Free And Accepted Masons.*

From the time of the " Revival " era , therefore , Freemasons have always been known as Accepted Masons . Preston , in his famous " Illustrations of Masonry , " gives what purports to be an historical relation of a Masonic occurrence , which runs as follows : " On the 27 th of December , 1663 , a General Assembly was held , at which Henry JermynEarl of St . Albanswas elected Grand Masterwho appointed

, , , Sir John Denhani , Knight , his Deputy , ancl Mr . ( afterwards Sir ) Christopher Wren and John Webb his Wardens . Several useful regulations were made at this assembly for the better government of the lodges , and the . greatest harmony prevailed among the brethren at their various meetings . Among the other regulations made at this assembly were the following : " ( 1 . ) That no personof what degree soeverbe made or accepted a

Free-, , mason , unless in a regular lodge , whereof one to be a Master or a Warden in that limit or division where such lodge is kept , and another to be a Craftsman in the trade of Freemasonry . " ( 2 . ) That no person hereafter shall be accepted a Freemason but such as are of able body , honest parentage , good reputation , ancl an observer of the laws of the land .

" Several records of the society of this ancl the preceding reign were lost at the Revolution ; and not a few were too hastil y burned in our own times b y some scrupulous brothers , from a ' fear of making discoveries prejudicial to the interests of the order . " In reference to the above we have onl y to observe , that it is unsupported by any existing authority except Roberts ' s 1722 edition of the " Constitutions " —ancl it must hence be accepted or rejected on these authorities alone . A

part of the statement we know to be erroneous . Sir Christopher Wren is therein stated to have been appointed Grand Warden of the Grand Lodge of England in the year 1663 , whereas we know , from "Aubrey ' s Natural History of Wiltshire , " that Wren was not made a Mason until May 18 th , 1691 . Beside , there were no Grand Masters in England prior to the ' " Revival" of 1717 . We are therefore led to decline to give credence to any part of the above

Statement . The so-called Constitutions of 1663 are a myth . In this opinion we are supported by the high authority of Bro . Woodford ( Kenning ' s " Cyclopedia , " 6 ) . The story however is related , without adverse criticism , by Steinbrenner ( " Origin ancl Early History of Masonry , " 124 ) , by Mackenzie ( "Royal Masonic Cyclopedia , " 15 ) , by Findel ( "History of Freemasonry , " 127 ) , and others .

There is a better authorit y for the use of " Accepted" in the Harleian MS . in the British Museum , the first part of which Bro . Hughan says is of date about A . D . 1670 ( Hughan ' s " Old Masonic Charges , " 527 ) . The first of the " new articles " in it , which are undated , reads as follows : " Noe person ( of what degree soever ) shal bee accepted a free Mason , unless hee shall have a lodge of five free Masons , at least w hereof one to bee a master or wardenof that limittor divisionwherein such Lodge shal bee keptand

, , , , another of the trade of Free Masonry . " That noe person shal bee accepted a Free Mason , but such as are of able body , honest parentage , and good reputacon ancl observers of the Laws of the Land . "

The " new articles " above , containing the term "accepted , " are peculiar to the " Harleian MS ., " ancl are hence of value and importance , although the fact of the uncertainty of the year of their being committed to writing leaves ns in the dark as to the exact value of the statement . In the year 1691 we find the word " adopted " ( probably a synonym for " accepted " ) prefixed to Mason . This is in Aubrey ' s " Natural History of Wiltshire" ( quoted in Steinbrenner ' s "Freemasonry , " 126 ) , ancl reads as follows -.