-
Articles/Ads
Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 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.
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 , —Several Past Masters and brethren have requested me to return our thanks to our worthy Brother William J . Hughan , not only for his interesting work , " Masonic Sketches and Reprints " in connection with English Masonry , but
for his valuable communications respecting " Freemasonry in Ireland , " which appear in THE FREEMASON , and we trust he will continue to give us more light . We intend to ask our Masonic friends to favour him with any old Masonic documents they may have , and hope many others may be induced
to do the same . There are many old lodges in this country that have never ceased working since their warrants were granted , and no doubt there is much valuable information to be obtained if a search , was instituted . Yours very fraternally ,
CHARLES SCOTT , P . M . 350 ( I . C . ) , P . P . J . G . W ., Devon . Strathrov , Omagh , April 25 , 1871 .
THE 1717 THEORY . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I regret to notice , at page 251 , a letter from Bro . Buchan , in which he implies a charge against me of want of good faith towards yourself and your readers , in what he
supposes is the suppression of part of the statute of Masons , 1425 . Bro . Buchan , being a Scotsman , is probably not familiar with the English statute book , and this must be his excuse . for so grave an insinuation . Permit me to explain that you did print the statute of Masons in extenso . The English statues
are divided into chapters ( each of which is a statute" ) and arc now invariably published in separate form ; but , at the earlier period referred to , many of such chapters were frequently published in one general statute . The one in question is "The statute made at Westminster the third yeere of King
Henry the sixt . It contains five chapters as follows : —1 , Masons ; 2 , " Shecpe and Wollys" from Flanders ; 3 , Offences against the Customs ; 4 , As to the Staple of Calais ; 5 , As to a Commisson concerning the river Ley . 1 think before making these strong assertions Uro . Buchan would do well cither
to make enquiry for himself , or to invite further explanation in your columns . Even in the statute of labourers to which he alludes , masons and carpenters are prominently distinguished from all other classes . This statute ( 1361 ) in dealing with labourers enacts " That the Lords of Townes may
take and imprison them by rifteene dayes if they will not instilie themselves and then to send them to the next gaolc , there to abide until they will instilie them by the forme of the statute . " Subsequently it proceeds : " And that as well carpenters and masons be comprised in this ordinance , as all
other labourers , servants , and artificers . And that the carpenters and masons take from henceforth wages by the day , and not by the week , nor in other manner . And the chief masters of carpenters and masons take foure pence by the day , and the other three pence or two pence according as they be
worth , and that all alliances and couincs of masons and carpenters , and congregations , chapters , ordinances and oalhes betwixt them made , shall be from henceforlh void and wholly annulled . " Here , in the statute of labourers itself , we have . remarkable distinction between the masons and
carpenters , and the ordinary classes of artificers in other trades , and the enactment is made special for the purpose of including them . As lo dogmatic assertions of what these statutes mean and refer to , they are idle and futile , and your readers must take them at their phantom value .
In another statute of Edward VI ., 1549 , a distinction is made between the classes of masons in an enactment , " That no person or persons shall at any time after the first day of Aprill next comming , interrupt , denie , let or disturbe any free mason , rough mason , carpenter , & c . "
I wish distinctly lo remark that 1 have only troubled you at any lime with these curious old laws upon the express challenge of Bro . Buchan , who immediately makes positive statements respecting the meaning of statutes of ihe existence of which lie had never before been aware .
1 entirely dissent from Uro . Uuchan ' s view , that those who do not accept his mere assertions and "affirm otherwise are bound to prove the affirmative" On the contrary I say that he is the one who has affirmed , and that he is bound to support his theorv by some proofs of his affirmation . Do
not let Uro . l ' ucban forget , or ignore , that when he has asked me for proofs he has not had long to wait for them ; and do not let any of us forget that he has never given any reasonable argument or evidence in reply . Bro . Buchan tells us that the case of the Clothiers' Gild is quite in support of his
Original Correspondence.
ideas ; but if this be so , his assertions and his ideas must wm in different channels , unless it be that he publishes the assertions and retains the ideas to himself . I should have no disposition to run away from the bubble if there was anything in it , but like other bubbles it is entirely empty , and , if it burst not , it must remain a bubble still . I am , faithfully yours , LUPUS .
LODGE BY-LAWS . ( To the Editor of the Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —In your issue of the 8 th inst . you was kind enough to insert my question as to whether it was competent to get a charter from the Grand Lodge of Scotland under which Scottish
or other Masons could meet m England , since which I have ascertained that such cannot be . But I now ask , Mr . Editor , if the said by-law spoken of in my last is Masonic or according to the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of England , and according to the ancient landmarks of our noble Order . If
such be in accordance with G . L . laws , then , as an Englishman , I must submit , but would earnestly impress upon the Scottish Craft the necessity of impressing upon the mind of every candidate that Masonry is not , as we express it in our instructions , universal , and that we must not expect the right
hand of fellowship ; neither docs the noble and beautiful lessons taught in our lodge-rooms extend to him , a Scotch Craftsman , further than the land of the thistle , and which he will have to acknowledge by paying one guinea more than the fees of said lodge , or be deprived of those privileges which
are dear to every true Mason s heart . But independent of all this , Mr . Editor , it would be a great boon to many Masons who do not measure Masonry by the amount of initiation fees , if the Grand Lodges of the United Kingdom would take stcos not only , as was suggested in your
valuable paper some time since , to have uniformity of working , but also uniformity of fees , so that such unseemly and unmasonic conduct may not be found among us . But surely , Mr . Editor , this cannot be according to the landmarks of that Freemasonry which teaches us in the N . E . corner that rank and
pomp arc all levelled here , and that jewels , riches , or gold arc of no avail in the attainment of Masonic honour . but that Masonic perseverance andbrofherh love is to be the criterion of our advancement am ! progress in the attainment of the honours of 0111 Order .
This , I again repeat , Mr . Editor , cannot be the Masonry which for the sake of £ s . d . debars us from the ennobling , and should be humiliating ' , lessons taught by the working tools of the Craft degree , viz ., that in a short time hence we shall all meet upon the , before Him who is no respecter of persons , and in that low valley where the bones
of the prince will be undistinguishable from those of the peasant , and where the . Scottish Mason will not be judged by lhc amount of his initiation fees , but by ihe plumb-line of his Masonic conduct according to the leaching of our patron St . John , who said , ' By this shall ye know if ye are of us—love one another . ' '
Again apologising for for intruding on your vain able space , I am , dear Sir and Brother , yours fratcrnalh WM . FOSTER , P . M . 354 S . G , V . 7 .. 87 R . A . C . Marvport , April iS . 1871 .
[ It would be a despotic exercise of power were the Grand Lodge of England to dictate to its subordinate lodges in matters which arc usually settled bv the lodge by-laws . Every lodge has a right lo
make its fees as high as it pleases , or to reduce them to the minimum allowed by law . We trust our correspondent will sec ihe propriety of every lodge being thus permitted to regulate its own membership . —En . F . )
KNIGHT TEMPLARISM AND MASONRY . ( To tin- Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , — In your impression of April 22 nd , I find a long letter from Uro . Charles J . Forsyth , giving a truly admirable account of the apparent connection between the Ancient Knights
Templar and the Masonic Order . Uro . Forsyth deserves the thanks of the Craft for his accurate transcription , the greater part of the article in question being from the pen of that highly accomplished Mason , the late Uro . George Walker Arnott , V , , LL . D .. Medical Professorof Botany at Ghisgow .
It can be found , word for word , at the commencement of the Regulations of ihe Supreme Grand Royal Arch Chanter of Scotland , to which it forms an introduction . As the letter quotes the whole of Dr . Anion's argument , verb , ct lit ., one would naturally expect some acknowledgment of the source the writer derived them
Original Correspondence.
from ; but Bro . Forsyth has omitted this , no doubt inadvertently . May I ask this brother to rectify his error of omission in your next issue . I am , my dear Sir and brother , Yours fraternally , f ZANONI , 30 ° .
C To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I observe in your impression of the 22 nd inst ., a letter on this subject , which contains several statements that I cannot let pass without lifting up my feble voice against them .
In the first place , I hold , and I know a good many of the Order hold with me , that our adhesion to Masonry was only to preserve our Order from being swept off the face of the earth , and that we only borrowed signs and symbols from Freemasonry to distinguish friend from foe , our ancient forms of
reception remaining the same as they had been before our adhesion . Again , with regard to the wonderful discovery ot Masonic relics at Stirling , I count that discovery as nil , for this reason , that when there were no charters from governing bodies the Craft lodges
without tiny authority used to work not only the Royal Arch , but also the Knight Templar and Red Cross Degrees . Only recently I discovered in Aberdeen the seals and jewels of office of the St . James's Encampment which had been worked in connection with the St . James ' s Lodge .
As to the Masonic branch of Knights Templar having their chief seat in Scotland at the present day , 1 , on behalf of the Scotch Knights Templar , entirely deny it . There are a few so-called Encampments in -some towns in Scotland that do not
recognise the governing body . These may be called Masonic Knights Templar , but as for the priories holding of that body , they never can be called Masonic . Why , our very title , " Religious and Military Order , " entirely throws Masonry aside .
I am , yours fraternally , A SCOTCH KNIGHT TEMPLAR Langham Hotel , April 24 th , 1871 .
• C To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , — I have read the lengthened remarks on this subject by Bro . Charles G . Forsyth at page 252 , and which , as he informs us , are " given from good authority , " only they appear to me to be taken from very Me / authority , or rather
from no authority at all . He would have done well ere writing his letter had he read tip the the information 10 be got in the past pages of THE FREEMASt ) N" on the subject from such writers as "Lupus , " W . J . Hughan , D . Murray Lyon , & c . The popular Masonic idea of the old Knights Templar being
freemasons and " practising Masonry , " is simply pure imagination ; many of them , however , were admitted freemen of the burgh , for the purpose of being able to buy and sell —not for the purpose of learning a trade , nor for the purpose of being initiated into the three degrees of St . John ' s
Masonry , for said three degrees never existed until A . 11 . 1717-23 . And as to Royal Arch Masonry , it never existed until the second quarter of last century . As to the engraved plates of the Stirling Ancient Lodge we hear so often about , yet so little definitely , taking them at the best , instead of their
age being " the beginning or middle of the seventeenth century , '" about the midlife of the eighteenth century would be nearer the true mark . However , if they be in existence give us a photo , of them , and if we can allow them to be older than the middle of last centurv , or even so old , wc shall be
quite happy lo do so . 1 hen as to Prince Charles Edward Stuart being made Grand Master of the Templars at Holy rood in 1 745 , that I consider is all a mere dream , while the bombastic pretended letter on the subject from the "Duke of Perth" is , in my opinion , anything but genuine , as I have stated at
length at page 236 of l ' HK FKKEMASON , May 14 th . 1 S 70 , and which opinion has been privately supported since by one of our best writers . Altogether , therefore , I would most respectfully and fraternally desire Bro . Forsyth to study this subject properly before writing upon it again . I am , yours fraternally , W . P . BUCHAN .
THE RITE OF MISRAIM . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I have read with interest the account in your paper of the founding in this country of the Rite of Misraim .
At Iirst it was stated that it was under the authority and with the sanction of M . Crcinieux , of the Grand Orient or Supreme Council of France ; but since that has been denied authoritatively by M . Thevendt , in the columns of your
contemporary you state in your issue , of the 8 th inst ., thai , the Rite is to be worked under the authority of a pupil of Mark Bedarride , the founder of the Order , and { that the charge to members of the Order of Constantino is to be nil .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
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 , —Several Past Masters and brethren have requested me to return our thanks to our worthy Brother William J . Hughan , not only for his interesting work , " Masonic Sketches and Reprints " in connection with English Masonry , but
for his valuable communications respecting " Freemasonry in Ireland , " which appear in THE FREEMASON , and we trust he will continue to give us more light . We intend to ask our Masonic friends to favour him with any old Masonic documents they may have , and hope many others may be induced
to do the same . There are many old lodges in this country that have never ceased working since their warrants were granted , and no doubt there is much valuable information to be obtained if a search , was instituted . Yours very fraternally ,
CHARLES SCOTT , P . M . 350 ( I . C . ) , P . P . J . G . W ., Devon . Strathrov , Omagh , April 25 , 1871 .
THE 1717 THEORY . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I regret to notice , at page 251 , a letter from Bro . Buchan , in which he implies a charge against me of want of good faith towards yourself and your readers , in what he
supposes is the suppression of part of the statute of Masons , 1425 . Bro . Buchan , being a Scotsman , is probably not familiar with the English statute book , and this must be his excuse . for so grave an insinuation . Permit me to explain that you did print the statute of Masons in extenso . The English statues
are divided into chapters ( each of which is a statute" ) and arc now invariably published in separate form ; but , at the earlier period referred to , many of such chapters were frequently published in one general statute . The one in question is "The statute made at Westminster the third yeere of King
Henry the sixt . It contains five chapters as follows : —1 , Masons ; 2 , " Shecpe and Wollys" from Flanders ; 3 , Offences against the Customs ; 4 , As to the Staple of Calais ; 5 , As to a Commisson concerning the river Ley . 1 think before making these strong assertions Uro . Buchan would do well cither
to make enquiry for himself , or to invite further explanation in your columns . Even in the statute of labourers to which he alludes , masons and carpenters are prominently distinguished from all other classes . This statute ( 1361 ) in dealing with labourers enacts " That the Lords of Townes may
take and imprison them by rifteene dayes if they will not instilie themselves and then to send them to the next gaolc , there to abide until they will instilie them by the forme of the statute . " Subsequently it proceeds : " And that as well carpenters and masons be comprised in this ordinance , as all
other labourers , servants , and artificers . And that the carpenters and masons take from henceforth wages by the day , and not by the week , nor in other manner . And the chief masters of carpenters and masons take foure pence by the day , and the other three pence or two pence according as they be
worth , and that all alliances and couincs of masons and carpenters , and congregations , chapters , ordinances and oalhes betwixt them made , shall be from henceforlh void and wholly annulled . " Here , in the statute of labourers itself , we have . remarkable distinction between the masons and
carpenters , and the ordinary classes of artificers in other trades , and the enactment is made special for the purpose of including them . As lo dogmatic assertions of what these statutes mean and refer to , they are idle and futile , and your readers must take them at their phantom value .
In another statute of Edward VI ., 1549 , a distinction is made between the classes of masons in an enactment , " That no person or persons shall at any time after the first day of Aprill next comming , interrupt , denie , let or disturbe any free mason , rough mason , carpenter , & c . "
I wish distinctly lo remark that 1 have only troubled you at any lime with these curious old laws upon the express challenge of Bro . Buchan , who immediately makes positive statements respecting the meaning of statutes of ihe existence of which lie had never before been aware .
1 entirely dissent from Uro . Uuchan ' s view , that those who do not accept his mere assertions and "affirm otherwise are bound to prove the affirmative" On the contrary I say that he is the one who has affirmed , and that he is bound to support his theorv by some proofs of his affirmation . Do
not let Uro . l ' ucban forget , or ignore , that when he has asked me for proofs he has not had long to wait for them ; and do not let any of us forget that he has never given any reasonable argument or evidence in reply . Bro . Buchan tells us that the case of the Clothiers' Gild is quite in support of his
Original Correspondence.
ideas ; but if this be so , his assertions and his ideas must wm in different channels , unless it be that he publishes the assertions and retains the ideas to himself . I should have no disposition to run away from the bubble if there was anything in it , but like other bubbles it is entirely empty , and , if it burst not , it must remain a bubble still . I am , faithfully yours , LUPUS .
LODGE BY-LAWS . ( To the Editor of the Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —In your issue of the 8 th inst . you was kind enough to insert my question as to whether it was competent to get a charter from the Grand Lodge of Scotland under which Scottish
or other Masons could meet m England , since which I have ascertained that such cannot be . But I now ask , Mr . Editor , if the said by-law spoken of in my last is Masonic or according to the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of England , and according to the ancient landmarks of our noble Order . If
such be in accordance with G . L . laws , then , as an Englishman , I must submit , but would earnestly impress upon the Scottish Craft the necessity of impressing upon the mind of every candidate that Masonry is not , as we express it in our instructions , universal , and that we must not expect the right
hand of fellowship ; neither docs the noble and beautiful lessons taught in our lodge-rooms extend to him , a Scotch Craftsman , further than the land of the thistle , and which he will have to acknowledge by paying one guinea more than the fees of said lodge , or be deprived of those privileges which
are dear to every true Mason s heart . But independent of all this , Mr . Editor , it would be a great boon to many Masons who do not measure Masonry by the amount of initiation fees , if the Grand Lodges of the United Kingdom would take stcos not only , as was suggested in your
valuable paper some time since , to have uniformity of working , but also uniformity of fees , so that such unseemly and unmasonic conduct may not be found among us . But surely , Mr . Editor , this cannot be according to the landmarks of that Freemasonry which teaches us in the N . E . corner that rank and
pomp arc all levelled here , and that jewels , riches , or gold arc of no avail in the attainment of Masonic honour . but that Masonic perseverance andbrofherh love is to be the criterion of our advancement am ! progress in the attainment of the honours of 0111 Order .
This , I again repeat , Mr . Editor , cannot be the Masonry which for the sake of £ s . d . debars us from the ennobling , and should be humiliating ' , lessons taught by the working tools of the Craft degree , viz ., that in a short time hence we shall all meet upon the , before Him who is no respecter of persons , and in that low valley where the bones
of the prince will be undistinguishable from those of the peasant , and where the . Scottish Mason will not be judged by lhc amount of his initiation fees , but by ihe plumb-line of his Masonic conduct according to the leaching of our patron St . John , who said , ' By this shall ye know if ye are of us—love one another . ' '
Again apologising for for intruding on your vain able space , I am , dear Sir and Brother , yours fratcrnalh WM . FOSTER , P . M . 354 S . G , V . 7 .. 87 R . A . C . Marvport , April iS . 1871 .
[ It would be a despotic exercise of power were the Grand Lodge of England to dictate to its subordinate lodges in matters which arc usually settled bv the lodge by-laws . Every lodge has a right lo
make its fees as high as it pleases , or to reduce them to the minimum allowed by law . We trust our correspondent will sec ihe propriety of every lodge being thus permitted to regulate its own membership . —En . F . )
KNIGHT TEMPLARISM AND MASONRY . ( To tin- Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , — In your impression of April 22 nd , I find a long letter from Uro . Charles J . Forsyth , giving a truly admirable account of the apparent connection between the Ancient Knights
Templar and the Masonic Order . Uro . Forsyth deserves the thanks of the Craft for his accurate transcription , the greater part of the article in question being from the pen of that highly accomplished Mason , the late Uro . George Walker Arnott , V , , LL . D .. Medical Professorof Botany at Ghisgow .
It can be found , word for word , at the commencement of the Regulations of ihe Supreme Grand Royal Arch Chanter of Scotland , to which it forms an introduction . As the letter quotes the whole of Dr . Anion's argument , verb , ct lit ., one would naturally expect some acknowledgment of the source the writer derived them
Original Correspondence.
from ; but Bro . Forsyth has omitted this , no doubt inadvertently . May I ask this brother to rectify his error of omission in your next issue . I am , my dear Sir and brother , Yours fraternally , f ZANONI , 30 ° .
C To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I observe in your impression of the 22 nd inst ., a letter on this subject , which contains several statements that I cannot let pass without lifting up my feble voice against them .
In the first place , I hold , and I know a good many of the Order hold with me , that our adhesion to Masonry was only to preserve our Order from being swept off the face of the earth , and that we only borrowed signs and symbols from Freemasonry to distinguish friend from foe , our ancient forms of
reception remaining the same as they had been before our adhesion . Again , with regard to the wonderful discovery ot Masonic relics at Stirling , I count that discovery as nil , for this reason , that when there were no charters from governing bodies the Craft lodges
without tiny authority used to work not only the Royal Arch , but also the Knight Templar and Red Cross Degrees . Only recently I discovered in Aberdeen the seals and jewels of office of the St . James's Encampment which had been worked in connection with the St . James ' s Lodge .
As to the Masonic branch of Knights Templar having their chief seat in Scotland at the present day , 1 , on behalf of the Scotch Knights Templar , entirely deny it . There are a few so-called Encampments in -some towns in Scotland that do not
recognise the governing body . These may be called Masonic Knights Templar , but as for the priories holding of that body , they never can be called Masonic . Why , our very title , " Religious and Military Order , " entirely throws Masonry aside .
I am , yours fraternally , A SCOTCH KNIGHT TEMPLAR Langham Hotel , April 24 th , 1871 .
• C To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , — I have read the lengthened remarks on this subject by Bro . Charles G . Forsyth at page 252 , and which , as he informs us , are " given from good authority , " only they appear to me to be taken from very Me / authority , or rather
from no authority at all . He would have done well ere writing his letter had he read tip the the information 10 be got in the past pages of THE FREEMASt ) N" on the subject from such writers as "Lupus , " W . J . Hughan , D . Murray Lyon , & c . The popular Masonic idea of the old Knights Templar being
freemasons and " practising Masonry , " is simply pure imagination ; many of them , however , were admitted freemen of the burgh , for the purpose of being able to buy and sell —not for the purpose of learning a trade , nor for the purpose of being initiated into the three degrees of St . John ' s
Masonry , for said three degrees never existed until A . 11 . 1717-23 . And as to Royal Arch Masonry , it never existed until the second quarter of last century . As to the engraved plates of the Stirling Ancient Lodge we hear so often about , yet so little definitely , taking them at the best , instead of their
age being " the beginning or middle of the seventeenth century , '" about the midlife of the eighteenth century would be nearer the true mark . However , if they be in existence give us a photo , of them , and if we can allow them to be older than the middle of last centurv , or even so old , wc shall be
quite happy lo do so . 1 hen as to Prince Charles Edward Stuart being made Grand Master of the Templars at Holy rood in 1 745 , that I consider is all a mere dream , while the bombastic pretended letter on the subject from the "Duke of Perth" is , in my opinion , anything but genuine , as I have stated at
length at page 236 of l ' HK FKKEMASON , May 14 th . 1 S 70 , and which opinion has been privately supported since by one of our best writers . Altogether , therefore , I would most respectfully and fraternally desire Bro . Forsyth to study this subject properly before writing upon it again . I am , yours fraternally , W . P . BUCHAN .
THE RITE OF MISRAIM . ( To the Editor of The Freemason . ) DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I have read with interest the account in your paper of the founding in this country of the Rite of Misraim .
At Iirst it was stated that it was under the authority and with the sanction of M . Crcinieux , of the Grand Orient or Supreme Council of France ; but since that has been denied authoritatively by M . Thevendt , in the columns of your
contemporary you state in your issue , of the 8 th inst ., thai , the Rite is to be worked under the authority of a pupil of Mark Bedarride , the founder of the Order , and { that the charge to members of the Order of Constantino is to be nil .