Masonic Historians.—No. 2.

MASONIC HISTORIANS . —No . 2 .

BROTHERS JOHN SHEVILLE AND JAMES L . GOULD . BY BRO . WILLIAM J AMES HUGHAN .

( Continuedfrom page 524 . J The sketch of the " Union " and of the few years preceding and succeeding 1813 is written in a masterly manner by Bro . James

L . Gould , of the difficulties constantly arising among the Craft from the existence of the two rival Grand Lodges are very fairly stated , and all the intricate questions growing out of the peculiar circumstances

are really exceedingly well considered and estimated by the author ; and we quite coincide with him in declaring that " the whole of the interesting History of the Formation of the United Grand Lodge

should be understood by every Mason . " Bro . Gould then remarks , that the lectures agreed on at the Union of 1813 , " were of necessity from the constitution of the Lodge ( of Reconciliation ) a compromise

between the systems of Preston and Dermott , modified by the individual views of the authors of the new system . Some of most important symbols and teachings of the Prestonian Ritual are entirely omitted

in the Hemming system , which is now the standard work of the United Grand Lodge of Ancient Freemasons of England . The changes thus made in the three degrees would not be considered by American

Masons as any improvement on our established modes of work . From what has been said , it is apparent that since the revival in 1717 until the Union in 1813 , a period of less than one hundred years , the lectures

and rituals of English Freemasonry have been authoritatively revised and changed at least seven or eight times , and while the Fraternity of that country have generally observed the binding force of the

fundamental landmarks , yet we arc forced to admit that at least in two notable instances such was not the case . " ( For example , the

Act of 1739 , thc transposition oj the words in the two first degrees , and the separation of the Royal Arch , the alteration in the third degree ) .

It further appears that 111 so far as the presentsystemadopted by thc Grand Lodge of England differs from thc Prestonian lectures , our English brethren have a more modern Ritual than the American , as the

American system is substantially that of Preston . Nor does it satisfactorily appear , as has been alleged by a recent author ( Pierson ' s 'Traditions , ' page 327 ) , that the English ritual is the more intellectual of

the two , but the contrary is undoubtedly the truth . The union of the two Grand Lodges prepared the way for the union of the two Grand Chapters , which occurred

A . D . 1 S 17 . The united body was at first styled , " Thc United Grand Chapter , " but in 1822 thc title of " Supreme Grand Chapter " was resumed .

Ihus was brought to an end the English Masonic Schism , out of which grew the Royal Arch , and from whose results the Masonic Fraternity will never recover ( page

27-8 ) . This opens out a very interesting inquiry , which we would like to prosecute when time permits . Wc have , however , no doubt but what various excellencies in both

systems led to the adoption of a mixed system , and hence the compound , though not so ancient , may after all have been more desirable than either of the separate Rituals . But of this more anon . We follow Bro . Gould next to his enquiry as

Masonic Historians.—No. 2.

to the " Present Status of the English Roya Arch , " and would like to quote the most of his able exposition of the facts relating to this division of the work , especially as the " Guide " is so little know in this country . We hope soon ,

however , that its merits will be more generally appreciated , and therefore beg to offer only a few extracts from the many we would like to have made . " The Royal Arch System was practised as an appendage to the third degree for many years after its introduction . At that

early period any lodge convened a chapter , and conferred the Royal Arch degree under the sanction of its own charter . Gradual steps were taken in process of time , however , which , little by little , separated capitular from lodge Masonry , until distinct warrants were declared to be

necessary to authorise the holding of chapters and the Order of the Royal Arch became , after the lapse of many years , an independent rite . . . . . According to the Constitutions , it appears to be practised as a fourth degree ,

although the Articles of Union declare that Ancient Masonry consists of three degrees only , including the Royal Arch . The Supreme Grand Chapter holds theoretically the position that the Royal Arch is not essentially a degree , but

rather the perfection of the third . " In practice , however , the degrees differ in design , in clothing , in constitutions , and in colour ; and the proceedings are regulated by different governing bodies . Bro . Dr . Geo . Oliver on this point observes : " It is an established doctrine of the

Order , that while three form a lodge , and five may hold it , seven only can make it perfect . " In such a case there requires an intermediate degree to complete the series ; for the Mark and Past Masters have been already admitted into the

Craft lodges . This degree , as used by our transatlantic brethren , who are zealous and intelligent Masons , is called the ( Most ) Excellent Master . Bro . Gould quotes again from Dr . Oliver to this effect : " If , however , Freemasonry in its

present form requires the Royal Arch to be considered as a separate degree , inasmuch as it has acquired the designation of Red Masonry in contradistinction to the three first degrees , which are esteemed Blue : and not onlv possesses

detached funds , but is placed under the direction of a different governing body , with a separate code of laws , it will be more consistent with the general principles of thc Order to consider it as the scecnth than the fourth •for four is not a

Masonic number , and as it is now constituted , some intermediate ceremonies appear to be necessary to connect it with the previous degrees . " In " Historical Landmarks" the same great

Masonic writer informs us that " Thc Royal Arch is evidently , therefore , to be considered as a completion of the third degree , which , indeed , appears broken and imperfect without it ; and was originallywas conferred complete at one time in the Grand Lodge only . "

The author proceeds to observe that the " Dermott degree , as practised by the Ancients so early as 1744 , required the possession of the Past Master's degree or ceremony as a preliminary qualification , and such continued to he the

case until the union of the two Grand Chapters in 1817 . Dunckerley's degree seems to have been conferred at fust without the requirement of the Chair degree as a preliminary , and separate chapters were held . The candidates , unless

they were actual Past Masters , were required to present a dispensation from the Grancl Master authorising them to privately pass the Chair . This dispensation was , in practice , only issued upon the recommendation of the lodge to which the candidate belonged . The possession of tlie

Chair degree was required by the Alodcrns until the Union—and hence the present practice of dispensing with that pre-requisite is a palpable violation of the ancient practice of both sections of the English Royal Arch Fraternity . This innovation has led to much confusion , and should never have been tolerated . The fact

that English Royal Arch Masons had not received the intermediate degrees naturally led to their exclusion from the American chapters . A case of this kind was brought to the notice of thc General Grand Chapter of the United States

Masonic Historians.—No. 2.

at its Session in 1844 , and led to the adoption of a resolution conferring the right upon the several chapters under its jurisdiction to confer the degrees of Mark Master , Past Master , and and Most Excellent Master , free of charge , upon any worthy companion Royal Arch Mason from

without the jurisdiction of the United States who had not received those degrees . The same thing was incorporated subsequently into , and is now a part of , the Constitution of the General Grand Chapter of the United States . It has heen asserted that the American system is inferior

to the English , and it has been our design to direct enquiry to a comparison of the two systems rather than attempt a vindication ofthe American degrees from the charge . " Under the circumstances narrated by Bro . Gould , we fail to see any reason for the working

of the " Excellent Master " in this country . We have too many degrees already , and the separate organisations are cumbersome methods of performing very simple acts . The G . Chapter of Ireland does not work the Most Excellent degree now , neither is it a pre-requisite for Royal Arch Masonry under that Constitution . Even

if such a degree were required to be taken previous to the Royal Arch , the Grand Chapter would he the authority to authorise its being worked , and not an inferior body , Masonically speaking . The Grand Chapter is not likely ever so to do , therefore we must rest content with our present position .

The Relation Of St. John The Evangelist To Freema Sonry.

THE RE LA TION OF ST . JOHN THE EVANGELIST to FREEMA SONRY .

BY BRO . CHALMERS I . PATON . Member of the Masonic Archaolog ical Institute of England , etc ., etc . It is said of the great patron saint of the Freemasons that " Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than J ohn

the Baptist . The honour thus given is the greatest that could be bestowed , and the title to it is indisputable and indefeasible . It was conferred by One who knew not only the man but all men ; and who was infinite in His wisdom and unerring in His judgment . There is

another John , however , mentioned in Sacred Writ , who is not less entitled to the respect , the confidence , the admiration , and the imitation of the Brotherhood . He is known by a great variety of distinguishing marks of heavenly approbation . Like John the Baptist he was of

humble parentage—even humbler than John . His lot was poor , his labours great , and his expectations in life moderate and few . Zebedee , his father , was a fisherman , who earned his bread by toiling and struggling night and day on the boisterous sea of Galilee : and John and his

elder brother followed the same rough and dangerous calling . Little is known , and that little not important , as to his early history . The probability is that he commenced business life on the sea , sold his fish to the people of Bethsaida and Capernaum , earned an ordinary competence

by the proceeds of his nets and lines , and like the majority of the humbler class of Jews , knew little of his nation or its customs , except so much as he gleaned on his annual excursions to the great feasts of Jerusalem . One thing is clearlike the whole Jewish people , he had been

taught enough to expect the early coming of the Messiah . The " sceptre had departed from Judah , and a lawgiver from between his feet ;" and nothing to the Jewish mind could be more conclusive proof that " the Shiloh " must now presently come . Had He come ? There were

rumours all over the country that a marvellous priest , clad in a robe of camel ' s hair , and with a leathern girdle about his loins , was preaching to great crowds in the wilderness of Judea , and baptising many of his followers in the sacred waters of the river Jordan . John was resolved to see and hear him ; he went , and was

disappointed . He found that the priest , whose praise was in everybody's mouth , was not the expected Deliverer ; that he openly and clearly avowed that he was not the Messiah •that he was simply the forerunner of the Redeemer — " the voice of one crying in the wilderness , Prepare ye the way of the Lord , make his path