Correspondence.

whole of York Masonry to be that ritual . It is for Grand Conclave to decide whether they claim to represent the initiatory ceremony , the Eose Croix , or the Kadosh degree . I don't dispute " Ebor ' s" quotation from " Eynner Hoedera" or " De Grenesfield ' s Eegister , " but I do dispute the accuracy of his reasoning , which was adduced

to me some time ago by a learned gentleman , for we know Masons have been made in prison , and we have the Order as an actual proof that it was continued . What became of the Escaped Templars ?—Five anywhere could hold a chapter for admissions—three might suffice in case of emergency , such as the death of the Order ; and " Ebor" knows that a follower of almost any of the

Persian sects , might at ono time , say 100 years ago , have obtained admission to our own lodges . I hare myself relieved one of these eastern wanderers who could give me no satisfactory account of his initiation . I believe Masonry was practised in England at a very early period , and in fact anywhere where the Chaldean forms and philosophcould penetratebut I don ' t yet

y , believe in an Athelstan Grand Lodge . The accounts are too contradictory ; and if it was an assembly with "dukes and barons" if , must have been after the Conquest . Suppose now that the Brother Templars , to assist their engineering aims aud operations , had joined the Lodge of Geometricians , established by the " Judge by die grace of God" at Cairowhere nine degrees were conferred—the

, thrice throe of the Brahmins and the Chaldeans . We know that when the Templars arrived in England , they commenced to build , and on the Continent , Aulk , Count of Anjou , was named the " Great Builder . " We know , also , that they commenced to affiliate non-members in a military sense . And what was to prevent these brothers using their knowledge to assist their friends , in turn , at

York , Bristol , and elsewhere . Wren ' s custom of an operative Warden over every ten workmen was a Templar custom , that body havingbeen ' ruledbyCommanders of tens and hundreds ; and , like the Maccabees , the Templars had also a Knight Commander ( or rnling 10 ) placed over their portable chapel—an Egyptian custom—a ruler of ten being placed over the Pastopheri , or bearers of tho sacred

utensils . I draw far back on my memory for tho foregoing , and believe that anyone with leisure for study might increase such coincidences without limit , ancl " Ebor" himself admits that Masonry was acknowledged at Paris . Now , this Templar Order was divided into three classes , and Anderson mentions , in his "Constitutions , " civil , sacred , and military Masom-y , and informs us that

" Sons of Noah , " according to some old Masonic traditions , was the first name of Masons , and that the military Orders had borrowed many customs from Craft Masonry . The Assassins also had their three classes , probably originally of three degrees each , corresponding with " Hakem b ' amar elleh ' s" college . The three Templar classes were the Knights , the Priests , and the Esquires ,

all ivith distinct receptions closely resembling each other . In Civil Masonry we have the Esquires—the initiate and Sheik of the eastern sects . In Sacred Masonry we have our Arch degree ( and tho Brahmins have a similar degree ) and High Priest . In Military Masonry we have the chivalric ceremony , equivalent to the Apprentice degree of the first classand we have the Eose Croix

, , the Chivalric or Military Master or Sheik ; the principal sign of which , I am assured , is well known to the Brahmins . Again , all degrees of York Masonry were strictly Christian . A century or so ago , it is said that three times nine constituted a complete encampment , in allusion , probably , to the three classes and of founders of the Order .

Mener , who wrote in England on the Order of Eose Croix , states that they had different degrees , and had to undergo a five years' noviciate , and that though the Masters of the Order held out the Eose as a remote prize , they imposed the cross on all who enter . Here we have a proof of the existence of our organisation

previously to 1630 , and there is other proof adduciblo to Eose Croix Masons carrying up tho Order far beyond that period . Then , as to its connection with the Templars , we have the period of 1400 assigned in Germany for the introduction of the Order from the East . Thiswould be about the period when a few old Templars might venture to revive the Order there , and there are the

claims of the Order of Eosy Croix at Edinburgh , and tho identity of Masonic ceremonies with the French Templars . I don't necessarily believe iu the Scotch lodges until they show how they got their rituals , eleven prove that thoy were brother Masons at all until a recent period . "Well , now , suppose after all that the old York Masons

were practising an imposture ( which " Ebor" more than insinuates ) in claiming their privileges from Baldwin at Jerusalem , and that all English Masonry is iu fact an imposture ( for "Ebor ' s" argument comes to that , and I love to call things by their right names ) , and has noclaims to antiquity beyond 1717-1725 , he-- has now to demolish the French Order of the Templefor we have

, sufficient proof that Masonry , both in England and Scotlaud , was mixed up with that Order , through the Stuarts , and everywhere members have been mutually received and affiliated , and probably the meeting at Hotyrood House , in 1746 , was a branch of the French Order . I write only for fact , for it is difficult to get at in connection with secret associations ; and if " Ebor" can

prove that everything has been pieced and patched together , I shall still think no worse of Masonry ; but let ushave the truth , the whole truth , and nothing but the truth , and moderate our pretensions to what we are . I believe so implioity in the great antiquity of our entiresystem , and feel so strongly on the point that I must bog you will not deny me even so large a space in your

pages . I know " Ebor" will strongly object to all this , because , whilst he wishes to leave Craft Masonry universal , to which I by no neans object , he will deny to me liberty of thought on religious subjects . Asabusinessman , ! have no leisure to pub this matter into well rounded paragraphs , but in tho style it is I leave it to the learned of your fullinitiated readersbut I cannot admit that others

y ; any are at all capable of properly deciding upon so important a question . I remain , dear Sir and Brother , Yours fraternally , A P . S . —I must strongly object to one system of Masonry attempting to lower another iu order to raise its own

importance . Call a meeting of learned brothers , compare MSS ., ascertain faithfully what the old York Eite was , and let us return to it . We want no foreign systems , least of all , no new ones .

TO ma -ron OF ran E . IEEITASO . YS . UAGAZI . YE AXD JTASOXIC . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —Bro . "Ebor" must excuse my being drawn into a controversy about ritualistic observances of degrees to which he does not belong , and cannot therefore bo properly qualified to discuss ; but I . must put him right upon one point . I never alluded tothe Templars or Knights of Malta .

They are no degrees , but independent orders of knighthood ., owing allegiance to no Masonic authority , but governed by their own Councils and Grand Masters , and as such are recognised by all Christendom . The chivalria degrees are those of the Eed Cross Knights , "Eose Croix , " and others known by all high grade Masons , as the knihtl degrees of the Ancient and

Acgy cepted Eite , now under the authority of our accomplished and revered chief , Dr . Leeson , with whom I have the honour to be personally acquainted , and am also indebted to for much valuable and authentic information , which , instead of locking np in his own breast , he is always ready to impart to those brethren qualified to receive it . The Kose Croix degree is of great antiquity . It was .