Masonic Notes And Queries.

for the time being ; and could no more be dispensed by any number of the present possessors of the decorations than could the 25 illustrious Companions of the Most Noble Order of the Garter bestow its proud insignia upon a distinguished twenty-sixth . The present head of the combined Parmese aud

Sicilian Order of Constantine is King Victor Emmanuel II ., and tbe power to confer the Order of the Holy Sepulchre is vested at present in the Patriarch of Jerusalem alone , the sword used for the purpose being the one said to have belonged to Godfrey de Bouillon .

The last of the Comneni had a perfect right to cede his privileges as Grand Master either by sale or otherwise . It was Ms own Order , and he could dictate whatever laws he thought proper . As his alone was the power to confer a Grand Cross , so could he curtail or enlarge the privileges of his Knihts at his

g own pleasure ; and could have equally rendered illegal the conferring by the Grand Crosses of any subordinate decorations , or dissolved the Order instead of transferring it to the Duke of Parma . But , supposing we put the sale of the Order out of the question altogether and admit the privilege of each

¦ Grand Cross to nominate a "Novice" or "Knightin-waiting . " What then ? Why the Knight-inwaiting must assuredly wait , until it was the pleasure of the Grand Master of the Order to confer upon hitn the accolade and the superior decoration . The Grand Crosses and their Novices could do nothing to " perpetuate the Order . " If the Grand Master ¦ ceased to promote the Novices and to create Grand Crosses , the institution must obviously die out . Any

other theory would be to show , be } ond argument , that after the first founder had created a few Grand Crosses he had reduced himself to their level and could retire from business . There are , however , two parties to every bargain , and , if this had been the state of things , the Duke Francis would not have looked with favour such an investment for his

upon money . We are now , by inference , asked to assume that a ¦ Grand Cross of the original Order , who was in this country on official duty , nominated as Novices a number of persons who were Freemasons , and that these persons thus received the right to confer upon

other Masons the dignities of a public Order , then , -as now , belonging to a reigning Sovereign ; or , in the words of R . W . L ., to " perpetuate the Order . " The Order , however , has never required perpetuating ; its existence has had no interregnum ; but , if it had been soI should like to see any oriinal statute

, g which would admit of such a proceeding as thus inferred . In the absence of it , we must be prepared to assume that any few brethren who have the fortune to receive the decoration of a foreign power , have a right to combine and set up that Order in this kingdom , and " perpetuate it" amongst their brother

Masons . What should we say if the Swedish Masons , having , according to your correspondent , "J . U . S . V ., " a system known as "St . Andrew ' s Masonry , " appointed a committee who recommended appropriating the insignia of the Moat Noble Order of the Thistle , and then , ignoring Her Most Gracious Majesty of England , thought it right to perpetuate the Order of the Thistle amongst the Masons of Sweden ?

If the theory laid clown by R . W . L . be accurate , the " Grand Council" of these Masonic Orders can have no substantial existence , because the Grand Crosses and their Noviciates can be perpetuating the Order in every province in their own right .

R . W . L . places the Red Cross Order as a Masonic institution , ' ¦ in much tho same category as the Order of the Temple , the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre , or the Hospitallers of St . John of Jerusalem . " But this requires some consideration . The Templars had a large establishment and numerous smaller ones , in

this kingdom and in Scotland , and , although traces of them may be found in the history of other subsequent Orders , yet no distinct continuation can claim the whole Temple Order as never having lost the thread of its existence . I will not occupy space by diverging into another discussion , but I may remark

that many writers , foes as well as friends , lay as well as Masonic , have admitted some claims for the Templars . I do not comprehend the comparison with the Order of the Holy Sepulchre , this Order being claimed by the sketch equally with that of Constantine , although R . W . L . makes no attempt to explain the title to this appropriation . A comparison with the Masonic Order of St . John is peculiarly

unfortunate , as it can have no claims to represent the venerable fraternity of the Baptist , which only became dissevered in 1798 , and of which all the continuing branches are perfectly well known . J am glad to find that it was the committee of 1813 which appropriated the Cross " worn in the Priestly

Order of Eusebius ; " but we are not told who is responsible for the adoption of the other badges , or for the appropriation of those of the Holy Sepulchre . I have never looked upon a Red Cross Order as new amongst Masons ; but I have always believed it to be an institution peculiar to the fraternity , and

not an imitation of an existing Order , the property of a foreign State . I fear that your reply to a correspondent in 1862- was significantly accurate , when you said : — "We know of no competent jurisdiction from whom you might receive it . " It appears to me that you may now vary that reply by saying , — " You can

receive it only at the hands of King Victor Emmanuel IL , first obtaining Her Majesty ' s license . " It has been asserted that 27 , 000 Masons went out to the Holy Land during the Crusades , and , although such a statement may be incapable of proof , there is yet some colour given to its probability when we consider that the architectural remains of the

warriors of the Cross appear a remarkable evidence ot greater assistance and skill than can be attributed to their martial followers . I should not have been surprised to hear that a Masonic Eed Cross Order had been originated and perpetuated amongst Masons in commemoration of their thus participating in the expeditions of the Crusaders ; but I am not prepared

to hear that this has been simply an attempt to introduce amongst the Craft something which professes to be the decoration of a foreign Order , having no connexion with Masonry or its early traditions , or any affinity with it even indirectly . I have a strong impression that the Red Cross Order and the Priestl

y Order , referred to as having existed at Manchester , simply appertained to the Red Cross for many years known as having a feeble existence in a few provinces . No declaration by the Grand Priory of Scotland can