Can A Warden" Initiate, &C.

TO TnE EDITOR OP THE EREEMASOXS' MAGAZIXE AXD MASONIC SIIHROR . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , — - "In the year 1646 , Elias Ashmole was made a Mason in AVai-rington , by the Warden and Fellow Crafts . " Does not the word . "Warden " here mean the " ' Master ? " the ecjuivalent term for the latter at this period being " Deacon , " at Kilwinning . Would " Resurgam " please point out his authorit }^ for

saying that Ashmole was not made a F . C . until 1682 . How does he know what degrees he received at AVarrington ? In the same paragraph in which we are assured Ashmole received his second degree in Grand Lodge , according to the old regulation , we are informed that the four old lodges retained their inherent rights of initiating , passing , and raising . It should be understood , once for

all that , as an historian , Preston is no authority for anything . Any student of Masonry knows why Anderson adopted the style which Preston followed . I do not dispute at present his reconcilability of the before-mentioned , because I don ' t consider it yet proved that the operative Masonry of England and Scotland was one and the same in degree or object with our present speculative Masonry . I merely ask , how are they to be reconnilerl ?

Comparison of tho minutes of Edinburgh and Kilwinning lodges would show that a Master Mason was one who employed Fellows of Craft , and that there was no ceremony . F . C . ' s are only mentioned at Warrington . Dermott , in detailing the origin of our present ceremony , mentions certain rusty Masons who had "passed the degree of a Craft . " Originally our two pillars both

belonged to our first degree . An old catechism states , " Q . An A . P . I presume you have been ? A . J . and B . I both have been ; A Master Mason I was made , " & c . At Roslin and Melrose it was an apprentice who was slain by his master . A German catechism , printed in your pages some years ago , states that

tho " study of moral and honourable conduct" commenced when the Mason had faithfully completed his apprenticeship . At Kilwinning we find entering , receiving , and passing mentioned . Might not tho entering be the ceremony detailed , and common to all operative lodges , and the receiving and passing the two principal degrees of what we call Craft Masonry .

However unwilling brethren with Craft predilections may bo to admit it , I can myself see but one way out of the difficulties surrounding the subject . There can be no doubt of the antiquity of our ceremonies " ; were they not originally rather the accident than the rule of the operative lodges ? I trust "Ebor" understands that the strong terms I

have occasionally used have been applied to the ignorant or else wilful misrepresentations which , I am sorry to say , are constantly made , and not to an honest and impartial attempt to trace our ceremonies to tho operative Masons .

I believe everything in England has been published respecting Masonry which we are likely to get ; but such is not the case in Scotland , where there is the Melrose Lodgo with books and papers for 300 years ; and there is theoriginal Latin charter of Malcolm at Glasgow . AVould our Scottish brethren hel p us here ? Let us get together all the information we can , and surely we have sufficient

brethren who would help with their subscriptions to an honest , impartial history of Freemasonry , in place of the rubbish now passing as such . I am , dear Sir and Brother , yours fraternally , A .

Masonic Foundations.

MASONIC FOUNDATIONS .

TO THE EDITOR OP THE FREEMASONS' MAOAZIXE AXD MASOXIC MIRROR . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —Permit me to offer a few remarks on the occasion of Freemasons being oraplo ^ 'od in laying the foundation-stone of a new building dedicated to the worship of Almighty God , according to the rites of the Established Church .

Each Freemason has his own peculiar views of the manner in w Inch the Great Beneficent Being should be addressed and worshipped—the salvation of the soul being a personal matter , thereby permitting a Jew , or a Chinaman to be present at any ceremony , whether for their own mode or for Christian worship . The intended structure , it must be borne in mind , is merely at its

foundation—at the opening . None but those for whom it is intended are presumed eligible to attend , and to enter heartily into the services ; the foundation-stone being merely the beginning of a structure which may be never finished . But when Freemasons are engaged they agree in one essential point , that the work has been begun in order ; they invoke a blessing that it may be

conducted in peace , and finished in harmony ; God , or the Mighty Architect , forming tbe real ingredient iu tho principles of Masonry which permits and invites men of all creeds to assemble in concert for the innocent purpose of paying respect to whom respect is due . And who but a man of crooked temper or prejudiced views could object to such reasonable practices ? Truth is at the basis

of a Freemason ' s belief , Fidelity is the watchword , and Charity is the characteristic of a true Freemason ' s heart . Wliat a pity it is that men find fault with that of which they know nothing ! What should we think of a reviewer who writes an opinion of a book which he has never read ? or of one who decides an arbitration without hearing both sides of the cpiestion ? And thus with Freemasonry .

The bigot , in his religion , cannot understand how Jews , Turks , and Mahomedans associate with Christians of all denominations in peace and good-will , imitating in some little degree the liberality of Him who dispenses His goodness on all alike in giving air , and bread , and water , and life—or , like the Samaritan we read of , who , having found an enemy half dead , relieves him and takes care of him . Not long ago , the writer of this letter was consulted by one very high in his spiritual ' office , whether I would

not prefer a Freemason to any work over which I might be deputed—as if the spirit of Masonry sanctioned injustice ! " Certainly not , " I replied , " if such preference was at the cost or risk of injuring a deserving man . " Why , let me here ask , should one man usurp dignity over his fellow-man in matters where conscience only can decide ? Why should a bigot , in professing Christianity , object to

the society and consultation of others differing from him merely in mode of worship , or government of class ? I have , in rny capacity as a Mason , associated with men of all nations , creed , and colour , and have heard , I hope in charity , differences of opinion expressed in great harmony . When men take upon themselves to criticise partially ,

and to condemn wholty , one of the most ancient institutions in the world , we must not expect to find iu their notions much liberality ; and thus many clever professors —ignorant , may be , of the origin of many of their own emblems—ridicule those of Masonry . When sneers are cast at the " white kid gloves" of the " Craft , " and the aprons and sashes , aud the jewels and banners , forgetting

their origin , I repeat it betrays a want of that charity which is so strongly recommended . As well might be derided the banns worn under the chin of a barrister or a Church clergyman , the scarf and the jewel of an Order , the academical degrees and collegiate costume ; and when Freemasons are subjected , not only to laughter , but to much blame—designated ,

perhaps , as fools , or something worse—the fact is overlooked that Masonry has been upheld , and is still supported , and will continue to be supported until Time , the consumer of all things , shall be no more . Dignified professors have always adorned the Masonic body , and have not thought it incongruous with the principles they have professed to join in vjorlcing a lodge , or enjoying a banquet . Ib is but a poor compliment to those good , and great , and wise men , now no more , to have one of their own body in this enlightened age de-