Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

The Editor ie not responsible for the opinion * expressed by Correspondents SLOANE MS : No . 3329 , EOL . 142 ; FORMERLY EOL . 102 . 10 THE EDITOB OF THE EEEEMASON ' MAGAZINE AND MASONIC inHEOB . Dear Sir and Brother , —Through the kindness of

Bro . W . J . Hughan , I have heen favoured with the reading of a copy ( which he had procured at considerable expense ) , of this very interesting Masonic MS . Bro . Eindel , at page 666 , appendix 0 , of the second ¦ edition of his " History of Freemasonry , " gives a copy of the latter half of it , which agrees with Bro . Hughan ' sexcept m some of the spelling . Owing to

, its contents , this MS . is of the greatest interest to Masonic students , more especially if it could be proved that it existed in the seventeenth century , and before 1717 . Of this , however , I am very doubtful ; as , so far as I can judge as yet , this Sloane MS . No . 3329 fol . 142 is no older than about A . D .

, , 1720 , whateverjater . No doubt Bro . Eindel , at page 118 of his history , inclines to put it afc the end of the seventeenth century ; and Bro . Hughan , at page 25 of his " Unpublished Records of the Craft , " while stating its age as doubtful , places ifc between " 1640 to 1700 . " Tetthe former has brought nothing forward

as yet , to support his idea properly , while the latter , at the very same place where he gives its age as " 1600 to 1700 , " also quotes good evidence which goes to prove it to be more modern ,- for , while stating it that Mr . E . A . Bond and Mr . E . Sims agree that it is " prohahiy of the beginning of the

eighteenth century , " he also adds , " We are also informed by a gentleman , whose name has been honourably associated with the British Museum for years , that , as Sir Hans Sloane only " died in 1753 , the article on MS ., 3329 , might easily be of a date after 1717 . " Now with the above statements before himwh

, y Bro . Hughan should have given its age as between 1640 to 1700 , 1 cannot understand . It would have heen better and fairer , in my opinion , to have said 1640 to 1720 , which latter date I consider was only fairly due to the statements of the gentlemen I have above referred totwo of whom lace ifc afc the

begin-, p ning of the eighteenth century , while one says ifc may easily he after 1717 . In writing to me some time ago about the age of this MS ., Mr . Bond said : — " My opinion is that the paper on Ereemasonry is of about the year 1710 , hut I see no certain evidence , and I judge by general character of the writing . " Now as

Mr . Bond only judges from the writing , ifc appears to me that we must allow a few years to come and go upon . Eor , if a man , 35 years of age , wrote in this style in 1710 , 1 ask— "What difference , if any , would there be in the style of his writing in 1720 ? Very little , if any , I consider , for a stranger especially , to judge hy . Under the above circumstances , therelore ^ and for other reasons , I must give it as my opinion that this document cannot he allowed to he

done so at once , more especially as ifc is nearly impossible for many brethren situated as they are to visit the British Museum personally . I am , yours fraternally , W . P- BUCHAN .

THE INITIATION EEE . TO TIIE EDITOE OE THE TEEEMASONS' MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIEEOR . Dear Sir and Brother , —If some expert London Brother could be induced to look up the different editions of the Book of Constitutionswith a view to

, ascertain when first the present inmimun rate of three guineas for making a Mason was fixed , secondly , to calculate the increased value of money . Thirdly , to give notice to G-rand Lodge to increase the sum for making Masons in the same ratio , or if more advisableto increase the amount to ten guineas . I think

, he would deserve well of the Craft in general , and of the writer in particular . I am led to a consideration of this subject by the rapid increase of some of the Lodges in this locality , as I am dealing with principles , and not persons , I must decline to give nameshut can easily verif

, y every statement I make . I am w ell acquainted with the leading members of eighteen lodges in this im mediate neighbourhood , and I know , more or less nearly the whole of their members , which , hy the last returns were 943 . I make no allusion to what

a great proportion of this number ought to have remained , bufc 1 am quite sure , a large number of them ought never to have been made Masons ,, and would not have heen , if the fee had been ten guineas or more . As to the truths symbolised in the work of Masons they have no conception . I remember one case in point . A naval officer and a dairyman were

made Masons the same evening , and before leaving the lodge , the dairyman , wishing to put the principles to the test , solicited a berth on board the naval officer ' s ship . Another case . A boatman or waterman desired to be made ; he applied to one lodge , was refused ; applied to anotherwas blackballed ;

, sought for by the officers of another lodge , balloted for , accepted , initiated , passed aud raised , and on the following morning hoisted his Hag ( the square and compass ) at the mast-head and flaunted it in the faces of those who had rejected his first application . The keeper of a house of ill-repute made a similar

application to the last and was refused , bufc was ultimately taken into the same lodge with the boatman-One other case . A labourer , earning twelve shillings per week , suffering from heart disease , desired to be made a Mason . He applied to one lodge , was refused ; applied to anotheralso refused ; was ht

, soug after by the officers of another lodge , accepted , made , passed and raised . How long will ifc be before these men , or their families , or some of them will become claimants for our charities ? These remarks refer to one lodge alone , and one class of entrants . I necessaryI might increase the number of cases

, of a different character in other lodges , leading to worse evils , but prefer to confine myself to the one thafc can be met with afc the very threshold of Masonry . Tours fraternally , A WESTEEIT WARDEN .

pronounced any older than 1717 without the very best of real evidence to support ifc . I also think thafc Bro . Hughan would do well to publish ib , as , had the copy I have before me been my own , 1 would have