The Present Position Of Masonic History, No. 1.

But Ave must approach the subject in calmness , moderation , and thoughtfulness , Ave must submit it to the crucial tests of sound reason and simple evidence ; Ave must discard prejudices and pre-conceived opinions , and

endeavour honestly to educe from the "debris " of the past—from the tAvisted skeins and confused maze of anachronisms and unscientific records , the sober tale of truth , of reality , and of genuine narrative .

Again we should not treat the question as Avith a criticism ready made . We live in an age of many doubts , and more negations . Hardly anything UOAVa-days appear to be able to Avithstand the sweeping advance of a cold , and callous , and destructive criticism .

There is a tendency amongst us , somewhat hastily to assume , that , ail is unreliable in our Masonic traditions for instance , Avhich is . not strictly proveahle to-day , by the common rules of substantial evidence , and therefore Ave

are too hastily condemned and treated as belonging to an obsolete school , Avho raise a Avord of warning or suggest a plea for deliberation . I hope to show , that , even on the most critical grounds , traditions have a value of their own

, and that a tradition is not to be rejected merely because it is a tradition , and as such to a great extent , resting more on credibility for acceptance , than on actual evidence . Keeping then these three principle canons of criticism

before us to-day , let us in the first place consider what is our Masonic history in reality . Suppose Ave were beginning the study of Masonic history as painstaking students , Avhat should Ave discover ? What should Ave assert 1

We find a society existing in almost every country of the known world , what are its annals of life and progress 1 Is it modern or ancient ? is it of these tAvo last hundred years ? is it

traceable to rnediseval times ? is it the creation of yesterday ? or is its origin lost in the dimness of ages long since dead and

buried in the common tomb of hu « inanity 1 Now to answer these questions properly we must take our time , Ave must not reply to them too hastily on the one hand , or dismiss them as

impossible to deal Avith on the other , And before Ave answer them ourselves , let us try and ascertain if others have written upon the same subject , IIOAV they looked upon it , how they treated it .

Well , the moment we do so , we find that the subject is not new , but has been already exhaustively treated , by many very able writers . These Avriters may be divided into several schools .

There are those , though their views are those of the past rather than of the present , Avho treat Freemasonry as a product of the ancient mysteries . That there may be a portion of truth in their viewsI for one do not think

, is to be denied , but their general proposition is one which does not harmonize with the stern demands of " cause and effect , " or the pressing claims of a constructive criticism .

There is another class of writers , who like still to linger amid the somewhat fanciful , if fascinating , theory of a crusader origin . But at the present moment , except Bro . Yarker , I know of no able writer Avho

really accepts such an explanation of our Masonic history , and I think Ave need not dilate further upon it . A third view of Masonic history is that propounded by Bro . J . Findel of Leipsicwell knoAvn for his most

valu-, able " History of Freemasonry . " His theory is shortly summoned up thusas he originally propounded it , in his German history , namely that the history of Freemasonry is practically the history of the operative Masonsor

, " Steinmetzen " in Germany . He gave , in the German text , a description of a mediaeval Masonic reception , under a Bendictine Eitual , which had such a striking similarity Avith more modern usage general ly ;