Burgh Records. —No. 7.

geyff to the kyng for his borowage at he deffendis , for ilke rud of land v . d . he yhere . " II . De burgense noviter facto " Quicunque faetus fuerit novus burgensis domini regis in primis iurabit fidelitatem domino regi et

badivis suis et comrnunitatt illius burgi in quo burgensis faetus est Of new burges made in burgh Wha ever he be is made new burges of our lorde the kyng fyrst he sail swer fewte to our lorde the

kyng and to the bailyeis and to the communyte of that burgh in the whilk he is made new burges . " XIV . De libertate filii burgensis " Filius burgensis quam diu fuerit ad mensam

patris sui liabebifc eandem libertatein ad vendendum et emendum quam et pater suus habet , Sed cum ab eo discesserit ilia libertate non gaudebit nisi burgensis fuerit

Of the fredome of the burges sone The sone of a burges als lang as he is at his fadre burde he sail hafe that ilke fredome to by aud sell at his fadre has Bot what tyme he be passit fra his fadre burde tille his awne fyndyn be shall nocht ioyse the fredome of the burgh bot gif he by it and be maid fre man . "

XV . De servo alicuius veniente in burgo . "Si homo alicuius barouis vel militis vel euiuscunque servus venerit in burgo et emerit ibi burgagium et manserit in burgagio suo per unum et diem unum sine calumpnia domini sui vel eius ballivi semper erit liber sicut burgensis et libertate bur < n gaudebit

Of a thryll at cummys to burgh Gif ony niannis thryll barounis or knychtis cummys to burgh ancl byis a borowage and duellis in his borowage a tuelfmoneth and a day foroutyn challange of bis lorde or of his bailye he sail be evir mare fre as a burges wythiu that kyngis burgh and

ioyse the fredome of that burgh . " XVI . De mercatore alieno "Nullus mercator alienus potest extra burgum emere lanam aut coria aut alia mercatoria nee infra burgum nisi de burgensibus .

Of uncouth marehandis Na marchaude uncouth may by ututh burgh woll na hydis or ony othir marchandyse , na yit within burgh bot gif it be fra burges . " XXXI . Quod vir pro uxore respondere potest

" Quilibet spousus potest respondere prouxore sua sponsata et stare in iudicio et faeere pro ea quod ei iudicatum fuerit si calumpniata fuerit de aliquo . Et

Burgh Records. —No. 7.

est retinendum quod in placitis burgorum utitur Twertnay in defensionibus defendendo wrang and unlawe Of a burges til ansuer for his wyff like spousyt man may ansuer for his spousyt wyff and stand in iugement and do for hir all thyng at the

court demys hym , geyff that seho be challangyt of ony thing . And it is to wyt that in borow mutis thar is hantyd and oysyt thuertnay in defendande wrang and unlawe . " * ( To le continued . ' )

Masonic Notes And Queries.

MASONIC NOTES AND QUERIES .

BEOS . HT / GHAW , BUCHAN " , AND J . A . H . Bros . Hughan and Buchan have so often referred to 1717 as the date of the origin of speculative Masonry that I submit I was justified in characterizing that particular year of grace as their " pet date . " If Bro . Buchan can show me that there ever existed

a society of Free-Tailors practising a speculative science , I may see something in his allusions to " a speculative Tailor , '' otherwise I consider the term an absurdity , unless applied in a purely commercial sense . There are now , as there were in the middle ages , trades unions and societies , but they have no

scientific basis . On the other hand , Freemasonry as it has oome down to us is a very different organization ; and it is admitted that , so far back as 1717 , it was a different organization to any other existing in the world . Bro . Buchan ought not to waste his time in writing jokes about " Free Tailors ' ' which have no real bearing on the subject . Bro . Hughan defines his position very clearly . " I mean , " says he , "by speculative Masonry the

substitution of the present system in lieu of the operative society of the past . " I at once admit the correctness of this position , but why should that substitution have been wholly completed in 1717 ? Does not the admitted fact that , previous to 1717 there were non-operative Masons , show that the probabilities are thatfor a long time

, previous to their separation , operative and speculative Masonry may have been united ? The last time I was in Brussels a learned brother told me he could prove that one of the Prince-Bishops of Liege was a Freemason . If not a speculative Mason , what was he ?

By tradition we have received the idea that Freemasonry as it exists now existed in the middle ages in conjunction with operative Masonry . It does not rest with those who accept tradition to prove their position ; it is the duty of those who deny tradition to prove the negative . However often the date of 1717 may have been reiterated , I for one cannot accept the evidence yet offered as conclusive that there was no speculative Masonry before that date . From