Mark Masonry And Bro. F. G. Tisdall.

' The title " Ancient Freemasons" must not be taken to mean the seceding body known as the " Ancients" ( or " Athol Masons" ) of England , for we find that the warrant was granted by Lord Aberdour , Grand Master , the Grand

Secretary being Samuel Spencer , who represented the Grand Lodge familiarly known at that period by the name of the " Moderns , " from which the so-called " Ancients" seceded , but subsequently united at the " Union of 1813 . "

In " Webb's Freemason ' s Monitor ( p . 314 , edit . 1808 ) we read that the Prov . Grand Lodge of New York was constituted by " a warrant from the Duke of Athol , " dated London , 5 th September , A . D . 1781 ; so likely enough the St . John ' s Lodge joined that body , which was

accordingly a departure from their original warrant , granted by the first Grand Body . In 178 / ( September 5 ) the Grand Lodge of New York was Formed on an independent basis , but still apparently with a bias in favour of the" Ancients , " or seceders , "; and hence the St . John ' s still

leaned to the " Athol Masons , rather than to the " Moderns " ( incorrectly so designated by their opponents in England . ) We may state that all the Lodges warranted in the United States by authority of English Freemasons , prior to A . D . 1753 , were under the

jurisdiction of the Grand Lodgeot the"Moderns , the " Ancients ' before that date having no separate organisation . We have the St . John ' s Lodge No . 2 New York , mentioned in a list of Lodges , under the regular Grand Lodge of England for A . D . 1765 .

It seems that , " from the year 1757 10 the year 1792 , the records of the Lodge , though not entirely missing , are imperfect ; " so we are not favoured with any excerpts of minutes affecting our discussion until " 1795 , December nth , " when the extracts of that date and others are

given in lull . "The following brethren were elected : Robert Cocks , Master ; Robert Hunter , Senior Warden ; H . Hays , Junior Warden . The Ledge numbered thirty-four members . September 9 , 179 6 : The fees for admission of adjoining members were raised from 20 s to 40 s .,

and for initiation from ffi to £ 20 . November s 1 : It was resolved , that the candidates pay a deposit fee . In this year the nights of meeting were changed from the second and fourth Wednesdays to the second and fourth Thursdays , and have remained since without alteration . There

were four affiliations and seven initiations . The accounts of the St . John ' s Mark Lodge No . 1 , made up to December 23 , 1796 , show a balance due to the treasury of £ 3 18 s . " The next series of consecutive minutes we we also transcribe from the history . ' ' 1801 ,

December 20 ; The Lodge chose Ezra Weeks for Master ; Thomas Richards , Senior Warden ; John Sayre , Junior Warden . May 1 , 1802 : The Lodge moved from its old quarters , 89 , William-street , to the City Hotel , the members

of the Lodge subscribing £ 295 toward fitting up the room . May 20 -. The balance of funds belonging to St . John ' s . Mark Lodge was paid over to the Treasurer of St . John ' s Lodge No . 1 . There were seven initiations and three affiliations during the year . "

Passing over certain minutes , which are both curious and valuable , we come to a short one of 1810 , April 25 : A committee of three was appointed " to obtain the warrant of the Mark Lodge , which is annexed to this Lodge ; " but

Bro . 1 isdall reports : " I can fine ! no trace of its having been recovered . '' He might ( we surmise ) with equal truth have observed that he could not find any trace of any such document being men-. tioned heretofore in the archives of the Lodge .

These are all the references to Mark Masonry we can discover throughout the racy history , and having thus given them due prominence , we will now turn to the remarks made by our brother , to which we at the time took exception . Bro . Tisdall observed in Poiiierm /' s Democrat as follows : " We had the honour of beinsr

Master of St . John ' s Lodge , No . 1 , New York city , in JS 4 S , 1849 , ami 1 S 50 , anil for the fourth time in 18 57 , the Lodge ' at the close of that year celebrating its centennial anniversary . These records gave the fullest evidence that what was asserted by the older Masons of the Lodge , as well as of other Lodges , was correct , and

Mark Masonry And Bro. F. G. Tisdall.

that the Lodge originall y conferred the Mark degree . On the 24 th October , j 794 , the Lodge ( as per records ) determined that the sum for initiation of Modern Masons ( including Mark degree ) be reduced from £ 4 . to 40 s . In 1795 the minutes show that one Modern Mason was

thus healed and admitted a full member of the Lodge . The minute-book of the Lodge , at the close of the year 1796 , reads thus : " The accounts of St . John ' s Mark Lodge No . i , msde up to December 23 , 1796 , show a baiance due to the treasury of £ 3 18 s . ' meaning the treasury

Master s Lodge . Bro . Tisdall , in addition , stated that " These Records also showed not only that the Mark degree was given under the authority of the warrant , and that a special fee was paid for the same , but that the officers of the Master ' s Lodge

were the officers of the Mark Lodge , the conferring of the degree preceding the conferring of that of Master Mason . This degree was continued to be conferred until May 20 , 1 S 62 , under the Lodge warrant . " Whatever these records may contain , in the

absence of an exact and complete transcript , we have simply to be guided by the few alread y copied and published ; and we think it cannot be gainsaid , that none of these minutes prove Bro . Tisdall ' s position in the discussion to be correct . We promised to withdraw our

assertions as to the Mark Master s degree not having been given in a Fellow Craft ' s Lodge , and the degree itself never having been authorised to be worked in any regular warrant of a Craft Lodge , on the production of evidence to the contrary ; but in the absence of documentary proof , we

cannot alter our views on the subject . Not one of the minutes published in Bro . Tisdall ' s History of St . John ' s Lodge declares the Mark Master ' s degree to have been given by authority of the warrant of lodge , or imparted , during the period of the lodge being open , in either of the three degrees ; but they actually tend to confirm

quite the opposite , as the disposable funds of the Mark Lodge No . 1 were paid to the treasurer of the St . John ' s Lodge , thereby evidently assuming the two lodges to be quite distinct ; and moreover a committee of three was appointed by the St . John ' s Lodge , in 1810 , "to obtain the warrant of the Mark Lodge , which is annexed to this lodge . "

These quotations , to our mind , clearly prove that it was not the Craft Lodge which conferred the Mark degree , but the Mark Lodge , which met by virtue of a warrant or some authority wholly distinct from that by which the Craft Lodge was authorised to meet ; and consequently there were separate meetings held for conducting the business of both bodies .

" The warrant of tiie Mark Lodge annexed to this Lodge" is a statement distinctly proving that the Mark warrant and the Craft warrant were two documents of a different and distinct character , and annexation means simply toleration by the members of the Craft Lodge ,

vithout even , necessarily , recognition . Chapters in England are annexed to lodges , but both are quite independent , and have their own separate funds , officers , assemblies , and laws . Bro . Tisdall says that the sum for th >

initiation of a Modern Mason , " including the Mark elegree , " was reduced , ou the 24 th October , 1794 , to forty shillings . We have tinned to the history , and at page 10 we find a reference to the "Modern Masons , " but not one word about the Mark desrree . How is this ? If the

minute reads " including the Mark degree , " why did not our brother say so ? Surely he would not have omitted so important a resolution , and yet chronicled matters of comparatively trifling value , when considered in relation to the Mark degree and St . John ' s Lodge .

Knowing his quickness of perception and readiness to make known all facts ol importance we are led to consider no such clause as " including the Mark degree " exists in the lodge records » if the date specified . Even if such a clause does exist , and the fee n > r initiation of a

Modern Mason amounted to forty . shillings A . D . 1794 , inclusive of the Mark degiee , ( although not in the history of St . John ' s Lodge , ) that would only establish the fact of the lee securing more than the three degrees , but certainl y not that the degree was given in a Craft Lodge ; and

Mark Masonry And Bro. F. G. Tisdall.

should a minute be produced , as yet not made public , in which it is stated that the Mark degree was worked in a Craft Lodge , that would still be insufficient to disprove our position , as the "Mark degree" may mean the "Mark man , " which we know was given to

Fellow-Crafts in Scotland A . D . 17 J 8 , when and where the Mark Master ' s degree was confined to Master Masons ; which latter is what we contend for as the general custom everywhere . We regret being unable to find anything confirmatory , in the history of St . John ' s Lodge ,

of the officers of the Master ' s Lodge being the officers of the Mark Lodge , as we should gladly possess authentic transcripts of such occurrences , in which the officers of each are specified . This circumstance or custom , however , is not important , as it often is so now in England and

Scotland , when the degrees are thus worked under the same roof , although at different times . A statement more to the point is as follows the "conferring the Mark degree preceded the conferring of that of Master Mason . " We shall be glad to have proof of this , especially if by that

is meant the Mark Master ' s degree , which we have distinctly stated from the first is the one we allude to , and not that of the " Mark Man . " Another remark we must notice : " This degree ( the Mark ) continued to be conferred until May 20 , 1862 , under the Lodge warrant . "

Let Bro . Tisdall prove this , and we shall be satisfied , and own ourselves in the wrong . Let him do so , and then will be accomplished what hitherto , though often promised , has never been don- ; - , for up to the present time no Craft warrant has ever been exhibited which provides for the

Mark degree being worked , whether Mark Man or Mark Master ' s , under its authority , and which is signed by the regular officers of any Grand Lodge in the world , We take it that the St . John ' s Mark Lodge No . 1 was worked by some of the members of

the St . John ' s Craft Lodge , and assumed the name and number of the latter . Independent Mark Lodges were scattered throughout the United States of America during the latter part of the last century and early in the present one . By independent we mean distinct from a Craft

Lodge , and not under the wing of any Royal Arch Chapter , though sometimes under the General Grand Chapter . In " Webb ' s Masonic Monitor , A . D . 1 S 08 , " there are the names recorded of seventeen such lodges under the jurisdiction of the Grand Royal Arch Chapter

of New York , the numbers one and two being left vacant , evidently for two not in connection with the Grand Chapter . Lest it should be thought that these Mark lodges met by virtue of the Royal Arch Chapter ' s warrants , we should state that several were held where no Chapters

met ; and , moreover , the Constitutions of the General Grand Chapter of A . D . 1806 provided for warrants being granted to Mark Master ' s Lodges , separate irom or without Royal Arch charters , and several clauses in these statutes

refer especially to the regulations necessary for the government of the degree . Bro . Tisdall declares the Mark degree to be " below and not above the third , * * * but a section of the second degree lopped off , and ought to be restored where it belongs . "

As the onl y degree by the name of " Mark " woiketl in the United Suites is ihe "Mark Master ' s degree , " it will be at once seen that either our brother is wrong or we are ; and as we entirely and unequivocally deny Bro . Tisdall ' s assertions just quoted , ( according to the evidence

as yet made public . ) the onus pnd-aiidi certainl y rests upon him to produce sufficient data to justify his new position , or his statements must tail to the ground . We think the inquiry one of considerable importance , inasmuch as if the Mark Master ' s degree was until late years

regularly communicated to Fellow-Crafts , in regularly constituted Craft Lodge , it should be again placed in its proper position as an integral part of the second degree ; while on the other hand , if the degree has never been worked , but

only one known as the " Mark Man , " then it is equally clear thai the " Mark Master ' s degree , " haying been communicated only to Master Masons , is actually in a similar condition , historically and masonicall y speaking , to the Royal Aich , so far as its independence and