have taken no pains to inquire into these particulars ) to preside over them . "

Page 3 O : " Though there are several persons of Character and Ability among the Ancient Masons , the greater part of them are a set of illiterate and mean Persons , such as Chairmen , Porters , Walking Poulterers , and the like , chiefly Natives of Ireland , who finding it not convenient to stay in their own Country , have lied hither lo get an HONEST Livelihood . "

I he reader is not expected to accept the whole of the foregoing extracts as gospel truth , he is merely requ-sted to observe that the writer of them i " 1765 probably had a better knowledge of the facts than Bro . NORTON has in the year 18 94 , and that he does not say that the " Ancients " seceded , but he does say they were Irish Masons .

I fear to encroach further on your valuable space , or I should like to offer a word or two on Bro . NORTON ' concluding paragraph on page ^ sg , beginning : " Now , Dermott made his ignorant adherents believe , " & c . I have previously informed Bro . NORTON that the words " Ancient " and " Modern ' were not Dermolt ' s selection but Anderson ' s , and the first " Rules and Orders " of the " Ancients , " written in 1751 , printed in " Masonic Facts and Fictions , " page 70 , show that they styled themselves " Most Ancient " before Djrmott was a member of that body

, I have also proved , by documentary evidence , that the adherents of the Regular Grand Lodge called themselves " Moderns , " and were rather proud of the title than otherwise until they found that it did them more harm than good , and then they endeavoured to repudiate it , and laid claim to being the real " Ancient Grand Lodge of York . " I will now add a fresh piece of information which may possibly be of interest to some ol your readersas I am sure it . will be to Bro . N ORTON .

, I have before me a Masonic song entitled " The Modern Masons . " R printed on folio paper with the music , and has a handsome pictorial heading about 7 inches and a half by four inches and a half ; it is engraved by Bro . B . Cole , who , for many years , was the engraver to the Grand Lodge . There are six verses highly laudatory of Modern Alasonry , beginning thus

" Li-t Ancient Masons boast their stile , where all the social virtues join , While Moiiarchson their Orders smile , to rival them ' s notour Design ; On scenes of mirth we build our Fame , contented with a Modern ' s Name . " I am not aware that I have ever met with the song before , and shall be obliged if either of your readers can furnish me with the name of the author , and the date or year of publication . From its general appearance I should imagine it to have been published about 1760 .