Masonic Notes And Queries.

mere word was sufficient to settle everything . Let your readers mark the arrogance with which Bro . Buchan deals with speculative Masonry before 1717 . He says : —lam quite sure it was not the speculative Masonry or Freemasonry we now practise . " A writer who is " quite sure ' ' on such a matter ought to be able to

prove his position ; but Bro . Buchan has given no proofs icliatever , and yet would have rational readers accept his opinions simply because he is " quite sure . " Hitherto Bro . Buchan has done nothing to constitute himself an authority , if we except his having made himself the mouthpiece of

Professor Innes , and no one is likely to be convinced that Bro . B . is right because he is " quite sure . " Another illustration of Bro . B . ' s summary mode of settling everything is furnished by his remarks on the question of " Tradesmen in Lodges . " In answer to a brother who had thrown considerable light on

the difficulties attending the formation of lodges in the 18 th century Bro . B . writes , — " The remarks of Bro . J . A . H . are not to the purpose ., ' To me and other readers of the Magazine the said remarks appeared very much " to the purpose ; " and to answer facts by mere dogmatic assertions' is puerile and childish . I think , before Bro . Buchan can aspire to he a Masonic authority , he must give us rather less of the personal pronoun . —J . B .

DEO . J . A . H . AND EEENCH MASONEX . The following is extracted from Le Monde Maconnique , October , 1869 : — " We have several times presented to our readers Bro . J . A . Horner as one of the most enlightened writers of the English Masonic This brother

press . has published , in the Freemasons' Magazine , some very interesting reports upon the present state of Freemasonry in most of the states of Europe . He is a K . H . of the Gonseil des Gauls of the Grand Orient . Bro . H . has given a most favourable and fraternal account of the working of the French lod

ges which he has visited , especially those of Paris , where he received a most cordial reception . Bro . Horner is , in some degree , our guarantee of friendship with our English brethren , aud he filled this office at the 100 th anniversary of the Partick Lodge , near Glasgow , at which he assisted , and replied to the

toast of the Grand Orient of France . The W . M . of the lodge had mistaken our sympathetic brother for a Frenchman , and told him that he was particularly happy to propose this toast , the lodge having rarely had the good fortune to receive a French brother . It is needless to add that Bro . Horner worthily acquitted himself of the honour which devolved upon him on this occasion . "

THE TE 3 IPDAES AND EEEEMASONEY . As to the notion that the Templars originated Freemasonry , were connected with it , and took shelter among the Freemasons on their downfall and thenceforth maiutained their organization , the following remarks may be worth consideration : —

1 . The Freemasons ( whatever they were ) worked for the regular clergy and for the secular clergy . 2 . The regulars and seculars were enemies of the Templars .

Masonic Notes And Queries.

3 . The Masons working ou a minster , or church , had no means of concealing Knights Templar . The Templars had better have taken shelter among woodcutters , miners , or with Robin Hood's outlaws in Sherwood . 4 . The Masons had St . John for their patronbut

, this did not connect them with Templars or Knights of St . John , but did bring them in contact with the secular and regular clergy for the celebration of the festival of their Patron Saint .

5 . The mediaeval Masons were devout Catholics and eschewed heretics , aud there is no more reason for supposing they would have countenanced the discarded Templars than they would have countenanced Jews . Toleration and universality are new doctrines of Freemasonry . While there is no historical evidence to support

the notion of auy connexion between the Templars and Freemasonry or Masons , there is negative evidence against . There is also the fact that the chivalrous orders arose in a cloud in the early part of the last century . When this kind of knighthood begun , it may have taken its origin from the members being called Knights of St . John , as the Masonry was of St . John , and then these transpositions of Knights of St . John , of Malta , and the Temple .

One thing may be held assured , that no Knights Templar gave their succession to working Masons any more than to shoemakers . This was contrary to the laws of knighthood in that latter day . How was a working Mason to be made first an esquire and then a knightunless he had performed feats of armswhich

, , were an equivalent ? If the Masons had been connected with the Templars they would have been persecuted likewise . — HISTOETCCJS .

Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

The Editor is not responsible for the opinions expressed by Correspondents

SPECULATIVE FREEMASONRY AND THE 1717 DATE .

TO THE EDITOR OP THE EEEEilASONS' MAGAZINE AUD SIASONIC MIBBOE . Dear Sir and Brother , —In reference to the above subject , I have received the following letter from my highly esteemed and respected Bro . W . J . Hughan ; it is dated October lGth , and he goes on to say : —¦ " I write at once after reading the Magazine of

to-day , to say I think the correspondence of late respecting the antiquity of Freemasonry has been more on verbal grounds than aught else , as I cannot think you deny the existence of any speculative Freemasonry before 1717 , but only that there was no Masonry of the character of the Freemasonry of the

18 th century , before then , consisting of Grand Masters , Grand and Provincial Grand Lodges , and three distinct and separate degrees , kept wholly apart from each other , and conferred on special grounds apart from operative Masonry . You know , of course , that gentlemen were admitted many years before the institution of the first Grand Lodge , who were therefore speculative Masons , i . e ., non-operative . You have evidently wished it to be understood that by " specie-