Some Masonic Matters For Future Inquiry.

Is it not probable that the statement of our commonly-received Masonic history is correct , which makes the Knights Templar patrons of our Order until 1199 ? Is it not probable that , whatever analogy may yet be traced between Masonic

and Templar practices , whatever may seem to be a common symbolism , is the necessary result of an old alliance and connection ? Is ifc nofc still a matter of doubt and discussion what fche intimate connection between the Templars and

the Freemasons really and truly was ? Is nofc Freemasonry , as we have it to-day , however overlaid by the purely speculative element , and affected by lapse of time , still the same in all its Q-reafc landmarks as that which existed in this

country in the operative lodges before the Order of the Knights Templar was established ? May we not look for the orig in of Masonry in some secret speculative kni ghtly body , for example the Templars ? May not a good many arguments be

adduced , and authorities quoted , for the proposition that Freemasonry has come down to us through the Kni ghts Templars ? May not the

whole question of the connection of the Knightly Orders with Freemasonry be looked upon as being still a vexata questio , and undetermined ? Upon what ground is it asserted that Templary is the ancient preserver of true Masonry ? Was

Templary the origin of Masonry ? What authority can be shown for the assertion that Freemasons are descended , or come from the Knights Templars ? What are the reasons alleged for the assertion that Freemasonry was re-introduced into Europe by

the Templars ? What are the reasons for thinking that Masonry having existed in England at a very early period , had expired to be re-introduced from the East by the Templars ? What is the meaning

of the assertion , that Templary claims as the purpose of its institution , the preservation of Masonry in its pristine purity ? What is signified by the assertion that there was an acknowledgment a century ago that Templary was a superior and

better grade in Masonry ? Who are tho writers called the able and authoritative supporters of the theory that Masonry comes from Templary ? Why has ifc been so often said that an intimate relation subsisted between the Knights Templars and fche

old Masons ? Wh y is it said that the true connection between the Freemasons and the Knights Templars is one of fche most difficult ; , and , afc the same time , one of the most interesting subjects of Masonic inquiry and research ?

OPERATIVE MASONS . At the time of the erection of the great medieval edifices were ( as some have said ) all fraternities of artizans , operative Masons included , imbued to a greater or less extent with a religious and :

spiritual element ? Can the assertion , thatmodern Freemasonry has derived its origin from medieval operative Freemasonry be impugned ? Can it be said to be known , that from a very early date there was an organised fraternity of

operative-Masons , who , from travelling * and observation , as . well as practice , gained knowledge , and by welldevised plans , communicated the benefit of . ifc to their whole body as far as practicable ^ , the members constituting an order , partly in some- ,

sorfc religious and partly professional , with oneobject and interest in common ? In ancient timeswere not priests , having a taste for architecture ,. , nofc merely associated with Freemasons , but readilyinitiated iu fche system of symbols in use amongst

them ? Iu early times had not each Cathedral its . own staff of permanent workmen , taking on additional hands whenever the edifice was to be added .

to or to be rebuilt ; and was nofc this staff quite .-distinct from the trade guild , or corporation which , mio-ht be in existence in the town at the same . D period ? Is it commonly conceded that the old operative-.

Freemasons held a general assembly under a , Master or president ? Is ifc not generally admitted that amongst the ancient Masons there .

was a system of symbols in use in which every Mason was initiated , and which he was bound to . keep secret ? Is there any doubt that all the old , constitutions which have come down to us werecompiled for the use of the operative Masons ? .

Of late , has not the opinion began to prevail thaiit is to the Master Mason , as a general rule , thal ;_ we may turn for the actual design of all the wellknown edifices of the Middle Ages ? Was ifc not the design of the system of symbols in use amongst

the ancient Masons that a person once a member .-of the fraternity might be universally accepted assuch , without being required , wherever he went ,. , to give fresh evidence of his skill ? Was it net - also fche design of this system of symbols to enable

a man , when travelling to his work , to claim the : hospitality of his brother Masons in his way ? . Where , at an early period , operative Masons , asuiL individuals not being operative Masons , appear to > have been members of the same lodge , is there , not reason to think that the individuals not being-: