Masonic Red Cross Order.

of " the conference betAveen Bro . Edward Busher and myself , on the one hand , and His Excellency Count Maftei , Italian Charge c ? Affaires , on the other , respecting the Italian order and the Anglican brand ) , which is now ( "be onl y legitimate

representative of tbe order in the world , the King of Italy having determined not to confer it , nor to permit any of Lis subjects to revive it under any pretence whatever . . . . A person claiming to be one

of the Lascaris asserts his claim , but as one of the public orders of the TAVO Sicilies it is noiv merged in the Kingdom of Italy , and it follows that Victor Emmanuel , as the Supreme King , is now the onl y lawful successor of the Parmese branch ! "

"There are also Greek pretenders . " continues R .-. W . L ., " but they have never been recognised since the death of the last of the Comneui . " Here Ave have a mass of contradictory statements , in the language of diplomacy , and a frank

admission that the promoters of tho imposture had even the audacity to attempt to compromise the Italian di plomatist , as an accessory after the fact , as will presently be seen . The same Avriter further states , that the papers

referring to the lodge Avere , on the application of Lord Kenlis to Lord Zetland , delivered to the Grand Council . Probabl y the latter lord had no difficulty in surrendering the precious archives , and regarded

them in tlie light of those printed notices which are often slipped in under doors , to be returned when called for .

To the direct question put by Lupus , * "Is there any document in existence dating more than a few years agof Avhich allies the Masonic Red Cross degree with the Constantine name ?" R . W . L . seems to appreciate the difficulty , and thus evades it : "The most conclusive evidence

on this point is naturally onl y to be found in the rituals of the order , am ; these of course cannot be published' '! In a long rambling statement the latter brings iu irrelevent matter , and under the feint of meeting his adversary ' s arguments , takes

care only to run parallel Avith them , quotin g an "Kistoiro des Francs Maoons " ( Brussels 1332 ) , and a quasi summons , dated in 1 SI 0 , bearing the signature of the original scapegoat " Waller Rodwell Wri ght / ' Avhich is addressed to the "celebrated (?) Sir Joseph Hippolyte da Costa , " also a reference to the seal ofthe spurious

order , namely , " a double-headed eagle "—the symbol of the union of the Eastern and Western Empires under Constantine , " and which is "borne at the present time by the senators of the revived order . "

Lupus replies * " The Histoire des Francs Matjons . . wliich lias attained the venerable age of 32 years , probably refers to the same or a similar order of Red Cross . " But R . W . L . says "the order has been confirmed from time immemorial in Scottish Encampments of Templars . " Now " IIOAV can this be true when . . . there

Avas no encampment in Scotland before 1800 ! And if it belonged to Scotland of '' time immemorial , would not this be strong evidence that it Avas not founded in England by Giustiniani ? " Lupus then proceeds to expose the unfounded

assumption , that an empty box at Freemasons ' Hall ever contained ancient documents , as advanced by R . W . L ., bearing on the antiquity of the use of the Constantinian name , in connection wifcli the Masonic Reel Cross degree , and furthermore

points out , that the summons of 1810 does not identif y itself Avith the Constantinian Order . Unfortunately , the mysterious box that ought to have contained valuable proofs , did not contain them , and that sheet anchcr , the Abbe Giustiniani ,

author of a book on chivalric orders full of blunders , " neither explains the poAvers of Grand Crosses to form such an order as that IIOAV imputed to him , but , what is more remarkable , he does not say one word about his OAVU performance in that respect

in England . " Bro . Hughan rejects Lupus' arguments , and " sees clearl y unequivocal evidence of the order ' s connection Avith Freemasonry during the latter part of the past century . "

Lupus , however , repeats his still unansAvered query : " Where is this evidence ? " and proves that the order called Constantinian , Avas not mentioned in Templar statutes thirty years back , and that "the present order is an invention of not

more than four years' standing , and is not identical Avith the purely Masonic order of which the Duke of Sussex was Grand Master , " and concludes by remarking that Bro . Hughan " carefull y alludes onl y to the connection oi the present scheme wifcli

Freemasonry , which nobod y doubts !" This is the pivot on Avhich all these prevarications turn .