Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

The Editor ta not responsible for the opinions expressed & j / Correspondents , THE HIGH DEGEEES AND BBO . MANNINGHAM .

TO IHB EDITOK OF THE EKEEMASONS' MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIKROR . Dear Sir aud Brother , —The letter from Bro . Man-• ningham to Bro . Sauer which was transmitted to you by our learned Bro . Dr . Findel , and which you inserted in your last number , is , if genuine , a very important addition to the information we possess in

respect of certain portions of our Masonic Archeology . Though dated in 1757 , and hitherto , I believe unknown to Masonic students , I see no reason to doubt the genuineness of the letter , or why we should not accept the data it affords as regards several moot feints .

1 . If we assume that the letter really emanated from Bro . Manningham , on his authority , which is decisive , we are able to dispose of a recent theory , that the third degree is no earlier than the revival . Bro . Manningham , on the contrary , distinctly , as we ¦ see , carries back the existence of the three degrees to 'the middle of the seventeenth century , and that in

itself presupposes a far earlier existence , I hope some day to put forward the evidences I have been long collecting iu humble confirmation of Bro . Man-¦ ningham ' s decisive statement .

2 . Bro . Manningham has no doubt either apparently of the connexion between the operative and speculative Masons , and his whole argument goes to prove that the traditions , usages , degrees , landmarks of the speculative Order of 1757 were identical with those of the older operative assemblies .

3 . It may be said that Bro . Manningham also decides the controversy of the Eoyal Arch . We must , however , remember that that controversy is , after all , more a matter of words than of any very antagonistic views . It all depends upou what Bro . Manningham means by the Master ' s Degree . If he ,

as I believe , understood the old full third degree , with its first and second parts , then—cadit qucestio . Those who , like myself , uphold the reality of tbe Eoyal Arch , have never contended for more than this , that , though the Eoyal Arch Degree may have to-day a modern name and an elaborate ritualit isand ever

, , has been , substantiall y the same with the second part of the Master ' s Degree . Any other theory would land ns on a shore of inextricable confusion and -hopeless controversy , and would throw the greatest doubt on the whole arrangement of our Masonic

ceremonies . 4 . Bro . Manningham no doubt by his letter ignores the claims of many of the high grades to antiquity , as he seems to mark their early actual beginning in this country by his words of warning protest . I do not wish to-day to reopen the question of the high grades further than to say that Bro . Manningham ' s

declaration in 1757 is fully borne out by all the later evidences we have seen accumulating gradually the last quarter of a century . But , as I think the controversy is productive of very little good to Masonry , and does not tend to promote what we all ought to

Correspondence.

desire , fraternal feelings of toleration and good will among Masons , I leave it here . 5 . Presuming Bro . Manningham ' s letter to be genuine , I have sought to point out what I think we may fairly deduce from it , and what certainly is and has been for some time the conviction derived from careful study of , Tours fraternally , A MASONIC " STUDENT .

Masonic Charities.

MASONIC CHARITIES .

TO THE EDITOK OH THE FREEMASONS * MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIHKOB . Dear Sir and Brother , —May I respectfully ask a P . G . O ., East Lancashire , if I understand his words in your last number rightly ? Does he mean to inform us that the organization of East Lancashire , of which he speaks so highly , has for its end a selection of the

most deserving candidate from whatever province that candidate comes ? If so , perhaps he would kindly impart to us how the East Lancashire brethren arrive at the satisfactory certainty of the most deserving case absolutely in itself . TJp to the present time I had been under the impression that the East

Lancashire organization had succeeded in securing the election of E . Lancashire candidates and E . Lancashire candidates alone , but , I suppose , after the letter of P . G . 0 ., that I am mistaken . Your fraternally , A MEMBER of the C . C . W . Torkshire .

Bro. Manningham's Letter And The Royal Order Of Scotland.

BRO . MANNINGHAM'S LETTER AND THE ROYAL ORDER OF SCOTLAND .

TO THE EDITOE OE THE EREEMASONS' MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIEEOE . Dear Sir and Brother , —I consider Bro . E . T . ' s communication relative to Bro . Manningham ' s letter ( which at present is considered of so much importance , aud which is accepted by one o ? the highest authorities in Masonry , Bro . J . Gr . Findel , as genuine )

to be to the point , and just what we want to have . Let us have a fair copy of the original , " without note or comment , " and then we can weig h well its statements . Eecords of the Eoyal Order of Scotlandstill in existence—date several years further back than A . D . 1757 , so its position is not effected by the letter . Tours fraternally , W . J . HUGHAN .

Antiquity Of The Third Degree.

ANTIQUITY OF THE THIRD DEGREE .

TO THE EDITOK OP THE EKEEMASONS * MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIBBOB . ) Dear Sir and Brother , —Bro . Eobert Sanderson has brought forward evidence , not that the third degree did not exist before 1762 , but that a certain lodge or society of Masons in a remote part of Scotland was loosely conducted . Few others with such license

would undertake to prove that W . M . ' s were never installed under the Grand Lodge of England before 1862 , from the loose example of some lodges . Tours fraternally , E . Y .