Arcane School 3

John Yarker

Chapter I-VI
Chapter VII-X
Chapter XI-XIII

XI – THE SYSTEM TERMED HIGH-GRADE

SPECULATIVE FREEMASONRY

God bless the King! I mean our Faith s Defender, God bless no harm in blessing the Pretender, But who Pretender is, or who is King, God bless us all! that s quite another thing. JOHN BYROM, Manchester.

The general opinion of Freemasons will be that this Chapter should conclude the next on the establishment of a Grand Lodge in 1717. The reason for placing it before that event is a reasonable belief in the assertions of the ANCIENTS, as opposed to the MODERNS, who admitted themselves the characteristic by which the former distinguished the latter. The subject of these degrees is a very intricate one and I am rather puzzled how to put it clearly to the reader without much repetition. With Chapter IX. the Gothic Builders died out and their Lodges relaxed into small social gatherings, but in the North of England where there were Lodges in the jurisdiction of York, the Lodges continued the “Harodim,” or Masters Fraternity, of which Gould in his large history affords ancient proofs. What became of these bodies, for Grand Lodge has no knowledge of them? But on the death of the Gothic Builders and the attenuation of their Lodges there arose, temp. Jas. I., a young Englishman of the name of Inigo Jones, whom the Earl of Pembroke took into Italy. He studied with much interest, amongst the disciples of Palladio and the Comicini, the classic works of Italy, and on his return reorganised such bodies as existed on the model of the Italian academies, and brought over Italians to instruct the Guilds in the classical Masonry of old Rome, and it became a fashion to term the magnificent Gothic erections a barbarous style? Our principal authority for this statement is Anderson who says that the account was recorded in a MS. by Nicholas Stone which was burnt in 1720, in order, we may suggest, that it might not fall into his hands. He further states that Jones held Quarterly Meetings, and Lodges of Instruction; now there is no reason why Anderson should have falsified history on this matter, and his statements are accepted by Preston, and by so careful a writer as the German Findel; but the known ceremonies of the Guild is a confirmation strong enough in itself, for they certainly represent a Guild of the classical style. They had also the old Jewish Menatzchim or Intendents, and Harods, termed Passed Masters, of which rank Grand Lodge has no knowledge. The best work on the Comicini is by “Leader Scott,” she shows that on the sack of Rome by the Goths they settled at Como, and spread their Guilds over the whole of Italy and even to France; and retained the same style of architecture and ornamentation for centuries. Her impression seems to be that they had added to the Collegia a reference to Solomon s temple, and this is not improbable when we remember that the Roman Emperor Justinian after he had completed “Agia Sofia” in Constantinople exclaimed: “I have surpassed thee, O! Solomon.” These Italian Academies had their ” Caput Magistrum, ” and their ” Arch Magister, ” who according to Leader Scott had to be a grandee. The head-master was no doubt the Master of the Level Men, the Arch-Master of the Guild working curved work. At the same time any authority that had central jurisdiction was termed an “Arch Fraternity,” and M. H. Shuttleworth mentions a reprint of 1776 at Paris, of the 13th century Statutes of the Knights of St. John which mentions their “Archiconfrere Royale de Jerusalem.” Every country had a special class to “Pass” Masters; Scotland had its “Six Men of Ancient Memory”; Saxon England its “Elders”; France its “Masters Fraternities”; Germany its “Old Masters”; who assembled “Chapter-wise.” The establishment of the Grand Lodge of England and its depletion of the technical parts of the Guild, in time destroyed the power of these Harods, Rulers, or Passed Masters, and sought to occupy their place in a very perfunctory manner. The dissatisfaction against the Grand Lodge was everywhere great and England, Ireland, and Scotland had its Arch Masons in or about 1740, France had its Menatzchim, its Harods, its Provosts and Judges, its Architects, and its Royal Arch.

They were the real Grand Lodge, with secret Rites and tokens, they formed a Court of Award, as they united the Geomatic and Domatic Sections, until the law and the Grand Lodge rendered their functions obsolete; chiefly held in cathedral towns, we may find the sacred name over its gates. Besides the feeling, engendered by members of the old Operative Guilds, that Modern Masonry was an imperfect system, various other ideas operated in the development of a system of “Masters degrees,” at a later period termed High- grade Masonry. English Masonry, in the course of ages had gathered much Christian Symbolism upon its Semitic ceremonies, which, in certain parts, would intensify the dislike to the Modern system.

1. On this question of teaching it may be noted that whilst the Jacobite Masonic faction sought to strengthen the Christianity of our Rites, the Southern Masons, had sought from the time when Cromwell readmitted the Jews, to broaden its lines

2. In politics again there existed great, but suppressed, antagonism between North and South; the Grand Lodge of all England at York was essentially Jacobite, that of London, Hanoverian.

3. There was an Hermetic element, from early times in the Guilds, and we shall see that this was well understood in 1721; for there was, as we have indicated in previous Chapters, a very early quasi-connection.

4. There were in existence from the time of the Reformation in the 16th century, many mystical societies, and as these passed along the ages, they influenced the Masonic Lodges, and in some instances were drawn upon to establish high-degrees; and we will preface the information we can give upon some of these.

England seems to have first began an innovation upon the system of the Modern Grand Lodge, but the hot-bed of the high-grades was France. From 1688 when a quantity of English, Irish, and Scottish Masons emigrated with James II. there was an ancient Masonry in France of which Hector MacLean was Grand Master, and who was succeeded in 1725 by the Earl of Derwentwater who held that position until the Elector of Hanover decapitated him in 1745. But a little earlier, namely in 1737, the Duke of Richmond, who had been G.M. of England, opened a Lodge in which he initiated the Duc d Antin who in 1743 became Grand Master of the English Grand Lodge of Paris; we will leave him there for the present and take a survey of earlier matters. There is a Carbonari Certificate of 1707, printed by St. Edme (Paris, 1821) as authentic, which says that a Count Theodore born at Naples in 1685 had already obtained the High Grades of Free Masonry in France.

We cannot doubt, upon the evidence afforded in Chapter VI. that the Epoptae, or higher Initiates, of the first ages of Christianity, transmitted their Mystical Rites; these were taken up and carried forward by Monks, Dervishes, Manichees, Catharoi, Templars, Albigensis, Ghibellines, Friends of God, Militia of the Cross, Rosicrucians, and sects too numerous to mention; and that such secret Schools were in existence long prior to the Reformation in the church, as witness the labours of such men as Fiscini, Pico de Mirandolo, Reuchlin, Erasmus, Agrippa, Rudolphus Agricolo, and many more, and that educated Free Masons, in their Masters Fraternities and Fellowcraft Lodges, were more or less conversant with Pythagoreanism, Platonism, Cabalism, Rosicrucianism, and that these Societies interested themselves in Germany and elsewhere in the spread of the doctrines of the Culdees, of Wycliffe, Huss, Luther, and other Reformers, and the Secret Society established by Cornelius Agrippa in London, in 1510, may have been of this nature. How far these adapted the Craft guild ceremonies, or at what date if they did so, can only be plausible conjecture.

These Secret schools, which the Church of Rome would term Gnostic, must have permeated the whole of Europe and entered into the Guild life of the traders and artizans, and we cannot, well otherwise, account for the friendliness shewn to Luther, when in 1517 he began his fearless crusade against the overwhelming force of Rome. It is supposed that Luther himself was a Guild member and he actually uses Guild terms in 1527, when he says that he is “already passed-Master in clock-making.” It is stated that about 15 days after the holocaust which he had the temerity to make of the Pope s Bull, he was waited upon by a member of some Guild holding a meeting at Wiittemberg, and induced to go to an Assembly at the Guild Hall, where after Reception “by ancient ceremonies,” he received a medal bearing Mystic characters, and was then placed under the protection of the Brotherhood. (“National Freem.,” Washingtorn, 1863; Row s “Masonic Biographs,” 1868; “Canadian Craftsman,” 1893.) It is quite certain that Secret Societies of Mystics, united by ceremonies with signs, then existed; and it may be that the Reformers strengthened themselves by such Societies, intended for mutual protection, and the Charter of Cologne, 1535, if genuine, may represent such Assemblies. The early Secret Societies of the Albigensis and the Ghibellines usually represented their position under the symbol of an Egyptian or Babylonish captivity, for both forms are used, and Luther himself adopts this in his book entitled the “Babylonish Captivity.” He says, “The Christian people are God s true people, carried away captives into Babylon, where they have been robbed of that which they received at their baptism.” Salandronius the Swiss, thus writes to Vadian, “Oh! saw you how the inhabitants of the mountains of Rhetia, cast away from them, the Yoke of the Babylonish Captivity.” Melancthon, in 1520, says, “the finger of God is to be seen in what Luther is doing, even as the King of the Egyptians refused to acknowledge what was done by Moses.” We can even find language amongst them, which forms the most secret part of certain Masonic high-grades, but which we cannot repeat. Luther in 1520 thus writes to the Elector. “With one hand I hold the sword, and with the other I build the walls of Zion”; similar language was used in Paris and Toussaint Farrel, 1525, says, – “The 70th year will come at last, the year of deliverance, and then we shall have freedom of mind and conscience.” Nor is this symbolic language absent from the works of the English Rosicrucians for John Heyden, writing in 1663, has an allusion to it, particularly forced; speaking of Christian Rosenkreutz, circa 1400 he says (p. 18), – “After five years came into his mind, the wished return of the Children of Israel out of Egypt, how God would bring them out of bondage. Then he went to his Cloyster, to which he bare affection, and desired three of his brethren to go with him to Moses.” These he explains were Brothers G.V., I.A., and E.O., who constructed a “Magical language.” This may be traditional or found in MSS. to which Heyden had access, if history, it indicates a company of four working in a like direction to Luther a century and a half before his days.

We find this symbolic language reduced to emblems, two of these brought from Nuremberg are engraved in the “Transactions” of the Newcastle College of Rosicrucians. One of these has, on one side, the figure of a Pontiff in the act of blessing, also the figure of a Monk with a lighted taper in his hand, and between the two an Altar with an open Bible upon it, around the border is the inscription VERBUM DOMINI HB:YHYH (irradiated) MANETINAETER (nitate); the obverse has an armed man, with a drawn sword, holding the scales of justice, in the heavier pan is a human figure, and in the lighter pan a writhing serpent; several inscriptions appear in the centre but are indistinct, the legend is JOSUA CONFIDE NON DIRELINQUAMTE. In the Peasants league against the Nobles, 1524-5, the motto of Munzer was “we must like Joshua destroy all the nations of Canaan with the sword,” and in one of his letters he signs himself, “Munzer, armed with the sword of Gideon,” possibly this medal is Anabaptist. The Roman Catholic clergy are very fond of making Faustus Socinius the founder of Freemasonry, this, of course, is false, but Socinius seems to have established a secret Society by which he spread his views in Poland. The second medal we have named is a Jubilee one of 1617, the obverse being precisely the same as that just described; on the reverse we find a bee-hive, the HB:YHYH (irradiated), a serpent twined round a cross, three other indistinct emblems, at the top EGYPTUS ET ISRAEL; at the bottom ANNO JUBILAEI OM; around the border, in two lines is the legend DEMSCHWERN EGYPTISCHEN DIENSTH AUS WIE MOYSES GEUHRTAUS VNS CFURTAVS DESBAEST FINIS TEKNU, ALSOHATT MARTIN LUTHERUS. The Jubilee date of 1617 is about the period when the Rosicrucian Societies began to supersede the Mystic Schools mentioned in Chapter VI., of which, to a slight extent, this is a continuation. Although the Clerical enemies of Masonry in France pointed out last century the bearing of all this upon the Masonic Rites then practised, it is not in the province of a Mason to do so, but those who have the Red Cross and its analogous grades will comprehend.

We have alluded to the Harodim, which in France became the nucleus of the high grades, and the secret Societies from which these latter drew some of their material. There is, however, another Order, which the Romish Church associates with a Secret Discipline, and an enlightened purpose, which they suppose has been embodied in Freemasonry – we allude to the Order of the Temple. The Templar origin of Masonry, or at least one of its Rites, was quite a cardinal doctrine abroad last century; and we have already given the facts leading to this view. Philip le Bel before he undertook the suppression of the Templars in 1310, had, two years before this, interdicted the trade Fraternities. Two branches of the Templars escaped destruction, the one in Scotland the other in Portugal, and a third is mentioned in Hungary down to 1460, these would correspond with each other, and they could not feel any friendship for Rome. The difficulty of a widespread continuation would arise from the vigilance, after 1313, of the priesthood, but the Order may have been continued in spirit under other names; and we must ask what became of the numerous bodies of Artisans expelled by this action from the Preceptories of the Templars. Starck in his reply to Dr. Beister (“Anti Saint Nicasse,” 1786, ii, pp. 181-202.) says: “Had he been somewhat better acquainted with ecclesiastical history he would have found, not only one, but several religious bodies which under far more violent oppression than those endured by the Knights Templar, have secretly continued to exist for a far longer period.” In Scotland there was a strong leaven of Culdee opinion to preserve the Templars, and Papal opinion was always more lightly considered by the independent Scot than his English neighbour. Hence Scotland preserved the name of the Templars even after the dissolution of the Chivalric Orders in that country in 1560. These Knights were often addicted to Hermetic studies, and may have become amalgamated with some of these. Thory points out, in writing of the times of Lord Bacon, what he calls the singular fact that here and there in works of the time are found allusions to the Templars, and that Alchemical works have references to their red-cross banner.

Mere denial of some such connection does not admit of being loosely made, and Aberdeen had its share of support as a seat of Masonic Templary. Baron Hunde inherited some such traditionary belief and sent emissaries to investigate the belief. When the lands of Maryculter were surrendered in 1548 the Knights took up their residence in the city, where an old Lodge existed which embraced the noble and gentle; and we find this Lodge meeting in Tents, or Encampments under canvas, designated “Outfield Lodge,” or held in the Bay of Nigg, “where no one could see or hear,” and hence believed to have included Templar rites. It is also alleged that certain Templars, before 1600, united with the ancient Stirling Lodge. For some time after the Reformation the orthodox party would seem to have recruited themselves secretly with the sanction of the Grand Master at Malta, and it is very probable that the same thing had place in England when James I. was the “Mason King” and the craft included men of learning and gentlemen. The first assimilation of Chivalry and Freemasonry would arise within the Domus or Preceptory, amongst the Artisans and Lay- brothers there employed; and when they were expelled together in the 16th century, there would be a desire amongst both parties to continue the connection, and still stronger amongst the Protestant parties; gradually, in the course of a century, the Temple began to be looked upon as a Masonic appanage, owing to the chief members belonging to both orders. Finally, in order to make the Orders homogeneous, the craft and other degrees were treated as the necessary gradation by which to become a Templar. There was undoubtedly an ancient traditionary connection besides this, even if the Templars, as seems most probable, did not in the 12th and 13th centuries, introduce the Rites of Freemasonry now practised.

We will now consider the participation of the Freemasons themselves in the aims of the old Hermetic Schools of “Sons and Masters.” We must all admit that the builders of our ancient religious houses were men of great intelligence, who would seek to increase their knowledge from all available sources, and amongst these sources from the Societies of Alchemists and Rosicrucians, including Astrologers and Mathematicians. We have given instances in 1450 where Hermetic Symbolism was identical with that of Freemasonry; but the “Ordinall of Alchemy” compiled by Thomas Norton of Bristol, “In the yeare of Christ, 1477” (83 pp. of MS.), commences as follows:

“To the honour of God, one in persons three, This Boke is made that laie men shouldn t see.” He undertakes, “To teach by Alkimy great riches to winn,” and enumerates the great personages who have worked in the Mysteries of Hermes, Popes, Cardinals, Byshopes, Priests, Kings, Lords, Merchants, and adds: “And goldsmithes whome we should lest repreve, For sights in their Craft move them to beleeve.” He styles Alchemy a “Noble Craft,” and says (page 2) in allusion to the Freemasons: “But wonder is it that Weivers deale with such worke, Free-Masons, and Tanners, and poore P issh Clarkes, Stayners, and Glasiers will not thereof cease, And yet seely Tinkers will put them in prease.” He closes his instruction in the Noble Art thus: “All that hath pleasure in this Boke to reade, Pray for my soule, and for all both quick and dedde; In this yeare of Christ, one thousand four hundred seaventy seaven, This warke was begun, honour to God in heaven.” This participation may have gone on for centuries, and we may feel sure that it did; various Societies of Oriental origin then existed using symbols by which Masons would be attracted to them, and it is in evidence that the early Rosicrucians were Initiated by the Moslem sectaries. In 1630 we find Fludd, the chief of the Rosicrucians, using architectural language, and there is proof that his Society was divided into degrees, and from the fact that the Masons Company of London had a copy of the Masonic Charges “presented by Mr. fflood,” we may suppose he was a Free-Mason before 1620. From the language of Eugenius Philalethes or Thomas Vaughan we may assume that he also was a Mason. Sir Robert Moray and Elias Ashmole, who were received Masons in 1641 and 1646 respectively, were both of them diligent students of Occult matters, and it is within the bounds of probability that the Rosicrucians may have organised a system of the Craft degrees, upon which they superadded their own Harodim receptions long before Free-Masonry passed to the Grand Lodge in 1717.

“The Wise Man s Crown,” 1664, has the following: “The late years of tirany admitted stocking weavers, shoemakers, millers, masons, carpenters, bricklayers, gunsmiths, hatters, etc., to write and teach Astrology.” This latter Society Ashmole terms the Mathematicians; it held an annual festival, which was active in London in 1648 and again in 1682. Even Wren was, more or less, a student of Hermeticism, and if we had a full list of Freemasons and Rosicrucians we should probably be surprised at the numbers who belonged to both systems. It included a study of the Jewish Cabala, and a Dutch Jew was exhibiting a model of Solomon s temple in 1675, and he would be likely to draw upon the Talmud and Cabala in his explanatory lectures; for the Cabala has a branch which possesses a semi-Masonic character in “Architectonic Gematria,” which refers to the construction of words from the numbers given in the Bible when describing the measurements of the Temple, and the Ark of the Covenant, in relation to man himself. Brother W. W. Westcott, M.B., has translated a very curious passage entitled “The Secrets of Initiation, by J. J. Casanova, born 1725, Fr. R.C. circa 1757,” in which he says: “The secrets of Initiation are by their very nature inviolable; for the Frater who knows them, can only have discovered them by himself. He has found them whilst frequenting well-instructed Lodges, by observing, comparing and judging the doctrines and symbols. Rest assured then, that once he has arrived at this result, he will preserve it with the utmost care, and will not communicate it, even to those of his Fraters in whom he has confidence, for since any Frater has been unable to discover the secret for himself, he would be equally unable to grasp their real meaning, if he received them only by word of mouth.”

There can be no reasonable doubt from the evidence of numerous degrees of high-grade Masonry, and their symbolism, that what we have here described has contributed to the development of the systems now worked, though it must always be difficult to trace the development seriatim. These Mystical Societies had survived in various centres of Europe down to the period when Craft Masonry underwent a revival, and such traditional and mystical ceremonies were revised in many cases to adapt them to a new basis in new Rites. This is proved by identity of aims and emblems, but the system has such scant influence on the general work of the Craft that few consider these things worthy of notice; and moreover their ancient value as a means of uniting the forces of sectarian Brotherhoods, ceased to exist in their new form, with the general acceptance of freedom of conscience. The enquiry is of interest, but the secrecy of the old Mystic Societies will ever be an obstacle to full elucidation. Thus amongst Masons meeting together in Lodge, there were members of other Societies which had similar Rites to themselves, and therefore every probability that one would influence the other. The “Modern” historians, the word is used in its double sense, have always conceded scant justice to this section of Freemasonry, and it has been their effort to assign all degrees, above the three first, of which the Grand Lodge, at its start, adopted two, to a foreign origin; and although French and German systems were introduced into this country in the 18th century; the evidence goes to show that with our Craft system went the nucleus of all the high-grades which were carried from England as early as 1688 and afterwards manipulated abroad. There is far more probability for the continuous transmission of secret societies of mystics in this country than on foreign soil, and nothing is gained by the contention. We cannot be a party to the insinuations that truth is found only amongst English Masons, who are usually more ignorant than those abroad, nor concede an allseeing infallibility to the conceited critic who imagines that he knows everything.

In affinity with this subject of the high-grades must further be noticed, in one section at least, the essentially Christian character of its ancient ritual. Thus in a printed Catechism we find after a question of “How many lights?” the farther question, “What do they represent? A. The three persons; Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Q. How many pillars? A. Two, Jachin and Boaz. Q. What do they represent? A. A strength and stability of the Church in all ages. Q. Who is greater than a Freemason! A. He who was carried to the highest pinnacle of the Temple of Jerusalem.” This Christian character is found, in its strength, in the “Dumfries MS.” from which we have had quotations, and was probably the system of such bodies as possessed the old Christian Masters Grade of Harodim-Rosy Cross.

The earliest printed evidence of something beyond the then new speculative Craft is a work by Robert Samber, written in 1721 under the nom-de-plume of Eugenius Philalethes, Junior, and which he dedicated to the Grand Lodge of London in 1722; and there is no doubt that much has passed out of existence that would have enlightened us upon the writers views, inasmuch as he claims, as did the Carpocratian Gnostics, that Jesus established an esoteric doctrine which he communicated to his disciples, and the possibility of such views implies a much broader field to survey than most writers wish to concede.

This Preface of “Long Livers” clearly refers to certain high-grades then known, and is written in the easiest of three keys used by the Hermetic Societies, namely, the operative, philosophic, and religious; it bears entirely upon the latter, and has no reference to operative Alchemy but uses the terms of this Craft, after the mode of Fludd, to convey Theosophic and Masonic truths. Almost whilst we write Brother Edward Armitage has discovered in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, fragments of a Ritualistic nature which bear upon the printed Preface, and is admitted to be in the handwriting of Samber. It is the preparatory application of a Rosicrucian formula to something missing. It embraces a trial by “water”, in washing; of “fire” in purification; of “light” as a symbol carried to its extinguishment; of giving the “coal” and “chalk;” the “cord,” or girdle, binding the recipient to the brotherhood; the “incense,” the symbolism of “knocking” at a door; of “entrance;” and the “Oath” which is that of secrecy, extending even to the persons acting, and treats of the Aspirant s duties in general. (Vide”Ars Quat. Cor.”) As a Preparation, which it says that it is, it may bear some relation to that which follows, as there is verbiage in common. In the Preface of 1721, Samber alludes to the grades of the Arcane Discipline of the early Christians as comparable with Masonry; to a spiritual cube, and he associates Masons spiritually with the three principles of the Hermetic Adepts, namely, salt, sulphur, and mercury, and there are other comparisons which agree with three Masonic grades. He claims that in all time there was a Brotherhood which preserved true religion, essentially what Dermott claims for the Royal Arch, and he goes on to demonstrate the doctrine of the Unity, passing from Moses through the Schools of the Prophets, and the Rabbis. He has also three traitors who correspond with the Cain, Achan, and Enni (Annas) of Harodim-Rosy Cross who slew the “Beauty” of the world. He ends by making Christ the reorganiser of a Masonic Brotherhood, and “holy brother St. Paul,” is alluded to with a marked emphasis which shews that he had a Masonic theory respecting him. He thus leads us through the natural law exemplified in the Craft, the Jewish law in the Arch or Red Cross, to the law of grace in Christian Masonry; for these things are fully implied though no such grades are alluded to by name.

He says that he is addressing “a higher class who are but few,” and this is done in Hermetic language, which shows that he perfectly understood the mystic language of that body. He speaks of those who ought to be “erased from the Book M.,” which implies here Masonry, but remotely that mentioned in Chapter VI. We are rather concerned in defending Samber against his critics of the last 20 years, who represent him as little better than an idiot; the fault is theirs, for they “have eyes but see not.” We will now follow with some extracts which shew that it was a well understood thing that there were certain degrees above the Craft system. The learned Dr. Stukeley states in his “Autobiography,” “7 Novr. 1722. The Order of the Book instituted,” he terms it also “Roman Knighthood,” and says, 28th December that he admitted to it Lords Hertford and Winchelsea. There is nothing to shew the nature of it, and it is not probable that it survived as a Masonic degree. Bro. R. F. Gould has stated, in one of his papers, that there is an advertisement in the “Daily Mail” of 1724 announcing that a new Lodge is to be opened at St. Alban s Tavern for regulating the modern abuses which had crept into the fraternity, and “all the old real Masons are invited to attend.” It is evidently the beginning of the agitation which led to “Ancient” Masonry, and the role of the Royal Arch.

In the years 1724 and 1725 there appeared two editions of a pamphlet entitled “Two Letters to a Friend,” in which are allusions to Dr. Thomas Rawlinson, a leading Freemason, who left the Craft some documents referring to this period. In this print it is stated that the Brother styles himself R.S.S. and LL.D., and “he makes wonderful Brags of being of the Fifth Order. The Doctor pretends that he has found out a mysterious “hocus pocus” Word hat against whomsoever he (as a member of the Fifth Order) shall pronounce the terrible word the person shall instantly drop down dead.” To whatever degree Rawlinson really belonged it is certain that the allusion is to the Jewish tetragrammaton, and that the worthy doctor had been incautiously airing his knowledge of the “Essays” of Reuchlin and Agrippa upon the “Cabala,” and the Mirific Word. There is no reason why the “fifth order,” should not mean the 5th Degree which it is known the Arch was a little later. The nom-de-plume of the writer of the pamphlet is “Verus Commodus,” and he mentions that some of the Masons “write themselves STP,” after their names, which in his blatant fashion he tries to make a profanation of the Trinity; from this it may be inferred that a civil reference was not to be understood by him but that it represented something Masonic, and we know, later on in the Century, that the Templar grade was abbreviated T.P. either as here, or with the crossed (symbol: “P” with vertical extended below and crossed as a Greek cross) and is so found on the 1791 Seal of Grand Conclave. The writer also says: “they tell strange foppish stories of a tree that grew out of Hiram s tomb.”

In Ireland there seems an incipient reference to the Christian grades in the newspaper report of the Installation at Dublin of Lord Rosse as Grand Master, 24th June, 1725. The representatives of six Lodges of “Gentlemen Masons” were present, and it is said: “The Brothers of one Lodge wore fine Badges painted full of crosses and squares, with this Motto “Spes meo in Deo est,” which was no doubt very significant, for the Master of it wore a yellow jacket and Blue Britches.” (“Caementaria Hibernica,” fasc. II.) It was well known that the clothing refers to the brass handle and steel legs of a pair of compasses. The reporter also speaks of the “Mystical table” being in form of a Mason s square.

There is a burlesque advertisement of the tailors, 24 Dec. 1725, which accuses their “whimsical kinsmen of the hod and trowel,” with having changed their day of meeting and Patron, “on new light received from some worthy Rosicrucians.” On the 31st Dec. 1728, Brother Edward Oakley delivered an address at London, in which he quotes largely from Samber s Preface to “Long Livers,” so that it must have had some Masonic importance given to it, and its references understood. Also, in 1729, Ephraim Chambers mentions in his “Cyclopoedia” that there are certain Free-Masons who “have all the characters of Rosicrucians,” or “as retainers to the art of building.” There is a still more precise statement signed A.Z. in the “Daily Journal” of 5th Septr., 1730, from which we extract a small portion: – “It must be confessed that there is a society abroad, from which the English Freemasons have copied a few ceremonies, and take pains to persuade the world, that they are derived from them. These are called Rosicrucians from their Prime Officers (such as our Brethren call Grand Masters, Wardens, etc.), being distinguished on their High days by Red Crosses.”

The “Gentlemans Magazine,” April 1737, contains a long attack upon Masonry signed JACHIN, in which he says: – “They make no scruple to acknowledge that there is a distinction between “Prentices” and “Master Masons,” and who knows whether they have not a higher Order of “Cabalists” who keep the “grand secret” of all entirely to themselves.” It looks very like an intimation of the Royal Arch degree.

All this points out that prior even to 1717 the mixed Lodges possessed a higher section, whether known to the Grand Lodge or not, which could be spoken of in Rosicrucian Jargon, thus raising the question whether there was not then a Freemasonry that had been passing as Rosicrucian during the previous century; even the Chapter of Clermont, a Templar system, asserted that the system of Solomon, contained 7 degrees, and other books asserted that they had received a 7 degree system “from the very heart of Albion, the sanctuary of the high degrees.”One of the earliest bodies of which we know something was the following: THE GORMOGONS.

It is possible that the Gormogons had some relations with the Jacobite Lodges of Harodim, as they used pseudonyms like the latter, and were equally attached to the Stuarts. Prichard, who wrote in 1730 hints that they had pre- 1717 or Ancient Masons in their ranks. Particulars of the body is found in the 1724 pamphlet entitled “Two Letters to a Friend,” from which it appears that they had an Emissary at Rome, and Samber the author of “Long Livers,” is identifiable under the designation of a “Renegade Papist.” Ramsay was with the Pretender at Rome in 1724, and the Duke of Wharton, P.G.M. of England is evidently alluded to as a Peer who had suffered himself “to be degraded” by having his apron burnt in order that he might join the Gormogons, was with the Pretender at Parma in 1728, and had received the title of Duke of Northumberland from him about fourteen years previously. They had a secret reception and cypher of their own, and Kloss considers, no doubt rightly, that in their jargon “China” meant Rome.

Brother R. F. Gould has been at great pains to disentangle the history of the Gormogons, and has made it clear that not only was Wharton a member, but probably founded the Society on an older Jacobite plan; and he shows that the dates of its activity syncronises with the events of Whartons life; and the lampoon may very probably be Wharton s own composition, in which case it throws added light upon the matter in reference to Dr. Rawlinson. The “two unhappy busy persons” who obtained their idle notions “about Adam, Solomon, and Hiram being Craftsmen,” and who abused, “a venerable old gentlewoman under the pretence of making her a European Hiramite,” is interpreted to signify Anderson and Desaguliers in the new Constitution, whilst the venerable old gentlewoman is the old Operative Charges. The whole satire was embodied by William Hogarth in a plate designated “The Mystery of Masonry brought to light by ye Gormogons.” which went through three editions, the last about 1742; in this plate the old woman upon an ass who is about to be saluted by a man with his head in a ladder is thus explicable. As to Duke Philip, his father Thomas was somewhat to blame, Dr. Johnston flings the most opprobrious epithets at him.

THE NORTHERN HARODIM.

This degree was at one time very popular in the County of Durham, and may be supposed to be a part of the work of the Gateshead body to whom the Count Bishop granted a Charter in 1681. Bro. F. F. Schnitger was well acquainted with the last surviving Harod Bro. R. R. Read, a D.P.G.M. of the Mark, who received the degree from his father at Gateshead, where his grandfather also conferred it, and he had been received in the Lodge in youth as an Apprentice and it is said that the Lodge possessed his operative Indentures. Bro. Read made over all his privileges “free from Harodim,” to the Newcastle high grades.

Bro. Robert Whitfield first mentioned the Swalwell Minutes of the degree in the “Freemason” of 11th Decr., 1880, and says that the Lodges claimed important privileges from former ages; the appointment of the P.G.M., and the wearing of hats at the P.G.L. meetings.

The first mention of it, if it can be called so, is the quotation by Bro. Joseph Laycock, who brought the Swalwell, and the Gateshead Lodges under the G.L. in 1735, and was appointed P.G. Master of the Co. of Durham in that year. On these occasions he gave a quotation, in an Oration he then made, and which is printed in the “Book M., or Masonry Triumphant,” in 1736 at Newcastle. He terms these “old verses,” and they are yet a part of the 4th section of the Jacobite Harodim-Rosy-Cross.

The next reference is a minute of the Swalwell Lodge as follows: “July 1st 1746. Enacted at a Grand Lodge “held this evening that no brother mason shall be “admitted into the dignity of a Highrodiam under less “than a charge of 2s. 6d.; or as Domaskin or Forin as “John Thomson of Gateside paid at the same night 5s. “Memorandum: Highrodiams to pay for making in that “order only 1s. 6d.” (8 names follow and 9th line closes) “Paid 2s 6d. English, William Ogden. N.B. The “English Masters to pay for entering into the said “Master-ship 2s. 6d., per Majority.” Of course the “English Masters” refers to the Master Mason of the Grand Lodge of London, introduced by Laycock, and as they style themselves a Grand Lodge, and as the name of Joseph Laycock does not appear as a Harod at any time, it seems very clear that the object was a semi-rebellion of the old operative Masons against the innovations of 1735. A man who spells Harodim as Highrodiam may be excused for spelling Domatic as Domaskin, but Bro. Schnitger seems to think it may mean Damascus. The Lodge was mostly composed of the men employed at Cowley s foundry, and he brought over from Solingen, steel workers who claimed that they had inherited their method of working the metal from Damascus, as the Markgrave had brought instructions thence in the time of the Crusades.

The Ceremonial was a system of secret receptions in points, similar to the Jacobite Harodim-Rosy-Cross to which we will shortly refer. They were the custodians of the Ritual of all Masonry, which was what Oliver invariably termed the “Old York Ritual,” and which certainly contains Harodim points, and no doubt York at one time had the ceremony. The two Trollopes who were part of the Gateshead foundation of 1681 were Stone-Masons of the city of York. Its position in Masonry is precisely that which we have described as Passed Masters, in the old pre-1717 London Guild. In operative times the Ritual, of which they claimed to have been the custodians, was doubtless the yearly Drama; it is the key to all York Masonry after 1725, and begins with the 7th Degree and goes down even to the Apprentice.

They had oversight of all the Lodges of their jurisdiction, there were 9 of them, and they travelled in groups of 3 to punish irregularities, and reconcile differences. At receptions there were to be 9 present, but 6 and 3 candidates would suffice in emergencies.

At Sunderland Bro. Hudson states that the Harodim was conferred from the first establishment of the Phoenix Lodge, and that between 1755 and 1811 they received 150 members. In 1787 R. Markham “Passed the Bridge,” and a month later was made a Royal Arch Mason. Bro. Logan has shown that Palatine Lodge, 97, had the Harodim. In each case members visited from neighbouring towns.

HARODIM-ROSY-CROSS.

This was a London version, clearly of Jacobite derivation, which in 1743 claimed a time immemorial origin; we would suggest that it might have been carried to France from the North by Derwentwater who belonged to this part of the country. It is clearly the grade which Baron Scheffer had from him, in two sections, when he gave him authority to establish Lodges in Sweden 25 Nov. 1737. Ramsay in his speech of 1737 alludes to the old Arcane Discipline of the Alexandrian Church when he says: “We have amongst us three classes of confreres, the “Novice or Apprentice; the Companion or Professed;

“the Master or the Perfected. We explain to the first the “moral virtues; to the second the heroic virtues, and to “the last the Christian virtues the fourth quality is “a taste for the useful sciences and the liberal arts. “Religious discords caused us to change and to disguise, “and to suppress, some of our Rites and usages, which “were opposed to the prejudices of the times.” He also alludes to the Jews working with the sword in one hand and the trowel in the other, which are the lines quoted by Laycock in 1735. Dean Swift must have had some knowledge of this, and he was acquainted with Ramsay in 1728; and he thus writes in 1731, – “the famous old Lodge of Kilwinin, of which all the Kings of Scotland have been, from time to time, Grand Masters without interruption,” and he speaks of the adornment of “Ancient Jewish and Pagan Masonry, with many religious and Christian Rites,” by the Knights of St. John and of Malta.

It is quite possible that Scotland may have had the Rite of Harodim-Rosy- Cross at an early date. There is a curious passage in the “Muses Threnody,” a metrical account of Perth, published in 1638 for Henry Adamson, M.A. The extract may mean much or little in the argument, according to the idea in the mind of the student, for he says: (“Ars Quat. Cor.,” 1898, p. 196. Vide also the writer s paper in A.Q.C., 1903.)

“For we be brethren of the Rosie Cross, We have the Masons word and second sight,” The claim is made for this Metrical system of Lectures that it is of Culdee origin, and had I-colm-Kill for its birth place. The following list of London Chapters has been carefully preserved at Edinburgh, and does not come down later than 1744:

1. Grand Lodge at the Thistle and Crown in Chandos Street, Immemorial.
2. Grand Chapter ” ” ” 3. Coach and Horses in Welbeck St. 4. Blue Boar s Head, Exeter St. 5. Golden Horse Shoe, Cannon St., Southwark, December 11th, 1743. 6. The Griffin, Deptford, in Kent, December 20th, 1744. In 1750 there is a petition of Sir William Mitchell, FDLTY to Sir Robert RLF, Provincial Grand Master of the Most Ancient and Honourable Order of the HRDM of KLWNNG in South Britain; Sir Henry Broomont, FRDM, Deputy Grand Master; Sir William PRPRTN; and Sir Richard, TCTY Grand
” Immemorial. Wardens; and the rest of the Right Worshipful Grand Officers of the said orders.”
It is said that the Grand Master had held his office since 1741, so that is probably the date when the Rite was reconstituted as here given. A Charter was granted to the Hague in 1751, and this was carried to Edinburgh in 1763, since which period the Rite has handed down the Lectures intact. It is likely however that some revision may have been made about 1740 say in the last section and the title. It has since 1767 been termed the “Royal Order of Scotland.” In 1786 they Chartered a body at Rouen, when an interesting correspondence ensued between Wm. Mason the Grand Deputy Master, and Murdoch the Grand Secretary, in which the latter speaks of the dormancy of the Order for some time in Scotland, in a light that scarcely agrees with the facts of the case. Rebold says that the ceremonies of the Royal Order were revived on the formation of the Grand Lodge of St. Johns Masonry the Mastership of the Jacobite Lodge Canongate Kilwinning, and it is a fact that in 1735 that Lodge had, as is proved by the Minutes, a “Masters Lodge” quite distinct from the Craft, and which in its work and organisation, was identical with the London Lodge, No. 115, designated in 1733 a “Scotts Masons Lodge,” and Brother John Lane holds that this was identical in Constitution with certain Lodges established as “Master Masons Lodges” conferring that degree only of the English Ritual, that therefore the so called Scotts Lodges differed only in this that their members were Scottishmen. But though this be so it is no proof that the Rituals were the same, and it may well be that the actual Scots Lodges had a special ceremony such as the Mastership of Harodim. It is probable therefore that there is truth in Rebolds statement that the Cannongate Kilwinning Lodge, which was a Jacobite Lodge, was the Christian Harodim which expired, as the Scotch Rite contends with the ruin which befel that political sect. Thory who was “Atharsata,” or Most Wise, of the French Branch in 1807 makes the Mason of Heredom; the Knight of the Tower; and the Rosy Cross to correspond. – as they clearly do, – with the degrees of Scotch Master; Knight of the East; and the Prince Rose Croix; the fourth and last step termed the Sanhedrin he considers “the figurative banquet of the Pascal lamb,” we rather consider it was converted into the Templar Kadosh.

RED AND ROSY CROSS.

In the absence of any old Minutes of these two degrees, it may perhaps be thought idle to express an opinion that they may have had an existence amongst Hermetic Masons long prior to the establishment of Modern Freemasonry. Ramsay told to Geusau, when occasionally visiting him at Paris in 1741, that General Monck had used the Lodges as meetings at which to promote the return of Charles II. Geusau s Diary passed into the keeping of the Prince of Reuss, and it is held that at this period it was sought to further ally the Hermetic associations of London with the Craft for the same purpose. There is this further to be said on the matter that the quaint old rhyming ritual of Heredom-Rosy Cross would seem to be a system of Lectures referring to these two degrees, which constituted with the Craft a Rite of themselves, the only qualification for the Rosy Cross being the Red Cross, – sometimes termed the “Mysterious Red Cross of Babylon.” When Harodim-Rosy Cross was carried to France by the followers of James II. the title was translated into “Rose Croix of Heredom,” and the Red Cross was designated Knight of the East, and in 1744, Knight of the Sword, whilst the Rosy Cross is the Rose Croix. In the Red Cross there are three points, namely: – (1) The Obligation of the 3 Sojourners, Shadrach, Mesech, and Abadnigo, who have escaped the “fiery furnace of affliction”; (2) the Arch Chapter of Jerusalem, which includes the Passing of the Bridge on the way to and from Darius; (3) the Council of the Persian Monarch. There are many points in the degree which have reference to the Harodim Lectures; such as passing the Bridge; the dungeon of the Tower; the journey of Zerrubabel, and the essays on the respective strength of Wine, Women, and the King, when Truth is said to be mighty above all things. Would that it applied to Masonry and Masons! There is one curious thing in this portion, in which it is said that the Lord will provide a victim, and it probably alludes to the ancient Guild Rite of a human sacrifice. Whilst the Red Cross is a mystery of the second temple added to that of Solomon, the Rosy Cross of Harodim is the erection of a spiritual temple not made with hands, the Mystery of the ancient Gnostics – “God with us” in the bodily temple. There is an ancient alphabet given in Barrett s “Magus” called “Passing the River,” having much similarity to Masons Marks, which may be allied with “Passing of the Bridge.”

It is, to say the least, somewhat singular that so favourite a symbol, in all time, as the Rose has been, in both religious and civil architecture, should have been neglected by the modern Freemasons, and proves that it must have lost much of its symbolism. We have mentioned that Bishop Theodoratus connects mystically “Ros” with the Rose, which was a Gnostic emblem of the Saviour; and applies equally to the Arcane Discipline and the Rosy Cross – “Ros,” or dew, implying regeneration, and the Rose the thing regenerated. Shall I say it? The writer has seen an old Rosy Cross ritual, where the Adonisian fable that a drop of blood from the slain god, sprang up a rose, is applied to the Christian Saviour. In Egypt the Rose was consecrated to Isis or Mother Nature, and Apuleius fables himself as drawn from brute nature, or an Ass, by eating roses. Chaucer translated the Romance of the Rose, wherein a pilgrim is represented as going in search of roses. We have mentioned the Girdles of the Guild Mason, John Cadeby, of Beverley: a much worn one contains the letters J and B, whilst another is embroidered with roses, in the manner of modern Rose Croix clothing. The Arms of William of Wykeham were two carpenters – couples between three roses. The emblem was often carved in the centre of the ceilings of mansions to symbolise that what passed at the table was “under the rose.” One other example we will mention: the Chapter House of York Minster, which is octagonal, and therefore based on the eight pointed Cross of the Temple, has upon the lintel of the entrance door the following Latin couplet, which, though it looks modern, is said to be ancient, but renewed when necessary: –

“Ut Rosa flos florum Sic est domus ista domorum.” As the Rose is the flower of flowers, so this house is the house of houses. Under the name of Macons Ecossois, Harodim, the “Parfait Macon,” 1743, gives the degree of Knight of the Sword, or of the East, our Red Cross, as of the time of Darius and Zerrubabel, but in 1766 “Le Plus Secrets des Hauts Grades,” omits Darius and adopts Cyrus, and terms the degree a military ceremony, which goes to prove that the Army was employed to spread these degrees. Out of these two versions arose the Royal Arch, and other degrees.

The 4th point of Harodim-Rosy Cross was made Scottish by claiming Bruce as founder of it as a Knighthood, but Gould has shown that in ancient times, in the primitive Guilds of Paris, the Masters and Wardens were Esquires, and the Provosts (our Harods) Chevaliers. They also elected a Chief who had the title of Prince or King.

HOLY ROYAL ARCH, KNIGHT TEMPLAR, PRIEST.

This Rite is that of the Ancient Masons of York and London; yet although we have information that in or about 1740, it was known in London, Dublin, York, Stirling, very little that is reliable has appeared to show its actual origin. It is usually held that it originated with the dissident Ancients; yet as there was no Ancient Grand Lodge at the time when it had some prominence, it could only have been established by the numerous Lodges of Masons which then existed, and which did not recognise the Grand Lodge of London. When Rawlinson brags of a 5th Order in 1724 it is just possible he may have belonged to such degree whether then termed the Red Cross or the Royal Arch. Only one thing is historically certain, sometime between 1723 and 1740 there were ancient pre-1717 Guild Masons, who were dissatisfied with the “digestive” faculties of Anderson and Desaguliers, and made up their minds to restore to Modern Masonry some part of what it had lost. There are so many features in common between the Red Cross of Babylon and the modern Royal Arch degree, that we are quite safe in assuming that there was a primitive Ritual from which both were evolved, and we can easily prove what that primitive ritual was. The term Red Cross seems to be far the most appropriate name for the degree, and for this reason that the term Royal Arch refers to a special Guild which members of this degree are not, they are essentially Craft Masons. Both York and Dermott practised the Templar degree, but it seems never to have assumed the rank of Masonry, but was occasionally, in all parts, at times, conferred on non-Masons; whilst the Priest was essentially a Protestant ceremonial.

The Arch. We have previously alluded to the ancient drama, or annual Commemorative Ceremonies, of the primitive Guilds. We have also mentioned that in laying the Foundation Stone of the temple of Solomon, a vault was constructed 1 Reed, or 6 cubits, below the floor, where, over the centre, was erected a Pedestal, in which were the plans and a scroll with the first lines of Genesis. This Foundation is laid on the “Five point method,” and the instant the centre is fixed it is guarded by four men armed with swords in one hand and building tools in the other. When the fugitives returned from Babylon the centre of Solomon had to be found, and the labourers were set to find the vault and report to the duly Passed Masters who had to report to the three Grand Masters. The vault being found, three Passed Masters descended and brought away the plans and the scroll which every modern Arch man brings away also. Nor did these revisers end here; they could not understand why modern Masons had only one Grand Master, whilst the Guilds had three, and they therefore gave the three Principals all the attributes of the original builders of the first temple; these held as their attributes three Rods by which to form a square building, or oblong as the 3 to 1 temple; the Arch Principals instead of rods have sceptres; the private receptions of these principals, and their secrets, are all but identical with those possessed by the representatives of S.K.J., H.K.T., and H.A.B. Masons are so utterly careless about historical truth, that we might safely have left them to puzzle out the origin of the Arch degree for themselves, but what we have written, we have written.

There is no doubt that the old northern Harodim gave much of this information owing to their having been of Operative origin before they joined the Grand Lodge of London. The author of “The Illustrations of Masonry,” William Preston, who was sometimes a Modern and sometimes an Ancient, reorganised the system of the Lectures in 1786 under the designation of the “Grand Chapter of Harodim,” and established them in London 4th January, 1787; he claims that “it is of ancient date in different parts of Europe. The Mysteries are peculiar to the Institution, and the Lectures of a Chapter include every branch of the Masonic System.” The Rulers were a General Director and a Grand Harod, of which Harodim is the plural. The members were divided into Clause-holders, Sectionists and Lecturers. Thus the 5 first sections would carry a member to the Royal Arch; and four more sections conducted to the “Ne plus ultra,” in a total of 81 points. The Arch of the Ancients represents the Sanhedrin, composed of 72 members, as a Supreme Court of Judicature amongst the ancient Jews, so also does the Red Cross, Knight of the Sword, and Prince of Jerusalem. Hence it is supposed to have a standing superior to that of a Grand Lodge which has irregularly usurped its functions. Although the ritual has undergone many changes, since none of its tinkers seem to have understood what it was, there is no doubt that it had developed into a stately reception before the year 1750. Brother A. J. Cooper Oakley has gone so far as to suggest a more ancient origin for the Arch Pedestal than any previous writer, namely, that it is the “Yantram” or symbol of the Temple of Jehovah, for the temple of every Hindu deity is bound to have a Yantram composed of a geometrical or monogrammatic emblem upon which the god is placed.

An old catechism printed in 1723 asks the question, “Whence comes the pattern of an Arch?” and the answer is, “From the rainbow.” Another printed Catechism of 1730 but grounded on the modern system of 1717, speaks of a word “which was lost, is now found,” and there are French tracing boards of the Craft for 1743, which contain the word “Jehovah,” and the Rituals of that period say that a word was substituted out of fear lest Hiram should have been induced to reveal the genuine one. We must bear in mind that the work of the Grand Lodge was not that of the Harods, though Anderson s Constitutions of 1723 has the representation of an Arch. Oliver in his “Discrepancies” embodies the excellent authority of the late Peter Gilkes that the lost secrets of the Moderns, for the Guild had no lost secrets, were anciently given to the newly received Master after an interval of 15 days, and the old French ritual, before quoted, gives them at the close of the ceremony. There is a symbolism at York and Stirling which seems to make the Arch and the Rainbow synonymous. The minutes of Dermott s Grand Lodge in 1752 mentions the “absurdities” of Dr. Macky, of London, “one of the leg of mutton Masons,” so called because they made Masons for that useful joint, “who gave a long story about twelve marble stones, &c., and that the rainbow was the Royal Arch.” Yet Oliver in confirmation of this quotes “an old Masonic work,” in which the Royal Arch is carried up from the building of the second temple to Moses, Aholiab, and Bezaleel, and from thence to the Altar and Sacrifice of Noah, under the Rainbow as an Arch, and with the Altar as a Pedestal, thence to the expulsion of our first parents from the Garden of Eden. (“Landmarks,” ii, p. 350.) Similar matter is referred to in the Old York Lectures, and its 2nd Degree has a legend of 12 stones erected in the river Jordan.

Dr. Crawley thinks that an incipient form of the Arch degree can be traced in Anderson s Constitutions of 1723, (“Cem. Hib.”) and that this is hinted at in two parts of the ceremony of Installation of Master, sanctioned by the Duke of Wharton in 1722, where he speaks of the “cement of the Brotherhood,” and of the “cement of the Lodge,” when the “well built” Arch was formed, and the word may have been then given. It is a very plausible theory and the only thing against it is that the oldest rituals we have give no hint of it. The Arch degree, by written evidence, first consisted of three steps or Veils, entitled the Excellent, Super-Excellent, and the Royal Arch itself.

In the “Impartial Enquiry” of Dr. D Assigny, printed at Dublin in 1744, he makes allusions to the Arch degree as composed of a body of men who had passed the Chair of Master, and alludes to some propagator of degrees in Dublin who claimed to have the York system “a few years before” (1744), and that his want of knowledge was exposed by some brother who was acquainted with the Royal Arch degree as it was practised in London, which is “prima facia” evidence that it was widely spread. He adds in a note: “I am told in that city (York) is held an assembly of Master Masons, under the title of Royal Arch Masons, who as their qualifications and excellencies are superior to others, they receive a larger pay than working Masons, of which more hereafter.” This seems to allude to an Operative Arch Guild at York, as it is doing violence to his language to read it that whilst the Craft was the initiation of working Masons, the Arch was intended for Initiates and Rulers of a higher standing.

At the “General Assembly on St. John s day,” there may have been practised ceremonies of which we are allowed to have no written knowledge, and which may have been discontinued in the sleep into which it fell between 1740 and 1760; their old Lectures ask the question: “Who amongst Masons are entitled to knowledge?” A. “Those who are justly considered Free and Accepted, and have been Exalted to the Royal Arch Degree, and Knighted in a Masonic Encampment.”

DAssigny goes on to say that there had “lately” arrived in Dublin some itinerant Mason, evidently a different person to those he had mentioned, who offered to add three more degrees to the Craft, of some “Italic” Order, and he warns his brethren against foreign schemers. When Lord Sandwich asked a definition of “Orthodoxy” from Bishop Warburton, the latter wittily replied, “Well, my Lord, Orthodoxy is my doxy, but Heterodoxy is another man s doxy.” Hence we need not worship D Assigny s doxy; what we learn from his remarks is that about 1740 there had entered Dublin two systems of working the Arch, one of York, and a London one which D Assigny favoured, and that these were, in some respects, opposed to each other. The three grades of an “Italic” system may have been Clermont Templary, Jacobite and Romish.

For some 15 or 20 years the Grand Lodge of all England at York was dormant, but was revived in 1762 by one of its old Grand Masters., Francis Drake, Jacobite in his leanings. The Grand Lodge formally recognised the Arch, and there are minutes which show that in 1778 the Templar was a ceremony equally recognised. It would seem, however, that the officers named, 7th Feb., 1762, are H.Z.J., so that the Arch degree related to the 2nd temple as with Dermott, but that in 1776 it referred to Solomons temple, and would therefore be the “Arch of Enoch,” and Oliver says that he saw an old ritual of 1778 in which this ceremony appears as introductory to the Arch of the 2nd temple, and that after his own Exaltation in 1813 he saw another ritual in which the portion relating to Enoch s Arch was struck out. At a later period, however, the officers are those of the 2nd temple as in Dermott s System.

The actual earliest mention of the Royal Arch in print is at Youghall in 1743, where there was a procession of Lodge 21, with display, amongst these particulars we have: “Fourthly, the Royal Arch, carried by two Excellent Masons.” (“Faulkner s Dublin Journal,” 10-14, Jany. 1743 (1744) quoted by Dr. Crawley.)

If these grades were given at York before 1740, it is curious to note that degrees, or systems, called “Scotch Masters,” are alluded to in minutes. Thus in Royal Cumberland Lodge, 41, Bath, appears the following, 8th January 1746: “Brothers Thomas Naish and John Berge were this day, made Scotch Masters, and paid for makeing 2s. 6d.”; five others were received 27th Novr., 1754. In the minutes of the Salisbury Lodge, 19th October, 1746, we find this: “At this Lodge were made Scotts Masons, five brethren of the Lodge,” one of them being the W.M. The Lodge of Longnor, Co. Derby, claim that they received the method of the secrets from the rebel Army whilst in Derby. Kloss quotes J. F. Pollett as saying, 25th April, 1763, that the Scotts degree was the same as that known as the Royal Arch of France, where it dates from the raising of the Scottish Regiment Ogilvy in 1746, and he gives the clothing as green and red, which is that of the Red Cross, and the two, crossed, of Harodim-Rosy Cross. This would render it probable that “Scotts” in England went with the rebellion of 1745. The old Scottish Minute books show Initiations of military men, many of whom joined James II., and established these degrees in the Army and on the Continent.

Lawrence Dermott, to whose labours London was indebted for the establishment of the Grand Lodge of the “Ancients,” who termed themselves York Masons also, had no doubt received the London version of the Royal Arch in Dublin apparently in 1746. In his “Ahiman Rezon” of 1764 is a note, not found in any earlier or later edition (Reprinted “Ars Quat. Cor.” vi.) in reference to the Arms, quarterly, a lion, ox, man, and eagle, which he says were found in the collection of the Architect and Brother, Rabbi Jacob Jehudah Leon, who had constructed in 1641 a model of Solomon s temple, for the States of Holland, which he exhibited in Paris, Vienna, and in London under the great seal and the signature of Killigrew. At the same time Leon published a description of his labours entitled “A relation of the most memorable things in the Tabernacle of Moses, and the temple of Solomon, 1675,” and dedicated it to King Charles II., and Dermott adds that in 1759 and 1760 he had examined and perused such curiosities, and he concludes, “As these were the Arms of the Masons who had built the Tabernacle and Temple, there is not the least doubt of their being the proper Arms of the most Ancient and Honourable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons, and the continual practice and formalities, and tradition, in all regular Lodges, from the lowest degree to the most high, “i.e.,” THE HOLY ROYAL ARCH, confirms the practice thereof.” Dermott in his “Constitutions” seems to follow the lines indicated by Samber in 1721, and he informs us that the Arch degree possessed (circa 1740) the peculiar square alphabet, which he says that he had known for over 30 years. A similar alphabet was in use amongst the Occultists, who termed it the “Aiq Bekar,” or Cabala of nine chambers; it is found in Barrett s “Magus,” and when dissected gives an alphabet of 9 characters increased to 27 by adding to the first series one and two dots respectively; Trithemius, the friend of Cornelius Agrippa, is known to have possessed it.

In reference to Dermott s claim to the Arms used by Rabbi Leon, it is easy to prove that they were not used by Craft Lodges, unless it might have been by some unknown Speculative branch. All the ancient Guild MSS., which add Arms, use those granted to the London Company of Masons in 1472, or a variation of them. Randal Holme gives these in his “Acadamie of Armorie,” with triple towers, according to the original grant, but he adds as supporters, which are not in the Grant, two pillars of the Corinthian Order, “or,” or gold. But we cannot hastily dismiss Dermotts contention, for Leons Arms of the Masons were used by the Grand Chapter of York, and Bro. W. H. Rylands posesses an old panel brought from St. Albans, of date circa 1675-80 which gives these Arms over the interlaced square, level, and plumb of the Masons. There are moreover Rosicrucian and Cabalistic works which treat of these symbols, and it is probable, as they represent the banners of the four leading Hebrew tribes, that Leon might derive them from the Cabala or Talmud, or he might have been a member of the ancient Jewish Guild. In Masonry peculiar systems are taken up by small bodies, then die out, to be revived in another part of the country. The “Book of Razael,” alluded to by Cornelius Agrippa in his book on “Magic,” affords evidence of the signs used in the Arch degree, and the “Exagogue” of the Jew Ezekiel, written, so Wharton thinks, after the destruction of Jerusalem, and translated into Latin by Fr. Morellus at Paris in 1580, gives details which have reference to the Signs of the Veils, omitted from the modern ceremony, but which gave the titles of Excellent and Super-excellent. Clemens and Eusebius give portions of the drama, so its great antiquity is unquestionable. The following seems to have been the general practice before the modern revision; Masons under the G.L. of the Ancients prefaced the Arch ceremony by the Mosaical Veils; those under the G.L. of the Moderns prefaced it with the Arch of Enoch. France at the same period had a degree said to refer to the time of Vespasian which they termed the Royal Arch of York.

A London Lodge of 1754 practised degrees to which the ordinary Mason was not admitted; Dermott terms it Ancient Masonry held every third Lodge night, on account of extraordinary benefits its members had received abroad. The Lodge met at the Ben Johnson s Head in Spitalfields, and Grand Lodge censured them. Moderns, however, became members of both the Royal Arch and Templar, but without the sanction of their Grand Lodge. They sought and obtained from Lord Blaney, 22nd July, 1767, a Charter of Institution and Protection, formulated a “Charter of Compact” in 1778, and printed an “Abstract of Laws for the Society of Royal Arch Masons in London,” 1778, and followed by a 2nd edition in 1782. Bristol had a Lodge founded in 1757 and erased in 1769, in which the Arch degree was worked. A Charter was granted in 1769 to Manchester under the title of “The Euphrates Lodge, or Chapter of the Garden of Eden, No. 2”; the writer tried to save it from erasure in 1854, but the old members were indifferent to its fate. At Bristol on 7th August, 1758.

Bro. Henry Wright gave a “Crafts Lecture,” and on the 13th of the same month “Brothers Gordon and John Thompson were raised to the degree of Royal Arch Masons”; on the 31st of the same month, “Brother Peter Fooks requested to be raised to the degree of Royal Arch and accepted,” and this was done on the 3rd Septr., 1758, along with two others, “and a Lecture on the degree was given by Brother James Barnes”; the minutes are headed “A Royal Arch Lodge,” (W. J. Hughan, “Freemason,” 17 Dec. 1898.) and there are other receptions down to 1759.

From recent discoveries it appears that Brother Thos. Dunckerley, a scion of royalty on the wrong side of the blanket, was Exalted to the Royal Arch degree at Portsmouth in 1754, as he states in a letter of 14th January, 1792. Bro. Alexr. Howell discovered at Portsmouth, in recent years, an old Minute book in cypher of the Chapter of Friendship, No. 3, chartered 11th August, 1769. We read: 1st Septr., 1769 – “The Bro. G.M. Thomas Dunckerley bro t the Warrant of the Chapter, and having lately received the Mark, he made the Bre n Mark Masons and Mark Masters, and each chuse their Mark, &c. He also told us of this mann r of writing which is to be used in the degree, which we may give to others, so that they be F.C. for Mark Masons, and Master M. for Mark Masters.” In Novr. 1770, the degrees of Excellent and Super Excellent Masons are mentioned, to pay 10s. for two steps and two guineas for the Arch as before. In Octr. 1778, the term Companion is used, and Dunckerley gives the Chapter permission to make Knights Templars.

In 1769 the Arch was known at Darlington, Co. of Durham. as the “Hierarchal Lodge”; and Lodge 124, Durham possessed the Mark as we read 21st Decr., 1773, “Brother Barwick was also made a Mark d Mason, and Bro. James MacKinlay raised to the degree, of a Master Mason, and also made a Mark Mason, and paid accordingly.”

In Scotland the Mark was usually recognised by the Arch authority, and Stirling has a very old Chapter named the “Stirling Rock Chapter” which possesses two old and rudely engraved brass plates which alludes to the REDD-CROSS or ARK. The Chapter has been admitted to date from 1743, and they had minutes from that period, but we will allude to this when we reach the Templar.

At Dumfries some interesting matter has been discovered by Bro. James Smith. The Register of Passings to the Royal Arch degree begin in 1756, with a form of Certificate after a Minute of “Passing the Chair,” and the “Sublime degrees of Excellent, Super-Excellent, and Royal Arch Mason” of the 8th October 1770, in which the degree of Mark Mason is mentioned. (“Freemason,” 17th March, 1894.) There was also a Royal Arch Chapter at Montrose in 1765. In the “Pocket Companion” of Joseph Galbraith, printed at Glasgow in 1765, is a song of which a verse follows; it also contains a letter on the Acts of the Associated Synod, which first appeared in the “Edinburgh Magazine” for October, 1757, under the signature of “R.A., M.T.L., Edin. Oct. 25th, 1757.” The Chapter mentioned in this verse would be the “Enoch”:

“May every loving Brother, Employ his thoughts, and search, How to improve, in peace and love, The GLASGOW ROYAL ARCH.”

A Glasgow Templar was “remade” in the Manchester Royal Encampment in 1786, the year chartered by the G.L. of All E. at York. (Notes on the Temple and St. John, 1869 – Yarker.) There are minutes at Banff, 1765-78, of the Arch and of the Mark, when the two steps of the latter were conferred on F.C. and M.M. The Scoon and Perth Lodge, which claims our “British Solomon,” James I. of England, as one of its members, had these degrees, as we learn from the Minutes of the Edinburgh Chapter, No. 1, 2nd Decr. 1778, when they were conferred on members of the St. Stephen s Lodge. Certain brethren were made Passed Masters, and 4th Decr. 1778, the Officers received – “Ex. and Sup. Ex. Mason, Arch and Royal Arch Masons,” and lastly Knights of Malta. (“Scoltish Freem.,” Aug. 1894.)

In Ireland it has hitherto been difficult to obtain information as to Lodge work, but we have already mentioned allusions to it, in Dublin, circa 1740, and elsewhere four years later. It was generally worked under the Craft Charter, as was equally the case, under authorisation of Dermott s G.L., from 1751. The Red Cross was required, but it has now been divided into three sections since they accepted the Scottish Rite of 33 degrees, and they professed to claim it from the 1515 Order of Kt. of the Sword of Gustavus Vasa.

In America the Arch degree was practised early. At Virginia, U.S.A., there is a record that, 22nd Dec., 1753, a “Royall Arch Lodge” was held, when “three brethren were raised to the degree of Royal Arch Mason.” Philadelphia has had a Chapter since 1758. At Boston. U.S.A., the “St. Andrews” has a Minute that Wm. Davies was”made by receiving the four steps, that of an Excellt., Sup.-Excellt., Royal Arch, and Kt. Templar,” and it is afterwards said these are “the four steps of a Royal Arch Mason.” (Hughan s “Englsh Rite.”) Brother Benjamin Deane, Past Gd. Master of Templars, has lithographed a certificate which says that, 1st Augt., 1783, a brother was “pass d, been raised to the Sublime Degrees of an Excellent, Super-Excellent, Royal Arch Mason, Red Cross, Knight Templar.” Bro. G. W. Bain, of Sunderland, has printed the copy of a certificate issued by the Dominica Lodge, No. 229, of the Ancients. It was given by the High Priest of an Arch Chapter, 22nd Decr., 1785, and records that John Lucas was appointed to constitute the Lodge and proved himself – “Past Master in the Chair, Grand Alarm, Signs and Summons, Ark, Excellent, and Super-Excellent, Arch, and Royal Arch, Super-Excellent Mason in the Royal Art a Sir Knight of the Red Cross.” (“Freemason,” 31st Jany. 1891.)

These notices might have been very greatly extended from English Minutes of bodies that worked these degrees under Craft Warrants, but we have said enough to show the nature of the system, which had not “one” central organisation. The Ancient Masons of the 1751 Grand Lodge of London, printed Royal Arch Regulations in 1771, which they again revised in 1789 and 1791. The members frequenting the Modern body of 1717, issued a 3rd edition in 1796, and a 4th in 1807. There is a peculiar duplication of Rites, alluded to in these last pages which we may point out before proceeding further. We have two separate and distinct rites as follows:

I. 1. Craft Masonry in 3 degrees. II. 1. Craft Masonry in 3 degrees. 2. Red Cross (passage of the Bridge). 2. Royal Arch (Enoch etc.) 3. Rosy Cross (Harodim, etc.). 3. Templar.

If to the first we add the Kadosh, and to the second the Templar Priest, we have (including the required Past Master) a double Rite each of seven degrees, practically distinct, yet all through identical in ceremony, or almost so, and yet no evidence that either Rite is derived from the other.

TEMPLAR PRIEST.

All the Templar bodies of the 18th century in England, Ireland, and Scotland, possessed this degree, which was at one time in esteem; it is now entirely abandoned; in Ireland because the Orangemen obtained it, at a time when there was a close alliance between that body and Freemasonry. The ceremony is an embodiment of Fludd s idea that: “It is under the type of an Architect that the prophet warns us – Let us go up to the mountain of reason and there build the Temple of Wisdom. ” Again, its laws have: “Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out the seven pillars thereof.” The rite had seven steps, or journeys, with seven passwords, and seven species of refreshment, seven seals, and seven emblems. Its certificates sometimes gave the era as “the year of revival 1686.” In the French Ordre du Temple the Profession of Knight exacted the tonsure, and conferred clerical functions; and it is a reasonable conjecture that conscientious convictions led to the establishment of the degree, in or about the date named. The Early Grand Lodge of Ireland dated its Era from 32 A.D. York Templars did the same.

KNIGHT TEMPLAR.

The early history of this degree, or Order, is shrouded in much mystery, and all that we can do in the elucidation of it in this country is to give such views as have some probability.

The writer suggested in “Notes on the Order of the Temple, etc,” 1869, that it entered England with the followers of James I., after 1603. Bro. F. F. Schnitger, in a Lecture given at Newcastle, sought to show, and with some force, that all the charges brought against the actual Knights of the Temple in 1311 can be explained by a forced and false view of certain Rites in the modern ceremony, which proves an actual descent of the ritual from the ancient body.

In a lecture by the late Bro. T. B. Whitehead, of York, some years ago, he advocated the probable connection of the Templars, whom Archbishop Greenfield placed in the Monastery of St. Mary s Abbey, and the York Guild Masons. Through the Knights of St. John and the Temple some such connection is feasible, as Masonic history asserts that in 1500 the Knights in London and the Guild Masons were under the protection of Henry VII. Lessing advocates the chivalric union through a certain house at which Wren assembled, with his Masons, during the erection of St. Pauls. Bro. Henry Sadler (“Facts and Fictions.”) shows that numerous independent Lodges existed termed “ye Holy Lodge of St John,” and the Grand Lodge list of 1723, contains a Lodge held at St. John s Gate, Clerkenwell, the old property of the Knights, and the Lodge must have withdrawn itself at once, as it is not mentioned in later lists. Hogarth in his burlesque of the “Scalde Miserable Masons,” has the Tyler of “His Grace of Wattin, Grand Master of the Holy Lodge of St. John of Jerusalem at Clerkenwell.” By Whattin does he allude to the Duke of Wharton? It would seem so. During the 18th and 19th century the “Gate” was a favourite meeting place for conferring the high grades and was much frequented by the adjacent Lodges. The Grand Master at Malta in 1740 expelled six of his Knights for being Freemasons.

The late Bro. Col. W. J. B. McLeod Moore, of Canada, a Past G.M. of Templars, had a theory, which he had received from an aged Danish Physician, and which included Templars and Masons. He asserts that the Benedictines, who date circa 600 A.D., practised the sacred mysteries of the “Arcane Discipline” of the Alexandrian Church. The aged Dane informed him that the King of Denmark was head of a secret non-Masonic Society in the 18th century, of which he himself was a member in 1785. It had seven degrees. When the United Orders of St. John and the Temple were suppressed in the 16th century, and Torphican and its Knights dissolved, these fugitives carried their mysteries to Denmark, and that he belonged to the body at Copenhagen 60 years previously. These sacred Mysteries represented the Fall of Man; his Redemption by sacrifice; and the Resurrection. (“Canadian Craftsman,” vol. 19- 22, 1885-8.) They saw Christ by Faith and represented his doctrine by symbols; they taught that none can claim the right of eternal life beyond the grave, but those that “believe on Him that liveth, and was dead, and is now alive for evermore.” The object, the end, the result of the great speculations of antiquity, was the ultimate annihilation of evil, and the restoration of man to his first state by a Redeemer, a Master, a Christus, the Incarnate Word.

Of course this view as to the Mystery of the Templars has been advocated by many writers, and has been equally applied to Masonry by Samber in 1721, by Ramsay in 1737, and is the same thing as the claim to a Culdee origin by the Harodim-Rosy-Cross. There were, as we have indicated, many similar Societies and the following may be noted. On 6th Dec., 1623, John Chamberlain wrote to Sir Dudley Carlton, a letter which appears in the “Court and Times of James the First” (London, 1848), from which it appears that Lord Vaux s regiment had brought from the Low Countries a Society the members of which had become numerous in London, and “under colour of good fellowship have taken certain oaths and Orders, to be true and faithful to the Society, and conceal one anothers secrets having a Prince wearing blue or yellow ribbons, having certain nicknames for their several Fraternities.” Apparently all the formula of Freemasonry.

The Stuarts in the 17th century made an effort to revive the Order of St. John and the Temple, then of Malta, and a North Convent seems to have existed about Montrose, and it is alleged, on the authority of Dom Calmet, that Viscount Dundee was Grand Master of “the Order of Templars in Scotland,” and that when he fell at Killiekrankie he wore the Grand Cross which was given to Dom Calmet by his brother. It is also asserted that Mar and Athol succeeded him, and that Prince Charles Edward Stuart was installed Grand Master at Holyrood in 1745, and that John Olivant of Bachilton succeeded him, and held the office until his death, 15th Oct., 1795. (“Scottish Statutes of the Temple.”) After this the remnant of the Order is said to have united with some Scoto-Irish Templars, of whom Alexander Deuchar, Lyon Herald, was Grand Master, and who said, no doubt truthfully, that he could trace the Order back in Scotland to 1740, by means of living members.

It is quite certain that there was at this period in France an “Ordre du Temple,” with a charter from John Mark Larmenius who claimed appointment from Jacques de Molay. Philip of Orleans accepted the Grand Mastership in 1705 and signed the Statutes. Its enemies, in recent years, have asserted that these Statutes were forged by the Jesuit Father Bonani, and that it was actually the resuscitation of a 1681 Society entitled the “Little resurrection of Templars,” and that it had as one of its members the learned Fenelon who converted Ramsay to Orthodoxy. In any case, if of 1705, the Charter proves the existence of a branch of Scottish Templars, because it was considered necessary to place them, with the Knights of St. John, “outside the bounds of the Temple, now and for ever.” In 1766, de Tschoudy speaks well of these French Knights as the “Fraternity of Jerusalem,” nicknamed “Freres de Aloya” from the compositon of their suppers.

At Stirling a system of Masonic Templary prevailed which they attributed, rightly or wrongly, to certain Knights of St. John and the Temple who became protestants, and joined the Masonic Lodge at that place, whence an order of “cross-legged masons” arose. We should put it that the Knights continued the superintendence of the Masons of their Domus. In confirmation of this they show two rudely-cut brass plates about 9 x 3 inches, which they believe to date into the 17th century. The first of these has on one side, the words STIRLING ANTIENT LODGE, and the Apprentice Symbols; – the obverse having the Fellow Craft emblems. The 2nd contains on one side the Masters symbols, – two pillars, sun, moon, figures 1 to 12 in a circle (a clock); obverse, at top the words REDD-CROSS OR ARK, with a cross, a dove, and an ark; at bottom, a series of concentric arches, like a rainbow, but with a Key-stone in place, within a border of three equal divisions the inscription SEPULCHRE, with an adze, stone, and sarcophagus. KNIGHTS OF MALTA, with lamb, &c., and three tapers joined, KNIGHT TEMPLAR, with what appears to be a serpent, and 12 tapers in 7 and 5. Name of Lodge as 1st plate. (Vide Plates. “Ars Quat. Cor.” xiii, p. 34) Allusions to the bye-laws appear in the Lodge Minutes in 1745, and a copy appears of 14th May, 1745, signed by Jo. Callender M. The 8th bye-law reads:

“Entered Apprentice 10s. To Grand Lodge 2s. 9d.
Passing Fellow-Craft 2s. 6d. Passing Master 7s. 6d. Excellent and super excellent 5s. Knight of Malta 5s. (Hughan s “Pref.” to D Assigny, Leeds 1898.) And that each Entered Apprentice shall treat the Lodge to the extent of 5s. if demanded.”

It is possible the plates may date about 1743. There is a minute of 1784 that Alexr. Craig then conferred on certain brethren the Order of Malta, and that about 10 years previously he had conferred the degrees of Excellent, super Excellent.

The objection is sometimes made that as Masonry was an Operative Guild they were not a likely body to have continued difficult Rites and ceremonies, or to have appreciated anything but simple tokens of recognition. But this is a very shallow view to take as will be apparent when we remember that Masons, and other trade Guilds, were engaged for ages in the spectacular dramas entitled the Mystery plays, and they were therefore, from ancient times, the very men who were most likely to appreciate such Rites in their own secret Assemblies. With the Reformation the sacred drama came to an end in this country, and it is to the feeling thus engendered that we owe such a Minute as that at Melrose, enacting that the Rites were to be administered “free from superstition.”

Dublin seems to have the most steady continuation of the Templar of St. John, though we have no written proof of the accuracy of its claims. There is a valuable paper on this subject by Bro. C. A. Cameron. (A.Q.C., 1900.) It appears that the Early Grand Encampment of Ireland on the 29th Augt. 1805, issued a document contesting a proposal of the Grand Lodge to take over the control of that body, in which it is said, – “Our Early Grand Encampment of Ireland has subsisted in the City of Dublin for above a century,” and additional currency was given to this by Caesar Gautier, who says, – “its age was above a century, as appears by its books.” Some of its Warrants established bodies of non-Masonic Templars of St. John, and the like is known to have been the case, from time to time, in England, Ireland, Scotland, and in America as says Dr. Folger; and although all the Ancient Masons in these countries gave the Templar in succession to the Arch degree, there seems equally a feeling everywhere, that it was not looked upon as a Masonic degree.

There was formerly an Early Grand body at Carisbrooke, I. of Wight; they also existed in Lancashire, and I have supplied to enquirers copies of a Ritual of 1800. The body ceased to meet about 1836. The “Freemasons Quarterly” (1846 p. 176) gives information in regard to an Early Grand Encampment of England, the minutes of which passed into the hands of the Duke of Sussex, G.M. It contained a curious document of 1312 in the shape of a Prayer, or supplication of the ancient Knights, at the time of their trial, at the hands of the two scoundrels Bertrand de Goth, and Philip le Bel, a coiner of false money. This ancient document is said to have been deposited under the high- altar of the Temple Church London, where it was discovered in 1540. Then it passed, – how is not stated, – into the hands of Jacob Ulric St. Clair of Roslyn, in whose family it was handed down, until it came to William St. Clair, the Scottish Grand Master of 1736, who gave it to his nephew John St. Clair, M.D., of Old Castle, Co. of Meath, who translated it, with assistance, and forwarded this copy to the said E. C. E. of England.

There was however a second body of Templars in Ireland termed the “High Knights Templar,” who conferred the Rite under their Craft Charter. These men applied in 1770 to the Kilwinning Lodge of Scotland for a Charter under the designation of the “High Knights Templar Kilwinning Lodge,” who granted the same without any enquiry. It is said that Baron Donoughmore was their G.M. in 1770, and that these said H.K.T. of Ireland s Kilwinning Lodge in 1779 conferred the degrees of E., S.E., H.R.A. The Knights Templar are mentioned in 1786, 1792; and the Rose Croix, is said to have been carried to Dublin by the Chevalier St. Laurent.

The Early Grand has been extinct for half a century but at the present moment is represented in Scotland by an independent body working the degrees of Red Cross of Rome and Constantine; Kt. of St. John; Knt. of the Holy Sepulchre; the Christian Mark; the T. I. O. of the Cross; Pilgrim, Templar, Mediterranean Pass, and Knight of Malta. Besides which they recognise other side degrees formerly practised in Scotland. It appears that after the Early Grand Encampment of Ireland had issued some 30 Charters to Britain they gave to Brother Robert Martin as Grand Master, in 1822, a Charter of renunciation of rights and of Erection under which this body works to the present time quite unattached to the ordinary history of Templary in Scotland. At York the Templar was formally recognised by the Grand Lodge, and they chartered several subordinate “Royal Encampments” before 1780, when a Charter was granted, 6th July, to Rotherham.

We have mentioned that the “Modern” members of the Royal Arch had established themselves under a so-called Charter of Compact, and the Templars of Bristol executed a similar Charter, 20th Decr., 1780, with Joshua Springer as G.M. Its 20 rules will be found in W. J. Hughan s “English Rite;” in which they style themselves, – “The Supreme Grand and Royal Encampment of the Order of Knights Templars of St. John of Jerusalem, Knights Hospitallers, and Knights of Malta, &c.;” these Regulations settle the question of Costume, &c., but we have not the “Charter of Compact” itself, nor the bodies thus compacted.

About the year 1790 Thomas Dunckerley, who had long taken a very important part, in every degree of Freemasonry, and was Grand Superintendent of the Royal Arch for Bristol &c., and he himself writes to the York Encampment of Redemption, 24th July, 1791, that the Bristol Knights had requested him to take the Grand Mastership of their Order, which of course would include all the bodies which had “Compacted,” no doubt Bath and Salisbury. There was an Encampment termed the “Observance” of London, which had evidently a Foreign origin, as Lambert de Lintot, who was a P.M. of Lodge “St. George of Observance,” and who had been initiated in 1743, had for many years been working the seven degree system of the French Templary of Clermont, ostensibly as “Agent of Prince Charles Edward Stuart.” A Rose Croix ritual in French was printed at London which says that a member of the degree had “power to assemble Masons, and perfect them up to the 6th degree of Ecossaise Knight of the East;” qualifying for the 7th Degree of R.C.

Bath, it has already been noted, had the practice of “Scotts Masonry” in 1746, nor was it then abandoned, for there are other minutes of 1754. But whatever degrees Bath had, with Bristol, under the Charter of Compact, Dunckerley commissions in 1791 Charles Phillpott, a Banker of Bath, to confer his system, and in 1793 he writes to T. West, who had been present at Phillpott s initiation in 1784, – that he expects he will have conferred upon him “the 1st section of the 5th degree, viz.: Rosae Crucis”; and there is a 1790 Minute at Bath with an evident Dunckerley reference, – “William Boyce took all the degrees of the Red Cross, also Royal Ark Mariners, and many other sections and degrees, having first a Dispensation afterwards a Warrant thereby to act.” Dunckerley had at once under his Grand Conclave, of which Prince Edward was Patron, at least four subordinate bodies to which he assigned “time immemorial” rank, the Observance of London; the Redemption of York; the Eminent of the seven degrees at Bristol; and the Antiquity of Bath. His order was styled “Royal, Exalted, Religious, and Military Orders of HRDM-KODSH, Grand Elected Knights Templar of St. John of Jerusalem, &c.” His history of the “Seven Steps of Chivalry” is crude, but his views are shown to be after the minor series of the Arch; 4th Degree, Rosae Crucis; 5th Degree, Templar of St. John; 6th Degree, K. of the E. & W. – T.P.; 7th Degree Kadosh-Palestine. There was also a Grand Inspector, but the whole series was often conferred in one ceremony, and the titles combined in the K.H. Varying fortunes followed this G.C. Dunckerley died in 1795, and was succeeded by Thomas, Baron Rancliffe, 3rd Feby., in 1796; he by Judge Waller Rodwell Wright, 10th April, 1800; he by Edward Duke of Kent 2nd Janry., 1805; and he by the Duke of Sussex 6th Augt., 1812. Judge Wright gave prominence to a degree termed “Red Cross of Rome and Constantine” which has been revived as a special Rite in recent years.

It also appears that French Masons had introduced into London various degrees, of which the members belonged to a Lodge chartered by the G. L. of London in 1754. On the death of Lambert de Lintot, about 1775, an Inventory was taken of his effects in which numerous references are found to French high-grades, which are not now practised. (Vide “Knept,” viii, p. 22.) The Initiation of Lintot must have taken place about 1743, when the Jacobites were very active, and meditating a descent on England, to enforce the rights of the Stuarts. In circularising a plate dedicated to the foundation of the Girls School in 1788, he states that he had been made a Mason 45 years previously, and that he was Past Master of the Lodge “St. George de l Observance,” No. 53, and he speaks mystically of the “Seventh and Ninth heavens.” One of his plates also has reference to the Rose Croix, and Kadosh.

CONTINENTAL ECOSSAISISME.

We have already alluded to the existence in France of two species of Masonry the earlier of which was that of the Jacobites and termed Ecossaisme, the ritual of Modern Masonry was later by a generation. Two works published in France in 1727 and 1731 had some influence upon the high-grades; the first was the “Travels of Cyrus” by the Chevalier Andrew Michael Ramsay; and the other was the “Life of Sethos” by the Abbe Terasson; but they founded no degrees.

There need be no mystery in regard to Ramsay s degrees, but there is much as to where he received them. Born in 1680 it is pretty clear that the system to which he belonged was not that of the Grand Lodge of London and though he was in England and Scotland, 1728-36, there is no record to show that he mixed with the Modern Lodges, but we have given a quotation from a work of Dean Swift s that has some affinity.

French writers seem to be of the opinion that the earliest additions to the Craft degrees were three, termed “Irlandais,” and included a Potent, or Powerful Irish Master. Then succeeded “Ecossais” degrees; usually assumed to be a 4th Degree voted by the Craft Lodge, to which Professor Robison, who was a member, assigns the date 1690; but if, at an early date, it had reference to one degree only, it ended in being applied to all degrees of the “Ancient” system. The first step in the increase of the degrees was this: In old pre-1717 Guild Masonry there was a trial of three traitors, and this system applies it in the best form; and as old Jacobite Masonry was that of the old Scottish Operative Lodges, and as the portion was omitted by the “Moderns,” though adopted by the Ancient-Moderns, so, as the Modern Rituals became known, three degrees of Elect – of 9; of 15; and of Sublime, were established. The Heredom-Rosy Cross was the old Guild Passed Master or Harodim. Out of these sprang the high-grade system, but most of these degrees were soon permeated by Hermetic influence – and I will therefore first speak of it.

ROSICRUCIANISM.

One of the first Societies to make use of the Craft as a basis for their own operations was the Rosicrucian, and it may even date from the time of Agrippa, and Fludd. Abroad the same view was adopted by the “Golden Rosy Cross,” and, once inaugurated, the Hermetic culte expanded. In 1714 a German pastor of the name of S. Richter published a book entitled “Sincerus Renatus,” which contains the basis of the order of the “Golden Rosicrucians,” and which, itself, contains many points which resemble Modern Freemasonry. About the year 1730, when the two Societies had been associated publicly, some of the former joined the latter. In 1716 Richter published at Breslau, – “The true and complete preparation of the Philosophers Stone of the Brotherhood of the Golden Rosy Cross for the benefit of the Sons of the Doctrine.” In this he says that “some years ago the Masters of the Rosicrucians went to India, and since that time none of them have remained in Europe.”

Mr. “Karl Kisewetter,” to whom we referred in a previous chapter, has stated that his grandfather was Imperator of the Order between 1764 and 1802, and that amongst his papers is mentioned, under the Cypher of F.R.C. an Adept who lived in honourable imprisonment at Dresden, and who made four quintals of gold for the Prince of Saxony, and that he vanished, in a mysterious way, leaving some “tincture of health.” His serving brother Johann Gotleib Fried, was afterwards employed at Taucha, near Leipzig, and had some of the tincture which “was of lead and quicksilver and found to give true results.” The last mentioned Imperator of the operative craft was admitted at Amsterdam by Tobias Tschultze. In religious matters the then members seemed to have sympathised with Boehme, and were in touch with the “Emanation” theory of the Cabala, and therefore with the ancient Gnostics. Then arose an amalgamation with the Masonic Rite founded by Martines Pasqually in 1754, and that of his pupil the Marquis de St. Martin, and which was instituted after a journey which the former made to the East. Schrepper, St. Germain, and Cagliostro, are said to have been connected with this Order of the Golden Rosy Cross; but the Masonic element, and a connection with the Illuminati of Germany, would seem, says “Keiswetter,” to have forced it out of its grooves, and in 1792 it was decided to relieve the members from their vows, and to destroy their archives.

THEURGIC.

Martines Pasqually was making proselytes between 1754 and 1762 under a Jacobite authority of 20th May, 1738, which describes Charles Stuart as King of Scotland, Ireland, and England, and Grand Master of All Lodges on the face of the earth. According to the book “Martinesisme,” (Paris, 1899) which seems to be written on the evidence afforded by contemporary writers, he added three degrees of Apprentice Coen, Companion Coen, and Master Coen. A letter says, – “I have been received Master Coen, in passing from the triangle to the circles.” The seventh degree was that of Rose Croix. His work was Theurgic and sought union with deity, as in Oriental Societies. He traced the Initiatory Circles, and the Sacred Words himself; and prayed with great humility and fervour in the name of Christ. Then the super-human beings appeared in full light to bless the labours. After these had departed Martines instructed his Disciples how to obtain like results, and it was to these only to whom he gave the 7th Degree of Rose Croix. Females were not refused admission. Jean Baptist Willermoz organised the Rite at Lyons about 1760 and the Marquis de St. Martin was a member between 1785 and 1790, when he resigned, having first made a system of his own by extending the degrees.

The Rite of Cagliostro was clearly that of Pasqually, as evidenced by his complete ritual which has recently been printed in the Paris Monthly – “Initiation;” it follows so closely the Theurgy above noted, that it need leave no doubt as to whence Cagliostro derived his system; and as he stated himself that it was founded on the MS. of a George Cofton, which he had acquired in London, it is pretty certain that Pasqually had Disciples in the Metropolis. Chastannier was at one time acting with Cagliostro, and left a Rite termed Swedenborg in London.

Amongst the Masonic Rites which dabbled more or less in Hermeticism and Theurgy may be mentioned the Beneficent Knights of the Holy City; the Philalethes; the Philadelphes; the Unknown Philosophers; the Philosophic Scotch rite; the True Mason; the Hermetic Rose Croix; the Cabalistic Rite; the Illuminees of Avignon, founded by Dom Pernetti; a system of Masonic Rosicrucianism and Alchemy was worked in Hungary by the Knights of St. Andrew in 1773. There was also the Fratres Lucis, or Brothers of Light, of which an interesting ritual appears in the “Theosophical Review” of 1899.

THE HOMUNCULI.

Some of the Lodges appear to have gone in for the creation of the “Homunculi” of Paracelsus, and Dr. Hartmann in his “Life of Paracelsus,” gives a very lengthy and curious account from a MS. diary printed in the “Sphinx” of Dr. Emiel Besetzay published at Vienna in 1873, and which is shortly as follows. The Count Joh. Ferd. Von Keuffstein, in Tyrol 1775, carried these bodies in bottles to the Lodge of which he was Master, where they were seen by Count Max. Lemberg, Count Franz Josef Von Thurn and others. These Homunculi were created by Keuffstein, and the Abbe Geloni, or Schiloni. Owing to the bottle being overturned one of the objects died, and the Count attempted to make another, but in the absence of the Abbe he only succeeded in making something of the nature of a leech, which soon died.

It is however impossible to dwell at length upon the numerous Rites which sprang out of the Hermetic and Mystic culte, and we must return to the basis upon which the existing and popular Rites are founded, and which we have already pointed out is to be found in the “Elect” degrees, and in the “Harodim,” and, as well, in the legends of the old operative Guilds.

CUMULATION OF RITES

Although Rites were being established with feverish haste, their cumulation into one Rite of numerous degrees was gradual. Though Derwentwater was considered, as we have shown, to be Grand Master of the Scottish system, yet the real claim to rule was in the hands of the Masters Fraternity. There is little truth to be gathered from the pretended history of Modern Masonry, and when Past G. M. Richmond had brought the Duc d Antin into the Modern system in 1737, and made him G.M. until his death 11th Decr. 1743, the Venerables assembled and elected the Comte de Clermont as G.M. of a new Grand Lodge “Anglais,” and a law was passed that the claims of the Ecossaise had recently arisen and were not to be recognised. Kloss gives an extract from an address published in the “Franc Maconne” of 1744, thus translated. (“Frem. Quart.” 1853. K. R. H. Mackenzie.) – “Ignorance is so common that the Masters and Wardens do not know that Masonry consists of seven degrees and the “Loge Generale,” in its blindness, resolved, on the 11th Dec. 1743, to regard the Masons of the fourth degree, that is to say the Scotch Masters, only as common Apprentices and Fellow Crafts.” This refers to the law of the English Grand Lodge just mentioned, and if, it has any meaning it is, that the Modern Masons were ignorant legislators who considered the Scots degrees as the equivalent of the Modern Craft, and some historians of to day fall into the same error.

The French Heredom-Rosy-Cross consisted of three steps: – (1) Lectures on the Craft; (2) the temple of Zerubbabel; (3) the Rosy Cross; (4) the Knighthood which is attributed to Bruce, and which it was sought to tack on to the Order of the Thistle. Out of these an Order of Templars, of which Bruce had assumed the protection in 1314 was established at Clermont, and with which Ramsay, a disciple of Fenelon, who belonged to the Temple, is supposed to have had some connection about the year 1740

CHAPTER OF CLERMONT

The original degrees of this Chapter were Scotch Master Elect; Knight of the Eagle; Illustrious Templar; and a little later a 4th degree was added viz.: that of Sublime Knight. Graf von Schmettau introduced these claims into Hamburg in 1742. In 1741 Field Marshal Von Marshall was admitted a Knight; the Baron Von Hunde followed in 1743. The Baron Von Weiler claimed to have received the degrees in 1743 at Rome, by some one whom he terms Lord Raleigh, the reception being made in a church of the Benedictines with two Monks in attendance. Out of this sprang the German Rite of “Strict Observance,” worked jointly by Marshall and Hunde, the latter of whom said that he had been created by Lord Kilmarnock, the Grand Master of Scotland, and that Lord George Clifford acted as Prior, that he was then introduced to the “Knight of the Red Feather,” whom he believed to be Prince Charles Edward Stuart, and the Supreme Grand Master. At a later period he sent two members to England and Scotland, who returned with a charter in cypher, creating him the head of the Seventh Province.

Between the years 1743-7 Sir Samuel Lockhart constituted Lodges of a Rite called the Vielle Bru, or Faithful Scots, at Toulouse, at Montpelier, and at Marseilles in 1751. The Rite, if we know it, drew on the legends of the old operative Guilds and did not proceed in its instruction beyond the 2nd temple. It consisted of 9 degrees of which the last was Menatzchim, or Prefects. In 1751 a similar Rite, and evidently derived from it, existed at Paris under the designation of “Knights of the East,” and ruled by a de Valois. It was democratic in its nature, whilst the Clermont Chapter was aristocratic. This Clermont Chapter in 1754 had added, to its degrees, under an unknown de “Bonneville” some of those of the Vielle Bru, as well as others of an Apocalyptic character, that we may find amongst the Friends of the Cross, the Militia Crucifera, and the Christian Fraternity of Andrea, previously referred to Brunswick received the degrees of the Clermont Chapter before any great change was made, and the following account has recently appeared from the pen of Archivist and Librarian F. Kistner. (A.Q,C., 1904, p. 233.)

“According to the legend of the Order it is said to have passed through five periods of time, and to have been founded by Adam. The 2nd period deals with the time of Nimrod. The 3rd period with Moses, who brings the knowledge from Egypt. The 4th period begins with Solomon, and contains the division into “seven grades,” and the distribution of the arts and sciences among them. The 5th period begins with the Order of Templars.” The Chapter concerned itself with the 4th and 5th periods. The 1754 version of the degrees in Brunswick was as follows; after the three Craft degrees:

4th Degree, Maitre Ecossais. (Scotch Master). 5th Degree, Maitre Eleu. (Master Elect, or Knight of the Eagle). 6th Degree, Maitre Illustre. (Illustrious Master, or Knight of the Holy Sepulchre). 7th Degree, Maitre Sublime. (Sublime Master, and Knight of God). “A legend of Solomon s revenge was omitted from the Masters degree and woven into the high-grades. The Maitre Illustre had to take vengeance on the murderers.” (Jewel a dagger struck into a skull, a white black edged apron, a black sash worn from left to right with a dagger at the end. In the 7th Degree, a hexagonal star of mother of pearl, suspended from the neck by a black ribbon). Bro. Kistner goes on to say that the Jesuits created clerical grades for the Jerusalem ones; and that in 1758 certain French Officers, prisoners of war, introduced the degrees into Berlin, with some changes, the organisation consisted of three grades, – “Capitulum Electum;” Illustrious; Sublime. Pastor Philip Samuel Rosa introduced it into Brunswick, where he received “seven members” into it.

I.
It cannot be denied that between 1725-47 the Irish, English and Scottish Jacobites were making political capital out of Masonry, and the eventual changes may be thus summarised. Their first essay, though the evidence is slight, would seem to have been, after the Craft degrees, – 4th Degree, Irish Master; 5th Degree, Perfect Master; 6th Degree, Powerful Master. The system then became divided into two branches: –
II.
“The Vielle Bru, 1743-7.” 1-3rd Degree, Jacobite Lodges. 4-7th Degree, Four “Elects”
8th Degree, Ecossaise. 9th Degree, Menatzchim.
“The System of Clermont, 1740.” 1-4th Degree, St. John s Lodges.
5th Degree, Knight of the Eagle, Elect.
6th Degree, Illustrious Templar. 7th Degree, Sublime Illus. Knight.
III. In 1751-5, College de Valois, In 1754 a certain Chev. de Kts. ofthe East, de Tschoudy a Member. Statutes signed 15 Janry. 1758, in 15 articles. . . 1-3rd Degree, M. Grand Lodge.
4th Degree, Perfect lrish Master.
Bonneville devised the Grades of the Chapter of Clermont and
increased them. 1-3rd Degree, M. Grand St. John s
Lodge. 4-5-7-9th Degrees, Ecoss. of Valois
5th Degree, Master Elect. 6-8th Degrees, Scotch App., Fellow and College.
Mr. 10th Degree, Knight of the Eagle, Elect.
9th Degree, Knight of the Orient. 11th Degree, Illustrious Templar. 12th Degree Sublime Illus. Knight.
In 1761 a Ritual was printed in France entitled, – ” Les Plus Secrets. ou le vrai Rose Croix Traduit de l Anglais; suivi du Noachite traduit de l Allemande.” The grades given resemble those of the College de Valois and are: – I-3rd Degree, Craft; 4th Degree, Perfect Mason Elect; 5th Degree, Elect of Perignian; 6th Degree, Elect of 15; 7th Degree, Little Architect; 8th Degree, Gd. Architect; 9th Degree, Knight of the Sword and Rose Croix, really the Red Cross; 10th Degree, Noachite, which is thought to be the Alitophilote of the German Rite of “African Architects.” The true Rose Croix is not given, yet its Jewel of a Pelican feeding its young is engraved therein. The true Rose Croix appeared in French at London in 1770, and is distinct from the English Ritual of Rosy-cross, and the present Rose Croix is a translation of it. It speaks of seven degrees, or 4 besides the Craft. The 6th Degree is Ecossaise Chevalier d Orient (East or Red Cross); 7th Degree, Knight of the Eagle, Perfect Prince Mason, Free from Heredom, Sovereign of the Rose Croix. The dedication is “on behalf of a Lodge of the Royal Art.”

Nicolai in 1783, and N. de Bonneville in 1788, London, repeat a general, but an old tradition, that the Rosicrucian Society in London and Craft Masonry were united by General Monk for the purpose of aiding the return of Charles II., and as rallying signs they added 5 symbols to be found in “Typotii Emblematii,” 1601, which were abandoned in England, after they had served their purpose. The Abbe Barruel says that they were used by the Chapter of Clermont, and we know that in 1764 they designated the Seven Templar Provinces in Germany. They are engraved for the “Francs-Macons Ecrasse,” 1747, 1772. 1778, &c, – placed crosswise, with a crouching lion in the centre, a fox, an ape, a dove, and a pelican feeding its young, de Bonneville also gives a Kadosh circular of England 1788.

A certain Lord de Berkley granted to Arras on the 13th Feby. 1747, in the name of Prince Charles Edward, to the Lodge “Jacobite Scots” at Arras, a charter for the Rose croix, in which he speaks of the degree having first been named – Chapter of H, (Harodim), then the Eagle and Pelican, (which was the standard of his father James III. in 1715), and “since our misfortunes (of 1745) Rose Croix.” The Charter is signed Berkley and is not unassailable, for we know of no authenticated copy. Some writers say that Charles Edward is termed King Pretendant, his father James III. being then alive; Ragon in his “Orthodoxie Maconnique,” gives a copy which omits the word Pretendant, and uses the term “substitue G.M.”

Considerable change must have taken place in the feelings of the Grand Lodge of France since 1743, for they abandoned the English title, and in the 1755 Statutes testified by Louis de Bourbon, G.M. the following appears as the 42nd Article: “The Scot s Masters shall “be Censors of the labours, they only may correct faults. “They shall at all times have liberty of speech, and that “of carrying arms, and remaining covered, and can only”be called to order, if they fall into error, by Scot s “Masters.”

There is some analogy between the Culdee legend of the Quest of the Sangrael, and the Rose Croix Masons search for the Word. In the old Harodim- Rosy-Cross it ends in the discovery of J.M. and J., in the modern Rose Croix in the discovery of the word I.N.R.I., and has drawn upon the Catholic “Miserere,” which is thus described by Lord Beaconsfield in his “Lothair.” He says: “The altar was desolate, the choir dumb; the service proceeded in hushed tones of sorrow and even of suppressed anguish. As the psalm and canticle proceeded all lights were gradually extinguished. A sound as of a distant and rising wind was heard and a crash as it were of the fall of trees in a storm. The earth is covered with darkness, and the veil of the Temple is rent. But just at the moment of extreme woe, when all human voices were silent, and it was forbidden even to breathe Amen ; when everything is symbolical of the confusion and despair of the church at the loss of the expiring Lord, a priest brings forth a concealed light of silvery flame, from a corner of the Altar. This is the Light of the World, and announces the Resurrection, and then all rise up and depart in peace.” In former times the degree of Rose Croix, or Rosy Cross, was considered and practised as the Easter celebration of the Templars of England.

IV.
In 1758 we have the ” m- perors of the East and West; ” a Council which practised a revised version of the degrees of the Chapter of Clermont, now increased to 25 degrees of which the original Grades were the two last, 24th Degree-25th Degree. 1-18th Degree Ineffable to Rose Croix. mont, G.M. appointed as his 19th Degree Grand Pontiff. 20th Degree Grand Patriarch. 21st Degree G.M. of the Key of Deputy an objectionable char- acter of the name of Lacorne.

The system of the “Em perors,” about 1760 entered the Grand Lodge of France as the “Rite of Perfection of Heredom,” 25 Degrees. We need not repeat the The Grand Lodge refused him Masonry. a seat and he, and Challon de 22nd Degree Prince of Libanus. 23rd Degree Sov. Prince Adept. 24th Degree Kadosh, Black & White Joinville, who was Venerable of the Lodge founded by the Duke names as they are found in any Cyclopaedia. of Richmond, assembled their Eagle. adherents, and 25th Augt. 1761, 25th Degree Sublime Prince of the conferred the 25th Degree by Patent R.S. upon Stephen Morin who was Though the Grand Lodge of France claimed possession of these degrees, the “Emperors” proceeding to San Domingo. In the course of a year the Count of Clermont restored peace, by In 1761 the Count of Cler remained a separate Council for the withdrawal of Lacorne, and 28 years, when they united with the substitution of de Joinville. the G.L., as did the Knights of the East.

V.
The primitive Scottish Rite of 33 degrees was established at Namur in 1770, of which Oliver gives a list of its degrees in his “Historical Landmarks.” (ii p. 89). It was constituted by a Brother of the name of Marchot, and it is necessary to mention it here, because several of its degrees went to swell the “Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite” of 33 Degrees, which was known at Geneva before 1797, as Chemin Dupontes gives a certificate of it at that date, granted to Villard Espinasse, an officer of the Grand Orient of France: the 33rd Degree title of Grand Inspector General was acquired by the G.L. of France from the dignatory Officers of the “Emperors” when, together with the “Knights of the East,” the remains of these Orders united with the Grand Orient in 1786, and into which de Tschoudy had introduced the “Noachite.” (Thory.)

Between 1762 and 1780, this de Tschoudy was working a Rite of his own termed “Adoniramite Masonry,” of which the last is the 13th degree or Noachite; but it is not a Rite of any importance in this enquiry.

THE MORINITE RITE OF PERFECTION, 25 DEGREES.

We are now approaching a subject which in every way is discreditable to Freemasonry. Stephen Morin proceeded to San Domingo, as we have said, with a patent of the 25th Degree as Grand Inspector of Lodges, but there is no evidence of what he did until later. On the 17th August, 1766, he was accused in Grand Lodge of “propagating strange and monstrous doctrines,” and his patent of a Grand Inspector was withdrawn; and the rank conferred on Henry Martin, who was proceeding to San Domingo. Upon this Morin, no doubt with revenge in his heart, proceeded to Kingston, Jamaica, where in 1767 he established a Grand Consistory of the 25th Degree, off his own bat. We know quite well, on the evidence of his own rituals what the changes which he made were.

The “Freemasons Magazine” for 1885 (p. 506-7) gives a full description of his ritual of 1767. He had with him, or they were sent after him, certain statutes of 1762, enacted and agreed to at the East of “Paris and Bordeaux,” and are so designated, even in the reprint of them which the late Bro. Albert Pike made. In 1767 Morin terms them of “Berlin and Paris,” and says they were of the “Grand East of France and Prussia.” To give a colour to this lie he introduced the degree of Prussian Noachite, which had been translated, from the German, at Paris in 1757. This he ranked as 21st Degree, and added the degree of “Key of Masonry” which he had on his patent of 1761, to the 23rd Degree “Knight of the Sun.” He shows his ignorance of Prussian heraldry by using the double headed Eagle of the “Emperors,” and retaining the mantling of the French Royal Arms. He probably – ignorant charlatan as he was – mistook Frederick II., Grandson of Barbarossa, an actual King of Jerusalem, for his contemporary Frederick II. of Prussia.

He seems to have shown ability in selecting energetic and pugnacious individuals as his disciples. He first conferred the degrees of his irregular Consistory at Kingston upon Henry Andrew Franken in 1767, who admitted M. M. Hayes, of Boston, who conferred the same on Spitzer of Charleston, who received others until we find them in possession of Mitchell and Dalcho. In 1802, when these latter issued to the world their Manifesto, they had certainly heard of the increase of the rite by 8 degrees, though they would seem to have been ignorant of their very names. In this Manifesto all the falsities of Morin are accepted without question, and others are added to them, as for instance, Challon de Joinville is termed “Deputy of the King of Prussia,” instead of what he actually was, Deputy of the Count of Clermont. When they forged the name of Frederick of Prussia to a charter they had discovered that several of the 8 added degrees were taken from the “Primaeval Rite,” or that of Namur 1770. On the 21st February, 1802, Mitchell and Dalcho signed a patent of the 33rd Degree on behalf of de Grasse Tilly, and also for Pierre Delorne of San Domingo.

Franken also conferred the 25th Degree upon Augustin Prevost, as Deputy Inspector of the Windward Islands and the British Army; and this Brother in 1776 conferred the degrees upon J. P. Rochet of Scotland, who is understood to have established them there. Prevost also conferred the degrees upon Major Charles Sherriff of Whitchurch, who was propagating them between 1783-8, and who gave Laws and a Charter for the Ineffable degrees to Grand Treasurer Haseltine, and Grand Secretary White, through whom they entered the Templar Conclaves. One important fact is little known. When de Grasse Tilly was a prisoner of war in England, one or two French Lodges were established by him and his confreres, and in 1811 Ben Plummer and six other “Noble Knights” – the requisite seven – were received members of the Conclave at Bath. Plummer had been member of a Lodge held at Wincanton in Somersetshire, and on the 20th, 5th month, 1813, Tilly certificated him as a member of Lodge “Les Mars et de Neptune” of which he was Master at Abergavenny, and terms him “a Royal Grand Commander of Templars,” which he had attained before his membership at Bath, where he was regularised.

THE MARTIN RITE OF THE GRAND LODGE, 25 DEGREES.

In the meanwhile the Grand Lodge of France was asserting itself, and as Henry Martin was proceeding to the West Indies he was appointed a Grand Inspector to supersede Morin, and Rituals, stamped, signed, and sealed, were ordered 17th August, 1766, to be prepared and handed to him. He laboured at the Consistory previously established by Morin, though little is recorded. He was succeeded in his office by Matthew Dupotet, with whom was the Frenchman Joseph Cerneau. In 1801 it is believed that Dupotet and German Hacquet had converted the Consistory of San Domingo into a S. G. C. of the 33rd Degree of the Scottish Rite. Towards the end of 1802 a second insurrection of the blacks occurred, and Cerneau fled to Cuba, and Hacquet to France by way of New York. Dupotet would seem to have appointed, 1st July, 1806, Joseph Cerneau, as Grand Inspector for Cuba. Hacquet revived the Rite in the Grand Orient of France in 1803, and Cerneau established a S.G.C. 33rd Degree in New York 22nd October, 1807, yet flourishing. Emanuel de la Motta, of Charleston, in 1813 gave him trouble by establishing his S.G.C. there; Folger treats him as a crazy lunatic; he acted it well.

It may be mentioned that the Lacornites continued to give trouble to the G.L. of France, and in 1766 a dozen of them were expelled. The Count of Clermont died 16th June, 1771, and with the aid of the Duke of Luxemburg, and the recognition of the Grand Lodge of London, Philip Egalite was elected G.M. of a new Grand Orient, which in 1786 reduced the degrees to seven, or 8 with the Kadosh.

Now we have the “Martinites,” the “Morinites,” and the “French Rite;” and the chief distinction between the two former is this: in the Rite of Morin the 33rd Degree claims to govern all Masonry under the pretended charter of Frederick of Prussia; with the Rite of Martin the bodies are governed chiefly by the 32nd Degree, the 33rd Degree forming a Supreme Court of Appeal.

CHANGES ON THE CRAFT UNION OF 1813.

Considerable changes arose in the Constitution of the High grades on the Union of the two rival bodies denominated “Ancient” and “Modern” Masons. The Duke of Sussex had been received into the Royal Arch degree in 1810. In the Templar Order – HRDM – KDSH – His Royal Highness was proposed as Grand Master 5th May, 1812, and duly installed 6th August of the same year, but he seems at no time to have shown interest in aught but the Craft.

In 1813 the Modern Grand Chapter had issued to its members 183 separate Charters for the Royal Arch, whilst on the other hand the Ancient-Modern Grand Lodge of 1751 empowered the working of the Arch under their Craft Charters, and it was now stipulated in the Articles of Union that the Royal Arch should be considered as the completion of the degree of Master Mason, and the members allowed to join the Chivalric Orders under separate governance. As a completion of the 3rd Degree, however, the statement is more imaginary than real. Up to 1813 if a Mason had not been a Chair Master the Past Master s degree was conferred upon him, as is yet done in America.

Accordingly it was resolved by the United Grand Lodge, 30th November, 1813, that a United Grand Chapter should be constituted with the Craft Grand Officers as its Rulers; and unlimited powers were given for this purpose. An Assembly was held on the 18th August, 1817, with the Duke of Sussex as First Principal. There is no doubt that many old Chapters, previously held under Craft Warrant, neglected to renew their privileges by applying for Charters, as they were required to do; and that such bodies gradually passed out of working. In August, 1826, it was decreed that none but Past Masters were eligible as Principals. The ceremonial of the degree was revised, and reduced to its present form in the year 1835 by the Duke s Chaplain, the Rev. Bro. Adam Brown, under a Committee of nine, appointed 5th February, 1834. (“Freem. Mag.” ii, 1860, p. 471.) A Chapter of Promulgation, consisting of 27 members was chartered May 1835. Also a new edition of Regulations of the United Grand Chapter, was published in 1817, and was followed by one with plates of Jewels, and a list of Chapters, in 1823; since which there have been editions printed in 1843, 1852, 1864, 1869, 1875, 1879. (Hughan s “English Rite,” 1884.)

The death of the Duke of Sussex, in 1843, caused further changes in the rule of the High-grades; he had held the Supreme power of the Orders of Knight Templars, HRDM-KDSH, since 1812, though he gave scant countenance to the High-grades. At one time he accepted a Patent as Grand Prior of the French Ordre du Temple, and it is said that Paul of Russia made him Grand Prior of the Order of Malta; he had also the degrees of the Rite of Mizraim conferred upon him. Ragon gives a ritual of the early time of the Duke s rule granted to a subordinate body at Porte-au-Prince, from which it appears that the ceremony was assimilated to the Templar Kadosh. The Jerusalem Conclave at Manchester, which had originally been chartered by the Grand Encampment of All England at York in 1786, and had gone under Gd. Master Dunckerley in 1795, issued its own certificates during the neglect of the Duke. It installed certain brethren from Liverpool in 1813 who constituted the St. Patrick Conclave; and there was also in 1830 a Conclave entitled the Jacques de Molay emanating from Scotland and which in that year went under the banner of the French Ordre du Temple, at the instance of Brother W. H. Stewart, a Grand Cross of the Scottish Conclave who sought recognition at Paris, and was made Commander, Bailly, and Grand Cross for the Liverpool Convent, (“Letters” of Dr. Morison to Bro. Michael Furnivall, 33rd Degree.) and printed, in 1830, a full translation of the French Statutes. (“Manual of the Knights of the O. of the Temp.,” by Frater H. Lucas of the Jacques de Molay, Liverpool. 12mo. Printed by D. Marples, 71 Lord St., Liverpool, 1830.) Brother Dr. Robert Bigsby was a member of the Metropolitan Convent of the Order, and nominally received a few members into the Order, after it had ceased to exist.

THE ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED RITE.

Certain members of the Templar Order and of the Rite of Perfection of 25th Degree, which continued to be conferred under Templar Charters, and in that form is not yet quite extinct, applied to Brother John James Joseph Gourgas, of New York, for a Charter to practise the Ancient and Accepted Rite of 33rd Degree – the pupil and amanuensis of the notorious Emanuel de la Motta in 1813. The Rite, as we have seen, dates from Charleston in 1802; Ireland had obtained a Charter from Charleston in 1825, Scotland from France in 1843. Accordingly the following English brethren obtained a Gourgas Charter 26th October, 1845, namely: – R. T. Crucifix; George Oliver, D.D.; Henry Udall; D. W. Nash, of Bristol, who was expelled by his confreres in 1858 because he had the audacity to attend meetings of the Templar bodies from which they had each and all received what degrees they individually possessed when the Charter was granted. Brother D. W. Nash then reorganised the old Templar body and pushed it as a System of seven degrees. The S.G.C. is said, however, to have freed itself from the Morin-de la Motta frauds by registration as a Limited Liability Company. The reader may consult the two exhaustive Histories of Robert Folger, M.D., and Wm. H. Peckham, of New York, as to the discord created by Charleston.

The seven degrees of Nash in 1858 were as follows: – 1st Degree, Knight Templar; 2nd Degree, Knight of St. John; 3rd Degree, Knight of Palestine; 4th Degree, Knight of Rhodes; 5th Degree, Knight of Malta; 6th Degree, Rosae Crucis of Heredom; 7th Degree, Grand Elected Knight Kadosh. To obtain a union of Bristol Knights with the Grand Priory of England that body in 1866 agreed to allow the practise of the old degrees of Heredom Kadosh, by its older Encampments, now termed Preceptories. Manchester revived the old Dunckerley degrees of Red Cross, Heredom, Kadosh, 1869-70. The trouble with Bristol led to a similar trouble at Bath in 1871, and they revived their old degrees together with the whole of the degrees which they had had from 1811 Of the Scottish Rite. In 1872 they received and certificated seven “Noble Knights” of the Manchester Chapter, and formed an alliance with them, their Certificates including the whole of England, Scotland, and Ireland and an alliance was formed.

When Harry J. Seymour, the S.G.C. of the Cerneau S.G.C. of New York, was over in Manchester in 1872 he received as 33rd Degree of that System the writer, John Yarker, and on his return to New York had him created an Honorary Member, 15th November, 1872, and Representative of Amity, and the same was renewed in 1880 by his successor W. H. Peckham, S.G.C. 33rd Degree. On the other hand Dr. R. B. Folger established a S.G.C. in Canada with Bro. G. C. Longley as S.G.C. 33rd Degree, and, 23rd July, 1882, Hon. Membership was conferred upon Yarker with a request that he would send on two other names for the same rank. Again on the 11th July, 1882, Peckham established a 2nd S.G.C. 33rd Degree in Canada with Bro. L. H. Henderson as G.C. 33rd Degree. Canada had also two bodies of the Rite of Memphis which were united in 1882, and from the combined bodies Theo. H. Tebbs visited Manchester, and formal documents were drawn 12th January, 1884, since which time the Scottish Rite has been in occupation.

It may be mentioned here that, January, 1903, Mrs. Annie Besant established in London a S.G.C. 33rd Degree, conferring all degrees from the 1st to the 33rd indiscriminately upon Men and Women; she received her constitution from India, a S.G.C. which had its authority from a dissension in the S.G.C. of the 33rd Degree for France, Tilly s constitution.

THE TEMPLAR.

The new Templars assembled a Grand Conclave 27th February, 1846, and elected Sir Knight Charles Kemeys Kemeys Tynte as Grand Master, and revised their ritual, as a single ceremonial in 1851. On his death, 22nd November, 1860, the ensuing Grand Conclave elected Brother William Stuart who was Installed Grand Master 10th May, 1861. On the death of this brother in 1870 the Order was placed under H.R.H the Prince of Wales with H.M. the Queen as Grand Patron, and attempts were made to unite with Ireland and Scotland under a General Chapter, or Convent General, with National Grand Priories in each country, but Scotland posed as a superior System though they had accepted a Patent in 1811 from Edward Duke of Kent, the Grand Patron of English Templary during the Grand Mastership of Bro. Alex. Deuchar, and hence the full scheme fell through. Other changes in clothing, nomenclature, and ritual were introduced, which met with scant approval. On the 12th December, 1895, the Prince of Wales dissolved Convent General, which had been utterly without success, and was proclaimed Sovereign of the National Great Priory, and the Statutes of the Order were revised accordingly. England has had as Gd. Priors, Earl of Limerick, 2nd April, 1873; Shrewsbury, 8th December, 1876; Lathom, 5th October, 1877; Euston, 8th May, 1896.

THE RITE OF MIZRAIM.

As to its origin and history something may be gathered from the French historians of the Rite. It may be added that the Hermetic Scottish body named the Illuminati of Avignon was founded by Dom Pernetti, and Gabrianca, and thence spread to Montpelier in 1760. Gad Bedarride of Cavillon went in 1771 to Avignon, where (he says) he was Initiated into Masonry by one Israel Cohen surnamed Carosse; and, after a few years, he obtained (the equivalent) 77th Degree, at Toulouse. In 1782 an Egyptian of the name of Ananiah visited Cavillon, and gave Gad an “Augmentation of Salary,” which means a higher degree, and perhaps we owe to this “augmentation” the Talmudic and Cabalistic degrees of the Rite. In the troubles of the time, Gad became a Captain of Artillery at Nice, and here he united himself with G. M. Blanc, and became 87th Degree, and was afterwards made a Sovereign Grand Master, 90th Degree, at Naples, by G. M. Palambo. The great authority of the Rite, Marc Bedarride, together with his brothers Michael and Joseph were born at Cavillon in 1766, and Marc became a soldier, and was Initiated at Cesina, 5th January, 1801; at Paris he received the 18th Degree Of Rose Croix (his 46th Degree), and also the 31st Degree Of the A. & A. S. Rite, and he says the 70th Degree of the Rite of Mizraim.

At this time the Chief of the Rite was Bro Le Changeur, of Milan, who is said to have systematised the 90th Degree in the year 1805. Ragon seems to have examined a certificate granted to B. Clavel in 1811 by a Chapter of Rose Croix meeting in the Abruzzes, and which Marc Bedarride signs as 77th Degree. In 1813 Milan granted Patents of the 90th Degree to a few brethren in Paris, and the Grand Orient accepted the authority, but on the 22nd December, 1817, the Rite assumed independence. Marc Bedarride himself states that he received the 90th degree at Naples, and he seems to have taken an active part in the Masonic Lodges of Italy and France. With varying fortunes the Rite continues to meet in Paris, and has recently exchanged Representatives of Amity with this country. Rebold says Jacques Etienne Marconis (surnamed de Negre), and founder of the Rite of Memphis, was at one time a member of Mizraim.

The “Rite of Mizraim” was first cumulated and established in Italy in 1804- 5, and consists of 90 degrees, collected from all sources, and is not without value; it was then taken to Paris by the brothers Bedarride. At one time it was looked upon favourably in this country, the Duke of Sussex was its recognised head in England; the Duke of Leinster in Ireland; and in Scotland the Duke of Athol was succeeded by Walker Arnott of Arleary, Esqre.; but eventually they came to an agreement to abandon the Rite. No doubt they were influenced in this step by financial difficulties in Paris; some one has observed that it needs the fortune of a kingdom to carry on a Rite of ninety degrees with the necessary splendour. Some of the Templar Conclaves continued to confer it till recently; in Italy and some other parts it has been reduced to 33 degrees, and designated the “Reformed Rite of Mizraim.” In a quiet way it is still conferred in this country under its own Supreme Council.

THE ANTIENT AND PRIMITIVE RITE.

The “Rite of Memphis” has a similar record to that of Mizraim, and was established on the basis of the Rites of Primitive Philadelphes and the Primitive Philalethes; occult branches of the systems of Paschalis and St. Martin, in which the grades were not clearly defined, but each of the three sections into which they were divided had power to add any suitable degrees useful for its aims. An Egyptian system of Masonry was foreshadowed in the pamphlet of “Master of Masters,” Paris 1815. Freemasonry had been introduced into Egypt by the armies of Buonaparte, and from thence, where it gathered some additions, was transplanted to Montauban in France, 1816, by the Brothers Marconis, Baron Dumas, Petite, Labrunie, Sam Honis of Cairo etc. After an interval of sleep it was revived at Brussels and Paris by Jacques Etienne Marconis, surnamed de Negre, son of Grand Master Marconis; its revival at Brussels took place in 1838, and at Paris in 1839, with the assistance of the elder Marconis, under the designation of the Ancient and Primitive Rite of Memphis divided into three Sections, and 95 or 97 degrees. At an early period it was introduced into America, Egypt, and Roumania, the former Chartered a Sovereign Sanctuary for Great Britain and Ireland in 1872, and in the two latter countries it is the only Rite held in much esteem. It requires, in this country, that its neophytes should already be Master Masons, and in this year of grace is spread into almost all countries, with whom Representatives are appointed. It introduced the Rite into Germany in 1905, where it has numerous Craft Lodges, and Paris is in course of re-establishing itself.

THE SWEDENBORGIAN RITE.

The Swedenborgian Rite was revived in the United States and Canada by Brother Samuel Beswick. It consists of three elaborate and beautiful ceremonies for which the Craft is required. A Supreme Grand Lodge and Temple for G.B. & I. was chartered by Brother Colonel W. J. B. McLeod Moore, 33rd Degree, &c., of the Canadian body, on 1st October, 1875, with Bro. John Yarker as G.M. A Charter has recently been issued by this country for a body in Paris, and previously to Roumania and Egypt.

MARK MASTER.

In the old arrangement there were, as we saw, two ceremonies of Mark Man and Mark Master, and at its early establishment a cubic stone of the Craft was used, then changed to an arch key stone. There was also a Fugative Mark conferred upon Royal Arch Masons, as well as a Christian Mark. It has also been worked in conjunction with the degrees of the Wrestle, the Link, and the Ark. One version which was practised in Yorkshire last century, say 1780, is based upon the older Red Cross of Babylon and the Second Temple. The ceremonies must have arisen from the discontinuance by the Speculative Masons of the old Operative Mark. A Grand Lodge of the Degree was established by Lord Leigh in June 1856, and has now a very numerous following. The present Ritual is a revisal of an old Aberdeen one; in Scotland the Marks are often hereditary.

RED CROSS OF CONSTANTINE.

This Order was revived in 1870; it had been formerly worked under Lord Rancliffe, and Judge Waller R. Wright; it enjoys consideration. Newcastle has not been dormant.

ROSICRUCIAN ORDER.

The Rosicrucian Order in IX. degrees was revived in 1866, chiefly by the exertions of Brother Kenneth Mackenzie, who had resided in Germany; it has made itself most useful to Freemasons by the publication of papers upon occult and abstruse subjects, of a superior kind, emanating from Scotland, Newcastle, York, and London. The first Supreme Magus was Bro. R. W. Little, whose successor was Dr. Woodman, and the present Chief is Dr. W. Wynn Westcott.

THE CRYPTIC RITE.

This is an American importation, and is the revision and rearrangement of certain ceremonies of the Ancient and Accepted Rite, as well as those of Mizraim and Memphis, and therefore was scarcely necessary in this country.

THE ORDER OF ST. MARTIN.

This Order has its Supreme Council in Paris, and its members are scattered all over the world. It has bodies in this country and a Sovereign Inspector and Delegate. Each of its members are supposed to contribute a paper annually upon the aims of the Order, and in affinity with those of its founder the Marquis de St. Martin. In Paris, its members are republishing the works of that author.

ALLIED DEGREES.

In 1884 a Grand Council of the Allied Masonic degrees was constituted in London; taking over the Red Cross of Babylon; the Knight of St. Lawrence, which claims an operative origin; the Knight of Constantinople, an American invention; the Grand High Priest, a degree in part referring to the Head of a Chapter prior to 1838, and in part to the Chief officer of Knight Templar Priest; there is also the Secret Monitor, and other degrees have recently been added, such as the Red Branch Knights of Ulster.

ORIENTAL SOCIETIES.

The SAT B HAI. This is a Hindu Society organised by the Pundit of an Anglo- Indian Regiment, and brought into this country, about the year 1872, by Major J. H. Lawrence Archer. The name alludes to the bird “Malacocercis Grisis,” which always fly by “sevens.” It has seven descending degrees, each of seven disciples, who constitute their seven; and seven ascending degrees of Perfection, Ekata or Unity. Its object is the study and development of Indian philosophy. Somehow its “raison detre” ceased to be necessary when the “Theosophical Society” was established by the late H. P. Blavatsky, which at one time at least had its secret signs of Reception.

AUGUST ORDER OF LIGHT.

This Order was introduced here in 1882 by Bro. Maurice Vidal Portman. The Altar is that of “Maha-Deva,” and had a Ritual of 3 degrees – Novice, Aspirans, Viator. The writer arranged with Bro. Portman to amalgamate it with the Sat Bhai Rite of Perfection, but it seems to be continued separately at Bradford, Yorkshire, as the “Oriental Order of Light.” Its early certificate adopted the forms of the Cabala, with which the Theosophy of India has some affinity. In the East ceremonial degrees are not valued, the object being the development of practical Occultism, which was the purpose of the establishment of the Order of Light, governed by a Grand Master of the Sacred Crown or “Kether” of the Cabala. The writer has a letter from Bro. Portman in which he says: “The Sat B hai rituals are without exception the finest and best suited to an Occult Order of anything I have ever read,” and he leaves all arrangements in the writer s hands.

ADOPTIVE MASONRY.

This Chapter would be incomplete without some mention of Adoptive Masonry. Societies admitting females as members were established in France early last century, and spread to other countries. One of the first to admit ladies were the “Mopses,” who reorganised after the Papal Bulls of 1738 against Freemasonry. The “Felicitaires” had a nautical character, and existed in 1742. In 1747 Brother Bauchaine, the Master of a Paris Lodge, instituted an Order, admitting ladies, called the “Fendeurs” or Woodcutters, modelled on the Carbonari a class of men who would seem to be a branch of the ancient Compagnnonage; the popularity of this Order led to the creation of others, to wit, of the “Hatchet,” of “Fidelity,” etc. This popularity induced the Grand Orient of France, in 1774, to establish a system of three degrees called the Rite of Adoption, with the Duchess de Bourbon as Grand Mistress of All France; the Rite has been generally adopted into Freemasonry, and various degrees added from time to time, to the number of about 12 in all. The “Ladies Hospitallers of Mount Tabor” added to the original plan, a recondite System called the Lesser and Greater Mysteries. The French Lodges of Adoption were patronised by the highest ladies in the land; and there is evidence that the Rite of Mizraim held androgynous Lodges in 1819, 1821, 1838, 1853; and the A. & P. Rite of Memphis in 1839; of these two last there are handsome certificates in the museum of the Lodge of Research, Leicester. America has a system of her own called the “Eastern Star” in 5 points. In all systems admissions are usually restricted to the wives, widows, sisters, or daughters of Master Masons. Scotland has attempted the working both of the “Order of the Eastern Star” and “Adoptive Masonry,” but not successfully.

SUMMARY.

To sum up this chapter, it advances that prior to Grand Lodges there were Masters of Masters and duly Passed Masters or Harods, who had controlling power over the ordinary Craftsmen, and that the chief Rites of the speculative system of which there is evidence may be thus summarised: –

1. The Guild Rite of four working and three official degrees – Judaic. 2. The Craft and their ruling Harods in the Co. of Durham. 3. Three Craft degrees, and the Red and Rosy Cross, Judaic and Christian. 4. Ancient Masonry of the Moderns, three Craft, and the higher degrees of Holy Royal Arch, Knight Templar, Priest. But outside all this, numberless degrees which we have not space to mention, in some cases derived from the Mystic Schools and adopted into the Masonic System. In many cases new degrees were but variants of the different Rites, readopted by others with a new name; the ruling degree of one Rite becoming a mere ritualistic ceremony in another. In other words, a constant revision by ignorant Rulers, making confusion worse confounded.

XII – FREEMASONRY IN THE GRAND LODGE ERA.

“And therefore what I throw of is ideal – Lower d, leaven d, like a history of Freemasons, Which bears the same relation to the real, As Captain Parry s voyage may do to “Jason s.” The Grand Arcanum s not for men to see all; My music has some mystic diapasons; And there is much which could not be appreciated In any manner by the uninitiated.”- Byron s ” Don Juan. ” “Canto” xiv., Stanza xxii.

The Guild Assembly is supposed to have been revived as the Grand Lodge of London in 1717, and according to the account of Dr. James Anderson, by four old Lodges, which met for that purpose at the Apple-tree tavern; but another account, of 1764, states that six old Lodges took part in the proceeding but gives no evidence. The first Grand Master may be considered a member of the old operative body, namely Brother Anthony Sayer, of whom a very excellently executed portrait has recently been published by Brother Henry Sadler; the election of this first Grand Master took place at the Goose and Gridiron on St. Johns Day, 1717; he was followed by George Payne, a gentleman of antiquarian tastes, who was elected G.M. on the 24th June, 1718. In the year 1719 Bro. J. T. Desaguliers was elected Grand Master, he was a man of some scientific eminence, and visited Lodge Mary s Chapel, Edinburgh, where he was received, “after due examination;” it has been suggested that he may have exemplified the London working, but the facts are such that it is much more probable that he went to learn and not to teach, moreover, the Grand Lodge terms, “Cowan” and “Fellow-Craft” are Scottisms.

Of late years the more critical historians have expressed themselves as very dissatisfied with the account which Anderson has given of himself and of the establishment of his Grand Lodge in 1717, and if the statements which appear in our pages are unassailable, – as we believe them to be, – he had every reason for prevarication and reticence. He says that the Grand Lodge was established because Wren neglected the Lodges, that is the Lodges which were established by the dissidents who left the operative Guilds in 1715. Under the circumstances whatever legitimacy the Grand Lodge of London had it derived it from the old operative Lodges, chiefly in the North of England, which united with it. The Guilds assert that it was Anderson who abrogated the seven years Apprenticeship and changed the seat of the Master from West to East.

In 1720 Brother George Payne was elected for a second time, and compiled a code of regulations for the Grand Lodge which was passed on the 24th June 1721, and forms the first Constitution. Several old MSS. were burnt in London by scrupulous brethren in 1720, one of them being by Nicholas Stone, who is said to have been a Grand Warden of Inigo Jones. The office of Deputy Grand Master was instituted.

In 1721 the antiquary Dr. William Stukely was made a Mason and records the circumstance thus in his “Diary:” – “6th January 1721, I was made a Free- mason at the Salutation Tav., Tavistock Street, with Mr. Collins and Captain Rowe who made the famous diving engine.” In his “Common-place” Book he records; that: – “I was the first person made a Free-mason in London for many years. We had great difficulty to find members enough to perform the ceremony. Immediately after that it took a run, and ran itself out of breath through the folly of the members.” In his “Autobiography” he again refers to the matter: “his curiosity led him to be initiated into the mysteries of Masonry, suspecting them to be the remains of the Mysteries of the antients.” These references are very valuable in the inferences to be drawn from them. As there were few members in 1721, it is clear that under Anderson and his friends much progress had not been made, but from some old members, he must have received the impression of the great antiquity of Masonic Rites. On the 10th March, 1721, he says – “I waited on Sir C. Wren.” At a meeting of the 24th June 1721, at which were present the Duke of Montague, Lords Herbert and Stanhope, and Sir Andrew Fountain, Stukely saw the “Cooke M.S.,” which he says Grand Master Payne had obtained in the West of England, and Brother Speth points out that Stukely made a copy of the first and last page. There exist two other copies of it made at this period; Stukely considered the MS. 500 years old. Grand Master Payne read over a new set of Articles and Dr. Desaguliers pronounced an Oration. (Vide Gould s “Hist. Frem.”) From this we gather that Speculative Masonry was rising into importance.

On the 24th June, 1721, at the Grand Lodge held by G. M. Payne at the Queen s Arms, St. Paul s Churchyard, at the request of the Duke of Montague, Philip Lord Stanhope (afterwards Earl of Chesterfield), and several gentlemen attended; after usual proceedings the Brethren adjourned to Stationers Hall, and in the presence of 150 brethren the Duke of Montague was proclaimed Grand Master and Brother Beale, Deputy. Dr. J. T. Desaguliers delivered “an eloquent oration about Masons and Masonry,” which is said to have been printed.

Stukely records that on the 25th May, 1722, he met the Duke of Queensboro, Lords Dunbarton and Hinchinbroke at the Fountain s Tavern Lodge to consider the Festival of St. John s. Philip Duke of Wharton was elected G.M. 25th June, 1722, and Brother J. T. Desaguliers Deputy. Brother Gould has given good reasons for believing that Anderson s statements of 1738 on this point, as well as upon others, are unreliable. (“Ars Quat. Cor.” viii.) Brother William Cowper was appointed Grand Secretary, and G.M. Wharton approved a Ceremony for Installing the Master of a Lodge. Wharton at this time was much embarrassed having inherited an impoverished estate, and was himself a man reckless in his expenses. Stukely records that on the 3rd November the Duke of Wharton and Lord Dalkeith visited the Lodge of which Stukely was Master. In this year J. Roberts printed the version of a MS., in which are the “New Regulations,” as to one Master and Assembly which his copy says was passed 8th December, 1663; it contains the Clause that a Freemason must be fully 21 years of age. At this time the Grand Lodge claimed the sole right to confer the grade, or grades, of Fellow and Master; it is thought that one grade is implied, if it is two it indicates the sense in which they regarded the rights of Assembly given in the “Cooke MS.”

In 1723 Francis Earl of Dalkeith was Grand Master, and in this year Brother James Anderson, a presbyterian divine, and a genealogist, published the first “Book of Constitutions,” which he had compiled from the old MSS., and other sources, by order of the Grand Lodge. It was dedicated to the Duke of Montague by J. T. Desaguliers the Deputy Grand Master, and Brother Gould is of opinion that Anderson, as an Aberdeen Man introduced Scottish terminology into the English Craft. As a Scottish Antiquary the author would be well acquainted with the Customs of the Lodges and the Masters Incorporations, and whilst the early years of Grand Lodge resembles the Scottish Lodges, the grant of “Fellowcraft and Master,” to the private Lodges, and the sending of Masters and Wardens to Grand Lodge brings it into line with the Incorporations, but Desaguliers had also visited the Edinburgh Lodge. This year an engraved list of Lodges was begun by Brother John Payne, in a small volume; the “Freemason an Hudibrastic Poem,” appeared, and attacks on the Society began in the Press.

In 1724, 1725, 1726,the Grand Masters were Charles Lennox Duke of Richmond; James Hamilton Lord Paisley; and William OBrian Earl of Inchiquin. In 1724 the office of Grand Treasurer was instituted. We gave particulars, in our last Chapter of a considerable Lodge at Chester of which Randle Holme was a member, and it is probable that admissions were continued, for in the year 1724 three Lodges were accepted at Chester and Brother F. Columbine was appointed the Provincial Grand Master. On the 27th November, 1725, Grand Lodge passed a Resolution granting the privilege of Masters to Private Lodges, – “the majority of the members being Masters may make Masters at their discretion.” No doubt Grand Lodge found its time fully occupied with affairs of the government; and this led, a little later, to the sanction of “Masters Lodges,” or meetings for the sole purpose of making Masters. (“Ars Quat. Cor.” – Lane.) The lampoon on the Freemasons and Gormogons appeared, and in 1726 the “Freemasons Accusation and Defence.” Anderson seems to have withdrawn from the Grand Lodge until 1730. A copy of the old Constitutional Charges appeared in 1726 which contains many additions and the name of Hermes is substituted for Euclid. (Spencers “Reprints,” 1870.) In June 1726 Dr. Stukely removed to Grantham and established a Lodge there.

In Ireland Masonry, as we have seen, was known at the University in 1688, and there was a Grand Lodge of Dublin in 1725, having six subordinate Lodges of “gentlemen Freemasons.” The first Grand Master was the Earl of Rosse who was Installed in the Great Hall of King s Inn 26th June, 1725. There was also a Grand Lodge at Munster in 1726, of which Brother James O Brian was Grand Master, and also member of the Horn Lodge in London. At Cork a Lodge is known to have existed in 1728. The custom of issuing Charters to Lodges began with the Grand Lodge of Ireland in 1729, and they were the first to Charter military Lodges, the earliest of which is 7th November, 1732, to the “First Battalion Royal.” (“Cem. Hiber.” – Crawley.) ) A copy of the English Constitutions edited by J. Pennell, with some slight additions, was printed by J. Watts of Dublin in 1730; and in 1734 Bro. Wm. Smith issued a “Pocket Companion,” of which later versions appeared in England. In the constant reception of noble brethren, changes in the Constitutions, and in the qualifications, coupled with the elimination of Christian references which had obtained admission in the course of ages we probably see, it is supposed in the first named case especially, the cause of the attacks made by the press between the years 1723-26, by a class socially inferior, but equally zealous for Masonry, of whom the old Speculative and Operative body had been previously composed. There are allusions in the “Praise of Drunkenness” by Robert Samber to catechisms then known in 1723; another appeared in that year; the “Grand Mystery” and praise of the Gormogons 1724, and a second edition in 1725; to this a short reply was printed by Dublin Masons, 1725, in which the Society is held to be of great antiquity and supported by superior persons. Some years ago the late Brother Matthew Cooke brought to light a very curious and important MS. book of this period which is now lying in the British Museum, being Add. MSS. 23002. (“Frem. Mag.” v, 1861. – Old Lodges. Now facsimiled by Quat. Cor. Lodge.) It is a minute book of the “Philo Musicae et Architecturae Societas” established at the Queens Head, near Temple Bar, by seven members of whom two were made Masons by Mr. Thomas Bradbury and three by the Duke of Richmond. Other Initiates were afterwards made by the Society and we read under date 1724, – “Mr. William Goulston, Court Nevit, Esq., Mr. William Jones, and Mr. Edmund Squire were regularly pass d Masters, in the beforementioned Lodge of Hollis Street, and before we founded this Society a Lodge was held consisting of Masters sufficient for that purpose, in order to pass Charles Cotton, Esq., Mr. Papillon Ball, and Mr. Thomas Marshall, Fellow Crafts; in the performance of which Mr. William Goulson acted as Senior Warden. Immediately after which, viz. the 18th day of February A.D. 1724, the said Mr. William Goulson was chosen President of the said Society.” These brethren, were visited amongst others by Past Gd. Master Payne, and the S. Gd. Warden Wm. Sorrel. As there are no minutes in Grand Lodge of any one being made Masters after 1723, and as it never had an actual body of “Passed” Masters the ancient Guild ceremony is in evidence. It is probable that the regulation of passing existed only on paper, for we see that officers of Grand Lodge were visiting and acting in private Lodges.

In the North of England, following a meeting evidently operative at Scarborough in 1705, and therefore unminuted; at Bradford in 1713; there are records of meetings in 1721, 1723, 1725, 1726, of Private Lodges at York, that mode being used to distinguish the Lodge from the General Assemblies on St. John s day. At a meeting in 1725 Francis Drake, the historian was made a Mason by Brother William Scourfield. A Code of regulations for their meetings was agreed upon and the Society now took the title of “Grand Lodge of All England.” In 1726 Charles Bathurst was appointed President, and Francis Drake, Warden, and the latter at the Annual Assembly on St. John s day, 27th December, 1726, gave an address, which has often been printed, and always held to be of great interest; he speaks of the efforts to revive the Society in London; addresses the operative Masons, other trades, and gentlemen, and claims for York the undeniable Mastership of “All England.” Brother Wm. Scourfield in 1726 was suspended for calling an unauthorised meeting, and making masons, and was probably acting with the operatives. The old body met till 1744, and then fell into abeyance until the year 1761, when Drake revived it. Besides York other bodies of an operative and independent nature existed in the North as at Swalwell, Alnwick, Hexham, Ford, Newcastle, etc.

At London in 1727, 1728, 1729-30, the Grand Masters were Henry Clare Lord Coleraine; James King Lord Kingston; Thomas Howard Duke of Norfolk who held the position for two years. On the 27th May, 1727, Hugh Warburton was appointed Prov. Gd. Master for North Wales; and on 27th December, 1728, George Pomfret opened a Lodge in Bengal. A copper plate of the “Mystery of Free Masons,” was printed by Andrew White – “Taken from the papers of a deceased Brother”; and we find Bro. Oakley quoting largely from Sambers Preface to Long Livers, 1721. Benjamin Cole published in 1728, from copper- plate, the Constitution of 1726. It is noteworthy as illustrating the state of things now existing that Past Gd. Master Sayer was censured for “behaving irregularly,” and what he did was probably to attend his old Guild as he was an operative. Brother Gould thinks he may have been visiting the Gormogons. In August and September 1730 the “Daily Journal” printed certain spurious rituals, and the “Grand Whimsey” of Masonry, by F. G., and these were followed in the same year by a broadsheet reprint entitled, “The Mystery and Motions of Free-masonry discovered.” In this year also Samuel Prichard published his “Masonry Dissected” (12mo. pp. 31, London, 1730) which led to an able “Defence,” which Brother Gould has proved, from the Minutes of the Lodge at Lincoln, was written by Brother Martin Clare. Also the censure of Grand Lodge fell upon a Society of Honorary Freemasons. Also appeared in 1730 “The Perjured Freemason Detected.” In all this there was probably a Jacobite undercurrent coupled with High grade dissatisfaction, for the sympathies of Grand Lodge was Hanoverian while York was essentially Jacobite. On the 29th January, 1731, the Duke of Norfolk presented Grand Lodge with the old sword of Gustavus Adolphus, to be used as the Sword of State. It is worthy of note that in the few preserved minutes of Lodge meetings, at this period as in those of Lincoln, there is but little mention, and sometimes none, of the degree of Fellow, now termed Fellow-craft, the minutes confining themselves to record the making of Apprentices and Masters.

Faulkner of Dublin printed in 1731, Swift s “Letter from the Grand Mistress of Female Freemasons.”

There appears in the “Daily Advertiser” of 16th August, 1731, an advertisement to the public, that there was on view a fine model of King Solomons Temple, with 2,000 chambers and windows, 7,000 pillars, and models of the Ark and all the holy utensils; further stating that a printed description, with 12 fine cuts, might be had. This would be a model prepared by Councillor Schott of Hamburg between 1718-25 and on exhibition 1725-31. There is mention 22nd September, 1732, of the admission of Jews in the Rose Tavern in Cheapside, and the “Grub Street Journal” printed letters attacking Freemasonry.

There are several interesting notices of meetings at Newcastle-on-Tyne, which we should suppose from “Border Table Talk,” to have had a succession from 1581, a tolerable antiquity for an English Lodge, if the links were shewn. The Northumberland Calendar states that 1st July, 1674, the Society met in the White Friar s tower; and no doubt the “Watson MS.” written in 1687 by Edward Thompson was their Lodge document. On the 29th May, 1730, a Lodge of the “Honourable Society of Free and Accepted Masons” was held at Mr. Barth. Pratts “at which abundance of gentlemen assisted, wearing white leathern aprons and gloves.” On 28th December, 1734, the “anniversary of the Most Honourable and Ancient Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons,” was held at widow Grey s, “the Society consisting of the principal inhabitants of the town and country;” after this they attended church to hear a sermon by the Rev. Mr. Robinson, Vicar of Byewell, “their chaplain.” On 27th December, 1737, Walter Blackett, Esq., was W.M.; Mr. Thoresby, Deputy W.M., Messrs. Newton and Graham, Wardens, for the ensuing year. (Gould s “Hist. Freem.” ii, p. 261; also “Trans. Newcastle Coll. Ros.” pt. I.) Richardson says that in, “1742, the Company obtained from the Corporation a grant of the Cutler s tower in Carliol Croft (now Croft Street), which they repaired, and fit up in a handsome manner.”

We have seen an old Craft certificate form used in the old Newcastle Lodge, under the Grand Lodge, which represented two pillars on one of which was engraved “Isk Chotzeb, Isb Sabhal, Giblim;” and on the other (facing right), “Bonai, Menatzckhim, Harods.”

The Lodge of Alnwick preserved its minutes from 1700-55, and these have been handsomely printed by the Newcastle College of Rosicrucians. We find mention of the Entering of Apprentices; making of Free-brothers; of Brothers and Fellows; the annual elections of the Masters and Wardens; yet no word as to Rites and secrets. But the only inference we can draw from this is that the brethren were real Masons, not pretenders, innoculated with the new doctrines of 1717, and knew that such things could not be written about. Hence in the case of similar omissions in the minutes of York, Durham, Scotland, etc., no reliance can be placed, or arguments drawn from obscure allusions to matters of this nature. There was also, at this period a Lodge at Hexham, which would seem to have died out without at any time coming under the Grand Lodge of England. There was another at Swalwell, which will be referred to when it comes under the Grand Lodge in 1735.

We may add a few lines here in regard to Masonry in Scotland, which had many ancient Lodges at work; and which were societies sanctioned by law for mutual assistance and the regulation of business, and over which the Clare family had an hereditary jurisdiction, and had to be in possession of the “Masons Word.” From early times they had admitted traders unconnected with building, and gentlemen of position; the one termed “Domatic” or operative Masons, the other “Geomatic,” or Speculative Masons. These bodies met together in 1736, and established a Grand Lodge upon the London system, and consolidated it by the election as Grand Master of Brother William St. Clair, who then resigned the rights if such still existed which he had from his ancestors who had been appointed in the 16th century Lord Wardens General, and patrons of the Masonic Craft; with the consent of Lodges, and sanction of the Kings, Judges of all matters in dispute. (Vide the “Schaw Constitution,” or rules, also previous chapter.) From this period, Scotland gradually conformed to the ritualistic system of England, but as proved by the “Dumfries MS.,” quoted in our last chapter, for a long period retained its Christian character. In this condensed account it is unnecessary to repeat the mere names of the Grand Masters of England; these are found in any modern Cyclopaedia, or in the Grand Lodge calendars. Various old Lodges must have united themselves with the Grand Lodge, but as the entries are made from the date of admission, it is impossible in all cases to trace their origin by the Grand Lodge Register; one notable exception is Lodge 65, of St. Rooks hill, Chichester, which is registered as dating from the time of Julius Caesar. An old Lodge of Swalwell, nr. Gateshead, with minutes from 1725, accepted a Deputation, or joined the Grand Lodge, 21st March, 1735, and the Earl of Crawford appointed one of its members, namely Brother Joseph Laycock of Winlaton, as Prov. Grand Master at the same date with a second Lodge at Gateshead, 3rd March, 1736, No. 256. The Lodge was frequented by “brethren from all the surrounding country as the Grand Master conferred the Harodim at his residence.” (“Freem. Mag.” 1794, also “Kneph.”) That these Lodges had the Harodim is proved by an Address which he gave the Lodge in 1735, and which is printed in “The Book M, or Masonry Triumphant,” Newcastle, 1736, and which contains subscribers from this Lodge at Swalwell, from Hexham, and Gateshead; but the minutes do not confirm the statement that Laycock continued the Harodim. It is the “Pocket Companion” of Brother Smith of Dublin adapted to English use; its full title being: “The Book M: or Masonry Triumphant. In two parts. Part I. containing the History, Charges, and Regulations of FREE MASONS, with an account of Stately Fabrics erected by the Illustrious Society. Part II. containing the Songs usually sung in LODGES, Prologues and Epilogues spoken at the Theatres in LONDON in honour of the Craft, with an account of all the places where Regular Lodges are held. “Be wise as Serpents, yet innocent as Doves.” Newcastle upon Tyne. Printed by Leonard Umfreville and Company. MDDCCXXXVI.” It is dedicated to the Brethren and Fellows, “assembling in Lodges in the Northern Counties of England.” In 1735 Anderson complained to Grand Lodge in evident allusion to it.

The Grand Lodge of London had now achieved high prestige, for in 1733 eighteen new Lodges were constituted in the London district alone, and the powers of the Committee of Charity were extended. In 1734 Prov. Gd.. Masters were appointed for Lancashire and Durham, Northumberland we have already named. This would not be likely to give much satisfaction to the Grand Lodge of All England at York, and may have contributed to its later relapse, and even in the South, 1735-8, dissatisfaction was spreading; Freemasons were being admitted in unchartered “St. John s Lodges,” members dropped off, and Lodges began to be erased.

On the 15th April, 1736, the Earl of Loudan had Garter and Lyon, the Kings of Arms of England and Scotland, besides many titled persons, to attend his Installation as Grand Master, but his appointment of officers seems to have given dissatisfaction. In 1737 the Prince of Wales was made a Mason, at a private Lodge held at the palace of Kew. Under the Marquis of Carnarvon the Gd. Master in 1737 a Prov. Gd. Master was appointed for the West Riding of Yorkshire. A Papal Bull excommunicating the members of the Society made its appearance in 1738. In the same year Anderson issued a second edition of the “Book of Constitutions” in which the history of architecture is much extended, but some changes were made in the wording of the Charges which were not altogether received with favour. In the same year the “Gentlemens Magazine” printed a pretended description of the ceremonies, and J. Wilford, the printer of Prichard s 7th edition,issued a 6d. pamphlet entitled, “Masonry further Dissected; or more SECRETS Of that Mysterious “Society” Reveald. Faithfully Englished from the French Original, just publish d at Paris, by the Permission and Privilege of M. de Harrant, Lieutenant General of Police” (pp.xvi. and 32, London, 1738). This work of Heraut is given in “Masonry Trahi.” 1745. In 1739, the Holy Roman Inquisition ordered to be burnt a work, written in French, entitled, – “The History of, and Apology for the Society of Freemasons, by J.G.D.M.F.M. Printed at Dublin by Patrick Odonoko, 1730.” Oliver gives a professed translation in Volume III. of the “Remains;” and it has been erroneously attributed to the Chevalier Ramsay.

On the 30th June, 1739, Lord Raymond, G.M., there are complaints of irregular makings, and the laws are ordered to be enforced; and on the 23rd July, 1740, Earl of Kintore, G.M., there are complaints of brethren “being present and assisting at irregular meetings.” In the year 1741 the Grand Lodge prohibited the publishing of anything concerning Freemasonry; and in the following year a mock procession was got up by people calling themselves Scald Miserable Masons, in imitation of that of the Grand Lodge which led to the abolition of the annual procession of Freemasons. A plate of this ridiculous procession was published 27th April, 1742, but this must not be confounded with Hogarths embodiment of the Gormogons slanders which had a third edition about the same year, and mentioned in our last chapter. On the 24th June, 1742, three Lodges were erased for not answering summonses to appear; and between 1743-7 there were 34 more Lodges erased, but No. 9 restored; next there were five Lodges erased, but two restored. Thus the basis was laid for the prosperous advent of a rival. A new “Book of Constitutions,” the third edition, appeared in 1746, but Brother Hughan points out that it is but that of 1738, with a new title.

In 1736 “Le Franc Macon,” appeared at Frankfort and Leipzic, and was dedicated to Count Bruhl. (Scott gives it in his Pocket Companion of 1757). In 1737 “The Mysterious Receptions of the Celebrated Society of Freemasons.” Also, in the same year, “The Society of Masonry made known to all men,” by S.P. In 1738, “Masonry further Dissected.” In 1745, The Testament of a Freemason or “Le Testament de Chevalier Graf.” In 1747, “L Adept Macon, or the True Secret of Freemasonry.” In a work entitled “Magistracy settled upon its only True Basis,” by Thomas

Nairn, Minister of the Gospel at Abbotshall, printed in the year MDCCXLVII., for which I am indebted to my Publisher, there is a peculiar “Protestation” in the Appendix. At Kirknewton, on December 27th, 1739, James Chrystie, James Aikman, Andrew Purdie, and John Chrystie renounce the Mason-Word, to which John Miller, at Dalkeith, July 27th, 1747, adds his adhesion. All repudiate their oaths as members of “The Society of Operative Masons in the Lodge at Torphicen to meet at Livingston Kirk.” They declare “When I was young at my admission amongst you, both as an Apprentice and Fellow Craft, wherein (upon very solemn penalties) I was bound to Secrecy and also to admit none but operative Masons into the Society.” “Kneeling upon their bare knee with the Bible upon the same, and the naked arm upon the Bible.” “Most of the secrets being idle stuff and lies.” “And as a further aggravation the idle and excessive misspending of precious time and money in superstitious observation of St. Johns Day in idleness, drunkenness and profane jests and songs.” Several particulars of the old Operative Charges are quoted and they withdraw from the Society in favour of the “Oaths of our National and Solemn League and Covenant.”

In 1750, December 27th, A Sermon was preached at Gloucester, by F.M.: printed and dedicated to “Henry Toy Bridgeman, of Prinknach, Esq.,” High Sheriff of the County of Gloucester, Master Mason, and Master of the Lodge of the Ancient and Honourable Society of Free and Accepted Masons, regularly constituted in the City of Gloucester.

In 1751, “An Answer to the Popes Bull, with a Vindication of the Real Principles of Freemasonry.” Published by the assent and approbation of the Grand Lodge of Ireland. “Magna est veritas et proevalebit.” Dublin, printed by John Butler on Cork Hill, for the author, 1751. Small 8vo., 64 pp. Dedicated – – “To the Right Worshipful and Right Honourable Lord George Sackville, Grand Master of the Ancient and Honourable Fraternity of Free and Accepted Masons in Ireland.” (Arms plate – R. Close, Sculp.)

In the same year, “La Macon Demasque.” By T.W. initiated at the Swan, in the Strand, thro his friend Mons. Cowen, a Mr. Fielding being the Venerable or Master. London 1751. (In Berlin 1757).

It is not difficult to see where the shoe pinched the “Modern Mason.” An old broadsheet of 1755 says that, “the Moderns leave out at least one half of the Lectures” – and this is confirmed, later, by a pamphlet of 1765 entitled, – “A Defence of Freemasonry,” the writer of which states that he visited a Lodge of the “Ancients,” and he condemns their prolixity, and defends the abridged form of Modern ceremonies. In our days the Guild Free Masons have spoken, to some extent, and we know their process. What the founders of the G. L. of 1717 did was to do away with all technic, and revise what was left to make a new system; the Dermott body had Guild Masons to help them.

The general dissatisfaction thus shewn to exist, was taken advantage of in the establishment at London of a rival Grand Lodge of which Brother Lawrence Dermott, an old Irish Mason, became the Grand Secretary. Their ceremonies were undoubtedly, as he states, remodelled by Ancient Guild Masons. Their affairs from 1751 were managed by a Committee of the Lodges until 1753 when Robert Turner, Esq., became Grand Master, and was succeeded by Robert Vaughan in 1754. In 1755 a Manifesto entitled “the Masons Creed” was issued. In 1756 Dermott issued their first Book of Constitutions under the title of “Ahiman Rezon,” and certain rules are entitled, “Regulations for Charity in Ireland and by York Masons in England.” The Earl of Blessington became Grand Master in 1757. Brother Henry Sadler in his work entitled “Facts and Fictions” has done much to disentangle the confused history of the period and he has shewn that this body was established by Irish Masons, reinforced by dissidents who had been Initiated in the unchartered “St. John s Lodges,” and by members of the Lodges which had been struck from the Roll of the Grand Lodge of 1717. They claimed to have retained the full ancient work of York which had been curtailed by the Grand Lodge which they dubbed Modern.

The “Ancient,” or the “York Masonry,” by which the new Grand Lodge distinguished itself, was an old Arch-Templar body, and the same system was worked by the London Grand Lodge of 1751. By their Charters the Arch was worked under Lodge authority, and though no prominence was given to the Templar, it was usually conferred with the Arch degree. At York itself, when a revival took place under Grand Master Drake, in 1761, the Arch was recognised by the Grand Lodge and the Templar also, continuing in active operation until 1792, when they silently expired.

In 1764 Dermott published a second edition of the “Ahiman Rezon,” in which comments are made upon three pamphlets of the period, namely: “Hiram, or the Master Key to Masonry; The three Distinct Knocks;” and “Boaz” “and Jachin;” these works seem to have given Dermott much annoyance, and he brings the author of the two last to untimely ends on the 23rd August, 1762, and 8th September, 1763. The Charity regulations of this new edition give in parallel columns the Dublin and London rules in force since 1738, and those of 1751 for his own Grand Lodge. In 1772 the Duke of Athol became Grand Master, after which they were usually designated “Athol Masons,” and had formal recognition from the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland. A third and enlarged edition of the “Ahiman Rezon” appeared in 1778.

We will now return to the Grand Lodge of 1717; and may mention that in 1746 a brother of the name of John Coustos published an account of the sufferings he had undergone by the Roman Inquisition for the crime of Freemasonry, and expressing his grateful thanks to the British Government for claiming his release from his abominable torturers. Complaints of irregular meetings reappear in 1749, and again in 1752. In 1754-5 there are proceedings against the members of a Lodge held at the Ben Johnson s Head in Spitalfields as “Ancient” Masons and the Lodge was ordered to be erased; Dermott says that some of its members had been abroad, where they received much favour from the fact of their following the traditional rites of the “Ancients,” and therefore they resolved to practise “Ancient” Masonry every third Lodge night, to which meetings the ordinary Craft Mason was not admitted. The matter was not mended by Brother Spenser, who replied to a letter from an Irish petitioner for his relief that their Grand Lodge was “neither Royal Arch nor Ancient,” and Dermott prints his letter in 1764. The progress of the “Ancients” has been attributed to the general mismanagement of the affairs of Grand Lodge and to the absence from England of Lord Byron the Grand Master, 1747-52, and a proposal was on foot to supersede him in 1751, but Brother Thomas Manningham interposed so judiciously that the proposal fell through, and he himself was promoted to the office of Deputy Grand Master in 1752; various Lectures and Sermons, given between 1735-52, are printed by Oliver in his “Remains,” and Brother Thomas Dunckerley delivered a Lecture “On Masonic Truth and Charity” at Plymouth in 1757.

A new edition of the “Book of Constitutions,” edited by Brother John Entick, was published in 1756. In 1757 a list of 14 irregular Masons meeting at the Marlboro s Head in Pelham Street, Spitalfields, was ordered to be sent to each Lodge; and Brother Henry Sadler points out that they were working independently of any Grand Lodge. In 1760 J. Burd published a translation of “Les Ordre des Franc Macons Trahi” under the title of “A Master Key to Freemasonry;” by which all the Secrets of the Society are laid open, and their pretended Mysteries exposed to the Publick.” (“Ars Quat. Cor.” 1896, p. 85; J. Bird, opposite St. Dunstan s Church, Fleet St., MDCCLX. 6d. viii and 48pp. 8vo.) This led in the same year to the publication of “The Freemasons Advocate, or Falsehood Detected.” In spite of this untoward state of affairs Freemasonry made progress. In 1764 appeared a work entitled “Multa Paucis for Lovers of Secrets,” which is the basis on which is grounded the charge of negligence by Lord Byron. In Scotland Joseph Galbraith, of Glasgow, in 1765, issued the “Free Masons Pocket Companion.” It contains an account of the “Acts of the Associate Synod concerning the Masons Oath,” at Stirling in 1745, September 26th, and at Edinburgh in 1755, March 6th, and appended is an “Impartial Examination of the Associate Synod against Free-masons,” reprinted from the “Edinburgh Magazine” of October, 1759. In 1763 a Lodge at Durham which had met since 1738 went under the Grand Lodge.

The office of Grand Chaplain was instituted in 1765, and in this year a Lodge at Ford in Northumberland, consisting of 40 members, petitioned Grand Lodge for a Charter, “it being of old standing”; and between 1764-7 seventy-one new Lodges were established. Prince Edward Duke of York having been made a Mason at Berlin in 1765 was constituted a Past Grand Master in 1766. The Steward s Lodge this year printed an “Address” of 16th November, 1763. Entick issued a new edition of the “Constitutions” in 1767. On the 16th May, 1766, William Henry Duke of Gloucester received the three degrees in a Lodge held at the Horn Tavern; on the 9th February, 1767, Henry Frederick Duke of Cumberland at the Thatched House Tavern. Thus the three princes, as Masons, attended a meeting of Grand Lodge 15th April, 1767, and were presented with their clothing, and the Duke of Cumberland was elected a Past Grand Master. Brother Thomas Dunckerley, who claimed to be an illegitimate connection of these princes, was present at the meeting, and from this period was a most active promoter of Freemasonry. The registration of Initiates commenced in 1768. In the year 1769 Brother Wellins Calcott, P.M., published “A Candid Disquisition of the Principles and Practises of the Most Ancient and Honourable Society of Free and Accepted Masons;” he dedicated the work to the Duke of Beaufort, and had the large number of 1,200 subscribers for the edition.

In these years, 1759-70, the opposition to the Grand Lodge, which had never ceased from the time that they broke away from the Operative Guild in 1715, was in constant evidence, as witness the following publications:

In 1759 appeared in jocular evidence, “The Secrets of Freemasonry Revealed, by a Disgusted Brother.”

In 1760 “The Three Distinct Knocks,” by W.O.V.-N., member of a Lodge in England. Also a “Wou d Be s Reason,” for and against; followed by a “Willingly Wou d Be,” believed to refer to Dermott s Ahiman Rezon.

In 1762, “Jachin and Boaz,” followed by “A Freemasons Answer to the Suspected Author of Jachin and Boaz.”

In 1764, “Hiram, or the Grand Master Key, by a member of the Royal Arch.” And in the same year, “An Institute of Red Masonry.”

In 1765, “Shibboleth, or every man a Freemason.” Also, in the same year, “Mahabone, or the Grand Lodge Door Opened.”

Also, “The Way to Things by Words.” McClelland.

“Solomon in All his Glory” professes to be “Translated from the French original published at Berlin, and burnt by order of the King of Prussia, at the intercession of the Freemasons.” London: Printed for G. Robinson and J. Roberts, at Addison s Head in Paternoster Row, 22nd April, 1766. 2s. 0d. viii. and 61 p. A second edition appeared in 1768.

In 1766, “Solomon in All his Glory, by T. W., an Officer in the Army, and late Member of the Swan Tavern Lodge in the Strand.”

In 1767, a second edition of “The Three Distinct Knocks” appeared at London, Sargeant; the previous edition being “Printed by and for A. Cleugh, Radcliffe Highway; T. Hughes, 35 Ludgate St.; B. Crosby, Stationers Court. Price one shilling.” N.D.

In 1769, “The Freemason Stripped Naked.” Isaac Fell.

We may also mention here six valuable plates by Lanbert de Lintot: 1, Grand Lodge of England. 2, Chapter and Grand Lodge. 3, Foundation of the Royal Order. 4, Fourth and Last Stone. 5, Old and New Jerusalem. 6, Night; and also in 1770 appeared in London a Ritual in French, of the Rose Croix as the 7th degree, the 6th degree being Knight of the East.

An effort was made at this time to Incorporate the Society by Act of Parliament and to build a Hall; and, in reply to a circular letter, 168 Lodges expressed themselves in favour of the proposal and 48 opposed it. A bill was accordingly promoted in 1771, but the scheme was finally abandoned. In 1772 under Lord Petrie, G.M., a Committee was appointed for the purpose of erecting a Hall, and Preston s “Illustrations of Masonry” received the sanction of Grand Lodge. In 1775, “The Spirit of Masonry” was published by Brother William Hutchinson, F.A.S., of Barnard Castle; it bears the sanction of the Grand Officers of England, and is dedicated to the Grand Lodges of England, Ireland, and Scotland, and the Craft in general. He is said to have revised the Old York Lectures and his system was used in Manchester. The foundation of Masonic Hall was laid 1st May, 1775, and was dedicated on the 23rd May, 1776. On 10th April, 1777, the first “Freemasons Calendar” appeared.

In 1778 a dispute occurred between the time immemorial Lodge of Antiquity and the Grand Lodge. This resulted in an application from Brother William Preston addressed to the Grand Lodge of All England at York, which had met regularly since 1761, for the grant of a Charter to establish a third Grand Lodge in London. This was accomplished on the 19th April, 1780, and a Grand Lodge on the Ancient system was constituted, with jurisdiction south of the Trent, and Preston mentions it briefly in the 1781 edition of his “Illustrations.” Now we have three Grand Lodges in London and one in York.

During the ten years existence of this new Grand Lodge it established only two subordinate Lodges in addition to the “Antiquity,” and the authority came to an end with the readmission of Brother Preston in 1790 by the premier Grand Lodge. In 1783 Brother Captain George Smith published a work entitled, “The Use and Abuse of Freemasonry.” The death of the Grand Lodge at York following shortly upon that of Brother Wm. Preston left only the two London rivals of “Ancients” and “Moderns,” and efforts began to be set on foot to unite them. It is asserted by the Rev. Brother A. F. A. Woodford, on the authority of Mr. Walbran, the editor of the Chartulary of Fountain s Abbey, that the York Brothers were in possession of a Charter, now missing, which was supposed to be that of Athelstan; other brethren say the same, but assert that it was almost illegible.

On the 1st May, 1782, Henry Frederick Duke of Cumberland was nominated Grand Master, with the Earl of Effingham as his Deputy. In 1784 a new edition of the “Constitutions” was issued by Brother John Northouck; the chief change is that the word “Order” is often used for the customary titles of “Society,” or “Brotherhood.” On the 9th March, 1786, Prince William Henry, afterwards Duke of Clarence, was initiated in Lodge No. 86 at Plymouth; and on the 6th February, 1787, the Prince of Wales, afterwards King George IV., was initiated by the Duke of Cumberland in a Lodge held at the Star and Garter, Pall Mall, London; and on the 21st November, 1788, Frederick Duke, of York was initiated by the same Grand Master, at the same place, the Prince of Wales, his brother, assisting at the ceremony. Sir Peter Parker, Admiral of the Fleet, had been appointed Deputy G.M. in November, 1786. The “Freemasons School for Girls” was founded 25th March, 1788, mainly by the exertions of the Chevalier Ruspini; it now bears the title of the “Royal Masonic Institution for Girls.”

In 1790 the Grand Lodge met under the auspices of the Duke of Cumberland, when Edward Duke of Kent and Augustus Frederick Duke of Sussex, both of whom had been made Masons abroad, were constituted Past Grand Masters. It was on this occasion that the old Lodge of “Antiquity” was reinstated. On the death of the Duke of Cumberland, G.M., the Prince of Wales was elected to the vacant throne, and was Installed Grand Master 2nd May, 1792, when he appointed Lord Rawdon as Acting Grand Master, and Sir Peter Parker as Deputy. The great extension of Freemasonry under the patronage of all these Princes is shewn by the fact that the number of Prov. Gd. Masters had increased, from eleven in 1770, to twenty-four in 1795, when Prince William of Gloucester was initiated, and Earl Moira appears as Acting Grand Master in 1795. A Masonic publication entitled, “The Freemasons Magazine” was begun in 1793, and continued for some years with a change of title in 1798. In this year Bro. Stephen Jones published his “Masonic Miscellanies.” In 1798 the Boys School was founded, and continues to the present day. On the 12th July, 1799, an Act was passed for the better suppression of treasonable Societies, special exemption being made of the Freemasons Lodges then existing. Under the favourable influence of the Prince of Wales and Earl Moira, Freemasonry made progress, and the possibility of uniting the two rival Grand Lodges began to be seriously contemplated. On the 10th April, 1799, an Address was received from the Duke of Sundermania, Chief of the Order in Sweden, and a brotherly reply was reported by the Earl of Moira to Grand Lodge 9th May, 1799.

The first step towards uniting the “Ancient” and “Modern” Masons was made at a meeting of the latter body 20th November, 1801, when a complaint was made against Brother Thomas Harper and others for frequenting Lodges of the “Athol Masons.” Harper then requested a delay of three months, promising to use the time in exerting himself to promote a union of the two Grand Lodges, and this delay was conceded. On the 4th May, 1802, the complaint against Harper was rescinded, and a Committee appointed, of which Lord Moira was a member, to pave the way for a union. From some cause or other Harper turned his back on this arrangement; the Duke of Athol s name was used in opposition to the scheme, and no progress resulted. On the 9th February, 1803, Grand Lodge passed a resolution condemnatory of the “meetings of persons calling themselves Ancient Masons,” and threatening to enforce the laws against their own members attending such meetings. In 1805 the Duke of Sussex was elected a Past Grand Master. A pamphlet dated 9th February, 1804, by an anonymous author was issued entitled, “Masonic Union: An Address to His Grace the Duke of Athol, on the subject of an Union, etc.” Although the writer was a member of the Grand Lodge of 17I7, he closes his title with a quotation from the ritual of Templar Priest. He overruns Masonry from the time of Carausius to the period when Harper was expelled by his Grand Lodge.

Other steps were being taken in the meantime, and on the 12th February, 1806, the Earl Of Moira reported that he had exerted his influence with the Grand Lodge of Scotland in favour of the union of the two bodies; the same course was followed with the Grand Lodge of Ireland, and a similar report was made on the 23rd November, 1808. On the 12th April, 1809, a resolution was passed that it was “necessary no longer to continue in force those measures which were resorted to, in or about the year 1739, respecting irregular Masons; and do therefore enjoin the several lodges to revert to the ancient landmarks of the Society.” This refers to a change which the Grand Lodge of 1717 had made, during the period, of what they were pleased to term the advent of “irregular Lodges,” and which is referred to in the pamphlet of 1804, by reversing the words of the Ist degree and 2nd degree, and which the pamphleteer alludes to as a dispute whether “Gog” and “Magog” were on the right hand or left, according to the position of the beholder. The reversal yet continues with many bodies of foreign Masons. This step was followed by the appointment of a “Lodge of Promulgation” as preparatory to the desired union. Generally it is considered that this change had given the Athol Masons the first handle for terming the Grand Lodge “Modern,” but the distinction between the two sects had much wider grounds, as shewn in our last chapter.

On the death of Admiral Sir Peter Parker, H.R.H. the Prince of Wales appointed his brother, the Duke of Sussex, 11th December, 1811, as Acting Grand-Master, and when the former became Regent of the Kingdom, the Duke of Sussex was elected Grand Master, and the Regent Grand Patron.

At a meeting of the Grand Lodge on the 27th January, 1813, there were present six Royal Dukes – Sussex, York, Clarence, Kent, Cumberland, Gloucester; on this occasion Earl Moira, now Marquis of Hastings, was presented with a magnificent chain and jewel of office, as he was about to depart for India. The Duke of Sussex was installed Grand Master on 12th May, 1813; and as Edward Duke of Kent had already become a member of the Athol Grand Lodge, their Grand Master the Duke of Athol, with the union in view, resigned his office and recommended as his successor H.R.H. the Duke of Kent, who was accordingly Installed as Grand Master on the 1st December, 1813, at Willis ooms, St. James Square.

There now remained no obstacle to the union of the whole Craft, and the formal “Articles of Union” were drawn up at Kensington Palace on the 25th November, 1813, and ratified at meetings of the two Grand Lodges held on 1st December, 1813; these Articles were signed on behalf of the Grand Lodge of 1717, by Augustus Frederick, G.M.; Waller Rodwell Wright, P.G.M. of the Ionian Islands; Arthur Tegart, P.G.W.; James Deans, P.G.W.; William H. White, Gd. Secretary; and on behalf of the Grand Lodge of 1751, by Edward, G.M.; Thomas Harper, D.G.M.; James Perry, P.D.G.M.; James Agar, P.D.G.M.; Robert Leslie, Gd. Secretary.

In accordance with this the two parties met at the Crown and Anchor tavern in Strand, when the Articles were accepted with Masonic acclamation and unanimously confirmed. A “Lodge of Reconciliation,” composed of nine members of the Constitution of England, with Brother White as Secretary, and nine members of the old Institution, with Brother Edward Harper as Secretary, was then constituted with the object of mutually obligating each other, and affording the necessary instruction for amalgamating the two usages into one uniform ritual.

Although the 1717, or “Modern” Masons, had become zealous members of the Royal Arch and Chivalric degrees, yet such degrees were held to be outside their Grand Lodge. On the other hand the 1751, “Ancient” Masons, had from the first treated the Arch degree as an essential part of Masonry to be conferred on Past Masters under Craft Charters, and to meet this the following was made part of the “Articles:” – “11. It is declared and pronounced that pure ancient Masonry consists of three degrees, and no more; viz., those of the Entered Apprentice; the Fellow Craft; and the Master Mason (including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch). But this Article is not intended to prevent any Lodge or Chapter from holding a meeting in any of the Orders of Chivalry, according to the Constitutions of the said Orders.”

By this Article, which is obligatory upon the Grand Lodge in all time, the Royal Arch is the completion of the third degree, yet worked as a High-grade, and though all other grades are excluded from the new Rite, they are not prohibited but they are allowed to be practised.

At the period of this Chapter the official Catechisms had become elaborate, the Harodim of Brother Preston being of some note. They still continued to retain a considerable amount of Christian symbolism, confined chiefly to the spiritualisation of Solomon s temple, and the furniture and utensils.

A meeting of the “United Grand Lodge of Ancient Freemasons of England” was held at Freemasons Hall on the 27th December, 1813, to formally consummate the Union. The Masters, Wardens, and Past Masters of the two bodies composing this united Assembly had been obligated by the “Lodge of Reconciliation” on a uniform plan, and were admitted by tickets, signed and countersigned by the two Secretaries whose names appear to the Articles of Union mentioned in our last chapter, Brothers White and Leslie. The two Grand Masters, namely, the Dukes of Sussex and Kent, occupied equal thrones. The Rev. Brother Coglin, D.D., Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of 1717, proclaimed the confirmation of the Articles to which the brethren signified their assent; then the Rev. Brother Barry, D.D., Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of 1751, proclaimed the Union; after which Brother Wesley performed a symphony on the organ. Other symbolic ceremonies were gone through and the tests were pronounced pure and correct.

The Grand Officers of both bodies now divested themselves of their Insignia. The Duke of Kent proposed his brother the Duke of Sussex as Grand Master of the United Fraternity. The latter was then obligated, placed upon the throne and proclaimed; after which the Grand Master proceeded to appoint his officers, the Rev. Bro. Samuel Hemming, D.D., and Bro. Isaac Lindo, Grand Wardens, and the two Grand Secretaries being those of the former Grand Lodges.

The Register of the united List of Lodges was settled by drawing lots for precedence, and as that resulted in favour of the 1751 body its Charters obtained a rank in numerical order over those of the other, which still perpetuates a muddle in the chronological position of the Lodges. A reference

XIII – FREEMASONRY UNDER THE UNITED GRAND LODGE.

to Brother John Lane s valuable “Masonic Records” indicates that the revised list of the United Grand Lodge included 388 Lodges of the 1717 Constitution, and 260 Lodges of the 1751 Constitution, or a total on the new Register of 648 Lodges. A new edition of the “Constitutions” was edited by Brother William Williams and issued in 1815, and which inserts the declaration as to degrees with which we closed our last chapter.

The Arms adopted by the United Grand Lodge were a quartering of those of the Grand Lodge of 1717, and those of the Grand Lodge of 1751; the first being a differenced coat of those granted to the London Company of Masons in 1472, and the latter being derived from the standards of the four principal tribes of Israel, adapted by Christians to the four Evangelists, and forming the seal of the Grand Chapter of York, the Grand Lodge Seal being the three crowns attributed to Prince Edwin of Deira. Motto: Aude vide tace (Hear, see, and be silent.)

A revision of the Lectures of the three degrees of the Craft was committed to the Rev. Bro. Samuel Hemming, D.D., Chaplain to the Duke of Sussex, who made some progress therein, but is said to have been completed by the Rev. Bro. Williams. The system, though exhibiting no great amount of genius, has continued in use to the present day, and though preserving the main features of the older systems all Christian references were expunged, in order to adapt them, in an antiquarian sense, to the supposed constitution of the Society by King Solomon, whose throne every Worshipful Master is fabled to occupy.

For some years the United Grand Lodge continued the even tenor of its way, without much worthy of notice for the historian. On the death of Brother William Preston in 1810 he left 300 Pounds in Consols the interest of which was to be devoted to an annual rehearsal of his own system of Lectures. On the 8th March, 1820, the Grand Master called the attention of Grand Lodge to the death of George III., who had occupied the throne since 1760, and an address of Condolence was voted to the Grand Patron of United Freemasonry, now King George IV.; this address was presented by the Duke of Sussex on the 10th May, 1820, and the Royal Arms were hereafter engraved on the head of the certificates. A similar address was presented to His Majesty, the Grand Patron upon the death of H.R.H. the Duke of Kent, Past G.M.

Between the years 1819-23 a regrettable misunderstanding occurred between the Prov. Gd. Master of Lancashire and some of the Lodges under his sway; the misunderstanding arising in Lodge No. 31, meeting at Liverpool. Blame seems to be attributable to all sides alike, and the Lodge was erased in 1822; it was followed in 1823 by the erasure of the Sea Captain s Lodge, No. 140 which had resolved to stand or fall by No. 31. (Preston s “Illus.,” Oliver s ed.; also “Hist. Harmonic Lo.,” 163, Jos. Hawkins.)

The death of the celebrated traveller Brother Belzoni in 1825, left his widow in straightened circumstances, and the Grand Lodge voted her the sum, of 50 Pounds, and has placed it on record that this Brother was made a Mason in the “Lodge of the Pyramids” at Cairo, and whilst resident at Cambridge had joined the “School of Plato Lodge,” No. 549. Belzoni left behind him some little memento of his Masonic theories, in which he refers to the triangular and the serpent aprons of the Egyptian Kings, and their Initiations; he also expresses an opinion that the invention of the Level and Plumb, are due to Nimrod and Ashur. In the year 1829 past Grand Stewards had permission to wear a Jewel. The death of the Grand Patron George IV. in 1830 was reported to Grand Lodge 17th July, 1830 by his brother the Grand Master, who then read the draft of an Address to be presented to King William IV. condoling with him upon the loss of his brother, and soliciting that he would extend his Patronage to the Craft. To this a reply was received from Sir Robert Peel, dated the 28th July, 1830, signifying the King s consent to become Grand Patron.

At the beginning of the year 1832 Sir John Soane, the Grand Superintendent of Works, reported the completion of alterations which had been in progress to adapt the new Masonic Hall as a Temple exclusively devoted to Masonry, and as the expense of the alterations had been great he enclosed a draft for 500 Poounds towards the cost. In this year 1832 a renumbering of the Lodges took place to fill up the vacancies occasioned by Lodges which had become extinct. In March 1833 Lord Dundas, the Deputy G.M. presented to Grand Lodge on behalf of the Duke of Sussex, G.M., a bust of King William IV. the Grand Patron; also three gilt trowels which had been used on the occasions of laying the foundation stones of the London University; the Licensed Victuallers Asylum; and the Charing Cross Hospital.

In the year 1834 the “Freemasons Quarterly Review” was commenced and continued its labours down to 1850 when a “New Series” was begun, since which time the Craft has never been without one or more periodicals. The learned Brother George Oliver, D.D., whose father, the Rev. Samuel Oliver, had been a Mason of the “Ancient” school, since 1823 had published a number of Masonic works; he may be considered the father of Masonic literature, though his works, for want of critical attention, have fallen into much undeserved neglect.

Several new Lodges were constituted in the Provinces in 1834, when the Earl of Durham was Deputy G.M., and new Masonic Halls were opened at Dorchester and Tiverton. In the month of June 1835 a resolution was passed at a meeting of brothers favourable to the scheme in view, – “that it is expedient to provide for the wants of the meritorious, but aged and decayed Freemasons, by the erection of an Asylum to receive them within its Sanctuary.”

In December 1835 the Grand Stewards Lodge celebrated the Centenary of its foundation in June 1735, at Freemasons Hall. Also the Grand Lodge of Scotland celebrated the Centenary of its foundation by a Festival on St. Andrew s day 1836. In this year 1836 several foundation stones were laid in England with Masonic ritual and solemnities. The Duke of Sussex, G.M., had been for some time in bad health, and the loss of his eyesight was feared, but on the 27th Jany., 1837, he was so far recovered as to make his appearance in Grand Lodge, when he received a most cordial and hearty welcome. The Grand Lodge at this period conceived the idea of forming a Library.

In the year 1838 a magnificent Candelabrum, the funds to purchase which had been raised by subscription, was presented to the Grand Master. The “Asylum for Aged and Decayed Freemasons,” celebrated a festival in June of this year, but later on, in the same year, an opposition to the scheme was raised by the Grand Master, who had formed the impression that it would injure the other charities, but the opposition was withdrawn, after some very unpleasant scenes, which for a time affected the Masonic standing of Brother R. T. Crucifex, one of its supporters and the Editor of the “Freemasons Quarterly Review.” This Asylum was brought into actual operation in 1839; and the Earl of Durham was appointed Pro-Grand Master in the same year. In 1842 the Male Annuity Fund of the Royal Benevolent Institution was established, the Grand Lodge voting it an annual sum of 400 Pounds.

The Duke of Sussex, G.M., died on the 21st April, 1843, and it then became necessary for the Grand Lodge to elect a Grand Master. Bro. Thomas Dundas Earl of Zetland was selected for that office, and his Installation took place in March 1844. In the same year a handsome testimonial was presented to Dr. George Oliver. Also the Duchess of Inverness presented to Grand Lodge the Candelabrum which had been given to her husband in 1838. Between the years 1944-7, a certain amount of friction occurred between the Grand Lodges of England and the Royal York of Berlin, owing to the refusal of the latter to acknowledge any other than Christian Freemasons; the difficulty was finally arranged by the Royal York, acceding, in a limited measure, to the liberal views of this country. Previous to 1847 it was, from olden time, a necessity that a Candidate should be “free-born,” but in this year it was resolved to substitute the qualification of “free-man.” In 1849 the Masonic Widow s Annuity fund was established; and the Queen became Grand Patroness of the Boy s School in 1852.

On the 7th December, 1853, the Grand Master reported to Grand Lodge that he had been under the necessity of suspending Bro. William Tucker, the Prov. Gd. Master of Dorsetshire; the offence being that he had made his appearance in his Prov. Gd. Lodge wearing, in addition to his Craft clothing, the insignia of the Christian orders of Masonry. It is also on record (“Freem Quart. Review.”) that Brother. Tucker had made a point in his Address of recommending those higher degrees of Masonry found in the Ancient and Accepted Rite of 33 degrees, which after having met with disfavour from the late Grand Master had been introduced into England from America within two years of the death of the Duke of Sussex.

On the 4th June, 1856, an attempt was made to foist the ceremonial of the Mark degree into the Craft series, but was rejected as an impossibility, as the “Articles of Union” state that pure Freemasonry consists of three degrees and no more; on this occasion Brother John Henderson, the Grand Registrar, said that, – “no man, nor body of men, could make such innovation as that proposed, without endangering the whole fabric of the Institution.” The Earl of Dalhousie was appointed Deputy G.M. In 1857.

Between October 1855 and September 1857, many of the Canadian Craftsmen withdrew themselves from under our banner alleging neglect by the officials of Grand Lodge, and thereupon erected a Grand Lodge of their own. This led to the formation of a “Colonial Board” in 1856 by the Grand Lodge of England, and the establishment of a second Grand Lodge in Canada. On this occasion England lost the Canadian Lodges, save a few Masons who remained faithful to their old allegiance. The two Grand Lodges, thus formed in Canada united 14th July, 1858 under the designation of “The Grand Lodge of Canada.” These troubles led to the resignation of Bro. Wm. Hy. White, who had been Gd. Secretary since the union of 1813, and to the appointment in 1857 of Brother William Gray Clarke.

The nucleus of a Masonic Hall was begun in Manchester 27th,June, 1857, by taking the upper floor of rooms over the shops with an opening at 78 Cross Street, and dividing the same into Refreshment room supplied by a back staircase, a Lodge Room and a Tyler s Room; a club also was established. The Liverpool Masonic Temple was commenced in 1858 by the purchase of a building for 1,600 Pounds.

In April 1861 the Earl de Grey and Ripon was appointed Deputy G.M. On the 8th January, 1862, the Grand Lodge voted an Address of Condolence to the Queen on the death of her Consort on 14th December, 1861. In July, 1862, the Prov. Gd. Master of East Lancashire Brother Stephen Blair, laid the foundation of a Masonic Hall at Manchester, the necessary funds being raised by a Company of Shareholders. On the 3rd December, 1862, it was resolved to revise the numbering of the Lodges, thus eliminating the vacancies occurring since 1832. The Masonic Hall at Manchester was opened by the Prov. Gd. Master 3rd November, 1864. It had been in contemplation to improve the Masonic Hall, London, by separating the Tavern entirely from that portion used for Grand Lodge purposes, and on the 27th April, 1864, the Earl of Zetland, G.M., laid the foundation stone of the new building which was completed for Masonic purposes in 1866.

In 1865 a revision of the “Book of Constitutions” was made and it was directed that the term Prov. Grand Master in England, should be District Grand Master in the Colonies and foreign parts. On the 7th June, 1865, the subject of the Mark degree was again brought under discussion and it was resolved to refuse recognition to the Mark Grand Lodge which had been established in 1856, the ceremonial being treated as comparatively modern. The learned brother Dr. George Oliver was interred with Masonic honours in 1867; and on the death of Brother William Gray Clarke in 1868, Brother John Hervey became Grand Secretary.

On the 2nd June 1869 the Earl of Zetland, G.M., informed the Grand Lodge that H.R.H. the Prince of Wales had been received into Freemasonry by the King of Sweden; and in September of the same year he was elected a Past Gd. Master of England, and the Prince attended Grand Lodge in December 1869. The number of Lodges on the Roll had increased from 723 in 1844, to 1299 in the year 1869. Freemasons Hall had now been separated from the tavern, and was formally inaugurated on the 14th April 1869.

On the voluntary resignation of the Earl of Zetland as Grand Master in 1870, a handsome testimonial was arranged and subscriptions obtained; the Earl accepted a silver inkstand, and directed that the remainder of the contribution, which amounted to 2,730 Pounds should form a fund for the relief of distinguished brethren who might be in distress and to be named the “Zetland Fund.”

Earl de Grey and Ripon was now nominated to the office of Grand Master, and was installed as such on the 14th May 1870. The Masonic career of this Grand Master, who was made a Marquis for diplomatic services in the United States, was not closed in a manner equally distinguished, as upon his embracing the Roman Catholic faith he resigned his office of Grand Master 2nd September, 1874. Arthur Duke of Connaught and Leopold Duke of Albany were initiated in 1874, the former in the “Prince of Wales Lodge,” and the latter in the “Apollo University Lodge.”

The Prince of Wales having already the rank of a Past Grand Master of England, a deputation was appointed to interview him upon the acceptance of the office vacated by the Marquis of Ripon. At the meeting of Grand Lodge in December, 1874, it was reported that the Prince would accept the Grand Mastership, and would appoint the Earl of Carnarvon as pro-Grand Master, and Lord Skelmersdale as Deputy G.M. Accordingly the Prince of Wales was Installed Grand Master, with great pomp, at the Royal Albert Hall, South Kensington, on the 28th April, 1875, which was duly commemorated by a painting in oil, and an engraved copy of the same. In May of the same year the Prince was Installed G.Z. of the Supreme Grand Chapter. His brother Leopold Duke of Albany was Installed Provincial Gd. Master of Oxfordshire in February 1876.

At the meeting of Grand Lodge, April, 1877, the Prince of Wales, G.M., appointed his brothers the Dukes of Connaught and of Albany as his two Grand Wardens; and 4,000 Pounds was voted by Grand Lodge to the Royal National Life Boat Institution. On the 5th December in this year a Committee was appointed to consider the action of the Grand Orient of France in reference to the abolition of the requirement of any special religious belief from candidates for Initiation, or as the Grand Lodge preferred to put it, the removal of the name of God from their Constitution, and in March 1878 the Committee gave in a report denying recognition as “true and genuine” brethren to those so Initiated.

In 1879 Brother John Hervey, whose death took place the following year, resigned the office of Grand Secretary, and Colonel Shadwell H. Clerke was appointed. On the 1st June, 1881, the list Of Grand Officers was increased by adding a Deputy Master of Ceremonies and two Grand Sword Bearers. In 1882 the Prince of Wales, G.M., was present at Grand Lodge, with his two brothers, when a congratulatory Address was voted to the Queen on her escape from the danger of assassination. In 1883 a new edition of the “Book of Constitutions” was issued; the great Hall at Freemasons Hall in London was destroyed by fire; and the Society lost the Duke of Albany by death, 28th March, 1884.

On the 28th November, 1884, a Charter was granted for the “Quatuor Coronati Lodge,” 2076, Brother Sir Charles Warren being the first W.M.; the object of the Lodge, besides the ordinary routine of such bodies, being the increase of Masonic knowledge by competent Lectures at each meeting, the publication of the same in a journal entitled “Ars Quatuor Coronatorum,” and the reprint of our ancient MSS., and other works in volumes designated “Quatuor Coronatorum Antigraphia.” One of their first developments was the establishment, by the late Brother G. W. Speth, the Secretary of the Lodge, of a “Correspondence Circle” which now numbers over three thousand members.

In the year 1884 Grand Lodge passed a resolution of Remonstrance against the Pope s Encyclical denouncing Freemasonry; and a new edition of the Arch Regulations was prepared. At a meeting of “Royal Alpha Lodge,” London, on the 17th March, 1885, the Prince of Wales, G.M., himself Initiated his eldest son Prince Albert Victor, and in 1887 conferred upon him the office of Senior Grand Warden. The new Great Hall was completed in 1885; and on the 22nd June, 1886, the Prince of Wales, G.M., Installed his brother the Duke of Connaught as Prov. Gd. Master of Sussex.

On the 1st June, 1887, Brother Henry Sadler was appointed Sub-librarian of Grand Lodge, which was a poor affair for so wealthy a body, but which Brother Sadler has done much to improve and is himself the author of some valuable works, as “Masonic Facts and Fictions; Life of Thomas Dunckerley; Notes on the Ceremony of Installation;” Portrait of G. M. Sayer; Catalogue of Gd. Lodge Library, etc. In this year, 1887, Brother R. F. Gould completed the last volume of his well-known “History of Freemasonry.”

On the 13th June, 1887, a grand Masonic Celebration of Her Majestys Jubilee was held at the Royal Albert Hall, under the presidency of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales as Grand Master, when an Address, handsomely illuminated on vellum, for presentation to her Majesty the Queen, was read to the Assembly and a special Jewel was presented to the Grand Master, such as might be worn by all Masons who were subscribing members of any Lodge at the time. At a meeting of Grand Lodge, 6th June, 1888, the rank of Past Grand Master was conferred upon Oscar II. King of Sweden and Norway, Grand Master or Vicarius Salamonis in those countries. Between the 4th and 7th of June in this year the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution for Girls celebrated its centenary at the Royal Albert Hall; the 4th was the prize distribution day, at which were present the Prince and Princess of Wales, and the Princesses Louise, Victoria, and Maud. On the 7th the Prince of Wales presided, and was supported by the King of Sweden, and various notables of the English Craft.

In December 1890 the Prince of Wales, G.M., Installed his eldest son Prince Albert Victor Duke of Clarence and Avondale as Prov. Grand Master of Berkshire; unfortunately his tenure of that office was very short as he died on the 14th January, 1892. The death of Brother Shadwell H. Clerke, the Grand Secretary, on the 25th December, 1891, led to the appointment to that office of Brother Edward Letchworth.

On the 27th January, 1892, the Grand Lodge voted an Address of Condolence to the Queen, and to the Prince of Wales, G.M., on the lamented death of the Duke of Clarence and Avondale, and the whole Craft followed this example. The Jubilee of the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution was celebrated the 24th February of this year at the Covent Garden Theatre, with the Earl of Mount Edgecombe as President, when the unprecedented sum of 59,593 Pounds 15s. 0d. was contributed. In December, 1892, Grand Lodge again agreed to enlarge the number of Grand Officers by the addition of a Deputy Grand Registrar, a Deputy Grand Sword Bearer, additional Grand Deacons, and Grand Directors of Ceremonies; the like appointments to extend to Provincial Grand Lodges, according to their numerical strength. During this year the question of admitting Jews as Freemasons was agitated in Prussia, and a new Lodge was established for the special purpose of such Initiations. It is, however, outside a work of this nature to print the ordinary and recent outline of the routine of Freemasonry, which must give the world the idea that all is pomp, parade, man millinery, and banqueting. Matters of this sort can be gathered from the ordinary Freemasons Journals, which make it their business to report every detail for the edification of the members of Lodges. With the great increase that is constantly taking place in the numbers of Lodges, innovations are constantly being introduced of a doubtful character, not calculated for the good of the Society. We will, however, mention a few more items of general interest.

At a meeting of Grand Lodge, 19th April, 1896, the rank of Past Grand Officer was conferred upon 21 distinguished Masons, in commemoration of the 21 years during which the Prince of Wales had filled the Grand Mastership. A commemoration festival was held on the 14th June 1897 at the Royal Albert Hall, in honour of her Majesty the Queen having attained the 60th year of her reign, and which was one of the finest spectacles on record. Another, worthy of record, was the Festival of the Royal Masonic Institution for Boys, on the 10th July, 1898, under the Presidency of the Grand Master at the Royal Albert Hall, London, when the unprecedented sum of 141,000 Pounds was reported as subscribed for the purpose of erecting new school buildings, and removing the School to Bushey, near Watford. At the meeting of Grand Lodge on the 7th September, 1898, terms were proposed and passed for the recognition of the sometime established Grand Lodge of New Zealand.

On the 12th May, 1900, the foundation-stone was laid at Bushey of the New Royal Masonic Institution for Boys; the inscription upon the plate deposited was as follows: – “This stone was laid on the 12th May, A.D. 1900, with Masonic ceremonial, by H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught and Strathearn, K.G., &c., &c., Grand Master, President of the Institution.”

The death of H.M. Queen Victoria occurring on the 22nd January, 1901, With the accession of the Prince of Wales as Edward VII., caused his resignation as Grand Master, on the 15th February, upon which the Duke of Connaught was nominated as Grand Master and was Installed 17th July, 1901, in the Royal Albert Hall.

The prosperity of the Craft, for many years, has been progressive and uninterrupted in its numerical accessions, and since 1869, when the Lodges were renumbered, to the day we write, some 1,500 Lodges are added to the Roll. The advance in its literary efforts has kept pace with the numerical increase in its Lodges, though Freemasons as a body are very indifferent to its literature. The “Quatuor Coronati Lodge” has distinguished itself by the issue of numerous facsimiles of ancient MSS. reproduced with great care, and in the most beautiful style; it has completed twenty volumes of its “Transactions,” Lectures and papers distinguished by the accuracy and soundness of their information, and the excellence of the workmanship, and it has thus been the means of spreading sound and reliable Masonic literature over all the world; and we have been much indebted to its papers in compiling this book. In equally good style the Newcastle College of Rosicrucians has produced facsimiles of ancient MSS. besides their ordinary “Transactions.” The Rosicrucian College of London has also published valuable papers. The West Yorkshire Provincial Library, established by the exertions of Brother Wm. Watson, the Prov. Gd. Secretary and Librarian, has reproduced nine copies of the Constitutional Charges at the cost of the Prov. Gd. Master, the late Brother Thos. Wm. Tew. The York brothers have published a similar volume of the old Charges by subscription. Other valuable works have proceeded from the pens of Brothers Wm. James Hughan, Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie, Robert Freke Gould, W. Wynn Westcott, M.B., G. W. Speth, John Strachan, Q.C., Henry Sadler, John Lane, W. J. C. Crawley, LL.D., G. W. Bain, and many others too numerous to mention; also some reprints of old plates, books, and documents. The Quatuor Coronati Lodge, 2076, however, has had the great misfortune to lose one of its most valued pillars, Bro. G. W. Speth, 19th April, 1901, in his 54th year, and the Lodge erected, by subscription, a monument. The death of the Treasurer followed on the 4th June 1901, viz., Sir Walter Besant in his 65th year. In 1905 Bro. R. F. Gould published his “Concise History of Freemasonry.”

Another notable event of the time was the establishment, by Mrs. Besant, of a S.G.C. 33rd Degree, in London, under authority from India, which received it from a dissension which occurred in the S.G.C. 33rd Degree of France. It confers all its degrees indiscriminately upon males and females, and works the Craft degrees under the Ritual of the Grand Lodge of England, and at the present time has numerous adherents and Lodges. It has added only to the Ritual a “Dharma” Lecture which compares Masonry with secret societies of India, and takes the name of Co-Masonry. Even this may aid in rousing amongst Freemasons a more intellectual standard of labour. Possibly, if Masonry was less of a political machine, officered from the Court, and its high officials elected by the Craft for “Merit” alone, we should see a better state of things than now exists. A section of the Press is now agitating against Freemasonry, assigning as grounds that the worst men are employed by our Municipal Councils to the detriment of non- Masons. On the other hand, a very worthy brother, who was initiated in the same Lodge as myself, was complaining against the carelessness in inquiry into the character of candidates. I replied that this was so, but although I had been fifty-five years a Mason, and had been deluged from every part of the world with unsolicited Honours, I was pleased to say that, in all these years, I never, in a single instance, met with any one Mason with an eye to my worldly interests, hence I utterly disbelieved those assertions that good men were ousted in the interests of Masons.

In all these years the old Operative Guilds of Free Masons have continued their work without changing the secrecy of their proceedings. They have their Lodges in London, Leicester, Norfolk, Derbyshire, Holyhead, York, Durham, Berwick, and elsewhere. Some of these are in a languishing condition, but they exist, and are in course of galvanisation. Of late years they seem to have become disgusted with the vain pretensions of Modern Speculative Freemasonry, and under authority of the three coequal G.M.M. s of the South and North have to some little extent relaxed the secrecy of their proceedings; and though the greater part of their members are utterly averse to anything whatever being made public, possibly in time these restrictions will be further modified, to the advantage of the Speculative system of 1813, for many parts are quite incomprehensible, even to learned Freemasons, without the technical part which only the Guilds of the Free Masons can supply.

F I N I S.

A P P E N D I X.
PREFACE.
It has been thought advisable to add here copies of the ancient MSS. referred to in the foregoing pages, reduced into somewhat more modern English for the comfort of the reader. No injury can arise from this procedure, as those who are interested in the exact verbiage will consult the facsimiles issued by Lodge 2076, and other printed copies. We have made use of certain emendations which have been shewn to be necessary by the best critics.

Attention was first directed to these MSS. by Brother William James Hughan, who printed, in 1872, a volume of the “Old Charges.” For some years his efforts to direct attention to these MSS. met with slight success, as the bearing of them upon the present state of Freemasonry was not fully recognised; but to Brother Hughan belongs the credit of bringing these documents into prominent notice.

A few zealous brethren, amongst whom may be mentioned the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, R. F. Gould, G. W. Speth, Dr. William Begemann of Rostock, C. C. Howard of Picton, N.Z., Wm. Watson, Henry Sadler, F. F. Schnitger, and others, have laboured to develop the work thus begun by Brother Hughan, and we must express indebtedness to their unselfish labours.

It is noteworthy that, with the exception of those MSS. which refer to Henry VI., all these documents close their Masonic history with the reign of Athelstan. Practically the “Regius MS.” and the ” Book of Charges ” of the “Cooke MS.” are identical, except that the versifier has lengthened the former MS. by his own comments, and we have therefore taken the prose copy, as probably nearer the Athelstan original; for most of the emendations (in brackets) we are indebted to Brother C. C. Howard. Brother G. W. Speth considered it likely that the nine ARTICLES were the legal enactments of the King, whilst the nine POINTS were those of the employers.
” West Didsbury,” “near Manchester, 1909.”
JOHN YARKER.

INTRODUCTION. I.

ANGLO-SAXON CHARGES.
This MS. as we have before stated is the “Book of Charges” attached to the “Cooke MS.,” and agrees with the “Regius MS.,” being complete in itself; and (our oldest MS.) is actually, with some additions, a rhythmical version of No. 1. When we come to the mention of “New Men,” it is possible that the 9 Points may have been substituted for them by “Divers Congregations”; in later times they were read as the Charge of an Apprentice. It is even so to-day by Masons.

II. ANGLO-NORMAN CHARGES.
There seems no reason to doubt that No. 1 is the original Saxon Charge, but as there was a constant influx of French Masons from the time of the conquest, a pure French Charge must at one time have existed, and which has clearly been added to the older English documents. The 1316 document is extracted from Brother R. F. Goulds History of Freemasonry (Vol. ii. p. 341). It is of equal value with any that we have, and illustrates the old MSS. in an interesting way. In the first place the Laws are decreed by the very authorities which the Charges themselves appeal to, and “six or four ancient men of the trade” are required to testify on a Master taking on work. It settles the dispute between the Mason-hewers and the Light masons or setters, and places them both under sworn Elders or Ancients of the trade. It admits that there was no Court, and orders one to be sworn, which thus became the London Company of Masons, uniting Masons and Freemasons, of which the former had 4 representatives and the latter 2, but became now a United Company.

III.
The text of the “Cooke” preface, as far as the same is complete, has been used for this document, the remainder being taken from the “Watson MS.,” which is a document complete in itself, but with many errors of the copyist. The author speaks of “old books of Charges,” existing before his time, and he has possibly mistaken “Martellus” for “Secundus,” inasmuch as Charles Martel was not King but Regent, and only “came to his kingdom” in his children, Charlemagne being his grandson, who had a grandson Charles Il.

IV. MODERN CHARGES.
These modern Charges, of which there are about 70 copies, of which no two are exactly alike, are an abridgement of the “Watson MS.” series, which had become too lengthy for use in Lodge work. The version given is a fair representative of all the others and is a York MS. circa 1600. The portion in brackets [ ], and Charges 19-25 are found in the “Tew MS.,” West Riding of Yorkshire.
V.
The Southern Variation of No. 5 is peculiar and found in a few MSS. The evidence of causing Edwin to be made a Mason at Windsor shews that it was compiled in the South, though Winchester is probably meant, as King Athelstan had his royal residence in that city. The version is a late 16th century view found in the “Lansdowne MS.,” the “Probity MS.,” and the “Antiquity MS.”
VI.
The “Apprentice Charge” attached to a MS. which contains the “New Regulations,” are found in many MSS., and are those used in the written Indentures of an Apprentice. The “New Regulations” are found in the “Harleian MS.,” which is the one we give; (2) the “Grand Lodge MS. 2,” numbered 29 c. 33; (2) the “Roberts MS.,” numbered 1 to 7; (3) the “McNab MS.”; (4) a MS. seen by Dr. James Anderson, number 1 to 7; but there must have been an older original. The Harleian, Grand Lodge, and McNab MSS. give no date of the Assembly; Roberts and Anderson give 1663; probably there was no date in the oldest original. The British Museum officials consider the “Harleian MS.” to be early 17th century; it forms a species of Grand Lodge, and inaugurates a Charge for Apprentices.
VII.
The Addition of 1663 to the “New Articles,” and numbered 6, is given by Anderson in the copy he saw, and also in the copy printed by Roberts in 1722. But as it appears in “Grand Lodge MS. 2,” as Article 32, it may have been omitted by accident from VI. version.

I. “THE ANGLO-SAXON CONSTITUTION.”

Good men for this cause and in this manner Masonry took its first beginning. It befell sometimes that great Lords had no such large possessions that they could well advance their free-begotten children for they had so many; therefore they took counsel how they might advance their children and ordain for them an honest livelihood. And they sent after wise Masters of the worthy science of Geometry, that through their wisdom they might ordain them some honest living. Then one of them that had the name of Euclid was the subtle and wise founder, and ordained an Art and called it Masonry, and so with this honest art he taught the children of the great Lords, by the prayer of the fathers and the free-will of their children; the which, when they were taught with high care, by a certain time they were not all alike able to take of the aforesaid Art, wherefore Euclid ordained that they who were passing of cunning should be passing honoured, and ordained to call the more cunning Master, to inform the less cunning, Masters of the which were called Masters of Nobility of wit and cunning of that Art. Nevertheless they commanded that they who were less of wit should not be called servant, nor subject, but fellow for nobility of their gentle blood. In this manner was the aforesaid Art begun in the land of Egypt, by the aforesaid Master Euclid, and so it went from land to land, and from kingdom to kingdom.

After that many years, in the time of Athelstan King of England, by his Councillors and other great Lords of the land, by common assent, for great defects found amongst Masons, they ordained a certain Rule amongst them, once in the year, or in three years, as the need were, the King and great Lords of the land, and all the commonality, from province to province, and from country to country, Congregations should be made by Masters, of all Master Masons and Fellows in the aforesaid Art, and so at such Congregations they that be made Masters should be examined of the “Articles” after written, and be ransacked whether they be able and cunning to the profit of the Lords (having) them to serve, and to the honour of the aforesaid Art.

And moreover (that) they should receive their “Charge” that they should well and truly dispend the goods of their Lords, as well the lowest as the highest, for they be their Lords for the time of whom they take pay for their service, and for their travail.

The first “Article” is this, – That every Master of this Art should be wise and true to the lord that he serveth, dispensing his goods truly as he would have his own were dispensed, and not give more pay to a Mason than he wot he may deserve, after the dearth of corn and victual in the country, no favour withstanding for every man to be rewarded after his travail.

The second “Article” is this, – That every Master of this Art should be warned beforehand to come to his congregation, but they be excused by some cause. But nevertheless if they be found rebellious at such Congregations, or faulty in any manner of harm to their lords, and reproof of this Art, they should not be excused unless in peril of death, and though they be in peril of death, they shall warn the Master who is Principal of the Gathering of his decease (disease).

The third “Article” is this, – That no Master take no Prentice for a less term than 7 years at the least, because such as be within a less term may not profitably come to (knowledge of) this Art, nor able to serve truly his lord and to take as a Mason should take.

The fourth “Article” is this, – That no Master for no profit take no Prentice to be learned that is born of bond blood, because his lord to whom he is bond, will take him, as he well may, from his Art, and lead him out of his Lodge, or out of his place that he worketh in; for his Fellows peradventure would help him and debate for him, and therefore manslaughter might arise; it is forbidden. And also for another cause; this Art took beginning of great lord s children freely begotten, as it is said before.

The fifth “Article” is this, – That no Master give more to his Prentice in time of his Prenticehood, for no profit he might take, than he notes well he may deserve of the lord that he serveth; nor not so much (but) that the lord of the place that he is taught in, may have some profit for his teaching.

The sixth “Article” is this, – That no Master for no covetousness nor profit take no Prentice to teach that is imperfect, that is to say having any maim, for the which he may not truly work as he ought to do.

The seventh “Article” is this, – That no Master be found wittingly, or help to procure to be (a) maintainer and sustainer (of) any common nightwalker to rob, by the which manner of nightwalking they may not fulfil their day s work and travail, (and) through the condition their Fellows might be wroth.

The eighth “Article” is this, – That if it befall that any Mason that be perfect, and cunning come for to seek work, and find an imperfect and uncunning (Mason) working, the Master of the place shall receive the perfect and do way with the imperfect to the profit of his lord.

The ninth “Article” is this, – That no Master shall supplant another: for it is said in the Art of Masonry, that no man can make an end so well of work, begun by another, to the profit of his lord, as he (that) began it, to end it by his matters, or to whom he sheweth his matters.

THIS COUNCIL is made by divers Lords and Masters of divers Provinces, and divers Congregations of Masonry, and it is, to wit, that whosoe coveteth to come to the state of the foresaid Art it behoveth them:

First, principally to (love) God and Holy Church and al-halows, and his Master and his Fellows as his own brethren.

The second “Point,” – He must fulfil his day s work truly that he taketh for his pay.
The third “Point,” – That he can hele the Counsel of his Fellows, in “Lodge” and in “Chamber,” and in every place where Masons be.
The fourth “Point,” – That he be no deceiver in the foresaid Art, nor do no prejudice, nor sustain any Articles against the Art, nor against any of the Art, but he shall sustain it in all honour, inasmuch as he may.
The fifth “Point,” – When he shall take his pay that he take it meekly, as the time is ordained by the Master to be done, and that he fulfil the acceptations of travail and of rest ordained and set by the Master.
The sixth “Point,” – If any discord shall be between him and his Fellows, he shall obey meekly, and be still at the bidding of his Master, or of the Warden of his Master, in the Masters absence, to the holy day following, and that he accord them at the disposition of his Fellows, and not upon the workday, for hindering of the work and profit of the lord.
The seventh “Point,” – That he covet not the wife, nor the daughter of his Master s, neither of his Fellows, but it be in marriage, nor hold concubines for discord that might fall among them.
The eighth “Point,” – If it befall him to be Warden under his Master, that he be true mean between his Master and his Fellows, and that he be busy in the absence of his Master, to the honour of his Master, and profit of the lord that he serveth.
The ninth “Point,” – If he be wiser and subtler than his Fellow working with him in his Lodge, or any other place, and he perceiveth that he should leave the stone that he is working upon for defect of cunning, and can teach him and amend the stone, he shall inform him, and help him, that the more love may increase among them, and that the work of the lord be not lost.
WHEN THE MASTERS and the Fellows be forewarned (and) are come to the Congregation if need be the Sheriff of the country, or the Mayor of the City, or Alderman of the Town, in which the Congregations are holden, shall be Fellow and Sociate to the Master of the Congregation to help him against rebels, and (for) upbearing of the right of the realm.

At the first beginning “New Men” that never were “Charged” before (were) “Charged” in this manner, – (1) That (they) should never be thieves, nor thieves maintainers. (2) And that they should truly fulfil their day s work and travail, for their pay that they shall take of their lord. (3) A true account give to their Fellows (as Stewards) in things to be accounted of them. (4) And to hear and love them as themselves. (5) And they shall be true to the King of England and to the realm. (6) And that they keep with all their might all the Articles aforesaid. (7) After that it shall be enquired if any Master or Fellow that is warned, have broken any Articles beforesaid, the which if they have done it shall be determined there. (8) Therefore it is, to wit, that if any Master or Fellow that is warned before to come to such Congregations, and be rebellious and will not come, or else shall have trespassed against any Article beforesaid, if it be proved he shall forswear his Masonry and shall no more use his Craft; (9) the which if he presume to do, the Sheriff of the Country in which he may be found working shall prison him and take all his goods into the King s hand, til his grace be granted him and shewed.

For this cause principally were these Congregations ordained that, as well the lowest as the highest should be well and truly served in his Art beforesaid, throughout all the Kingdom of England. Amen, – so mote it be.

SUPPOSED ASSENT OF ATHELSTAN. (REGIUS M.S.).

“These Statutes that I have here found, Beseeching him, of his high grace, I will they be held throughout my land, To stand with you in every place,
For the worship of my Royalty, That I have by my dignity. Also at every sembly that you hold, That ye come to your liege King bold,
To confirm the Statutes of King Athelstan.
That he ordained to this Craft, for good reason.”
(1-9) Possibly the ancient points, the Nos. 1 to 9, do not appear in the original MS.

“THE ANGLO-NORMAN CONSTITUTIONS” lI.
STATUTES OF A.D. 1356.
At a Congregation of Mayor and Aldermen holden on the Monday next before the purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary (2 Feby.) in the thirtieth year of the reign of King Edward III, etc., there being present Simon Fraunceys the Mayor, John Lovekyn, and other Aldermen, the Sheriffs, and John Little, Symon de Benyngtone, and William de Holbeche, commoners, certain Articles were ordained touching the trade of Masons, in these words:

1. Whereas Simon Fraunceys, Mayor of the City of London, has been given to understand that divers dissensions and disputes have been moved in the said City, between the Masons who are “hewers” on the one hand, and the light- Masons and “setters” on the other; because that their trade has not been regulated in due manner by the government of Folks of their trade in such form as other trades are. Therefore the said Mayor, for maintaining the peace of our Lord the King, and for allaying such manner of dissensions and disputes, and for nurturing love among all manner of folks, in honour of the said City, and for the profit of the common people, by assent and counsel of the Aldermen and Sheriffs, caused all the good folks of the said trade to be summoned before him, to have from them good and due information how their trade might be best ordered and ruled, for the profit of the common people.

2. Whereupon the good folks of the said trade chose from among themselves twelve of the most skilful men of their trade, to inform the Mayor, Aldermen, and Sheriffs, as to the acts and articles touching their said trade; – that is to say Walter de Sallynge, Richard de Sallynge, Thomas de Bredone, John de Tyringtone, Thomas de Gloucestre, and Henry de Yevelee, on behalf of the “Mason Hewers;” Richard Joye, Simon de Bartone, John de Estoune, John Wylot, Thomas Hardegray, and Richard de Cornewaylle on behalf of the “light- Masons and Setters;” which folks were sworn before the aforesaid Mayor, Aldermen, and Sheriffs, in manner as follows:
3. In the first place that every man of the trade may work at any work touching the trade, if he be perfectly skilled and knowing in the same.
4. Also, that good folks of the said trade shall be chosen and sworn every time that need shall be, to Oversee that no one of the trade takes work to complete, if he does not well and perfectly know how to perform such work, on pain of losing, to the use of the commonality, the first time that he shall by the persons so sworn be convicted thereof, one mark; and the second time two marks; and the third time he shall forswear his trade for ever.
5. Also, that no one shall take work in gross, if he be not in ability in a proper manner to complete such work; and he who wishes to undertake such work in gross, shall come to the good men, of whom he has taken such work to do and complete, and shall bring with him “Six” or “Four” Ancient men of his trade, sworn thereunto, if they are prepared to testify unto the good men of whom he has taken such work to do, that he is skilful and of ability to do such work, and that if he shall fail to complete such work in due manner, or not to be of ability to do the same, they themselves who so testify that he is skilful and of ability to finish the work are bound to complete the same work, well and properly, at their own charges, in such manner as he undertook; in case the employer who owns the work shall have fully paid the workman. And if the employer shall then owe him anything let him pay it to the persons who have so undertaken for him to complete such work.
6. Also, that no one shall set an apprentice or journeyman to work, except in the presence of his Master, before he has been perfectly instructed in his calling; and he who shall do the contrary, and by the person so sworn be convicted thereof, let him pay the first time to the commonality half a mark, and the second time one mark, and the third time 20 shillings; and so let him pay 20 shillings every time that he shall be convicted thereof.
7. Also, that no man of the said trade shall take an Apprentice for a less time than seven years, according to the usage of the City; and he who shall do the contrary thereof, shall be punished in the same manner.
8. Also; that the said Masters so chosen, shall see that all those who work by the day shall take for their hire according as they are skilled and may deserve for their work, and not outrageously.
9. Also, that if any one of the said trade will not be ruled or directed in due manner by the persons of his trade sworn thereto, such sworn persons are to make known his name unto the Mayor, and the Mayor by assent of the aldermen and sheriffs shall cause him to be chastised by imprisonment, and other punishment, so that rebels may take example by him, to be ruled by the good folks of their trade.
10. Also, that no one of the said trade shall take the Apprentice of another to the prejudice or damage of his Master, until his term shall have fully expired, on pain of paying, to the use of the commonality, half a mark each time that he shall be convicted thereof.

“THE ANCIENT CHARGES.” III.
CHARGE, “circa” 1400, REVISED, “circa” 1475.

Thanked be god our glorious Father and founder and former of heaven and earth, and of all things that in them is, that he would vouchsafe of his glorious Godhead to make so many things of divers virtues for mankind; for he made all worldly things to be obedient and subject to man; for all things that be comestible or of wholesome nature he ordained it for man s sustenance. And also he hath given to man wit and cunning of divers sciences and crafts, by the which he may labour in this world to get our living with (them); and to make divers things for God s pleasure and our (own) ease and profit; the which things if I were to rehearse them, it were too long to tell and to write. Wherefore I will leave (them), but I will shew you some part of them, and tell you how and in what wise the science of Geometry first began, and who were the founders thereof, and of other Crafts more, as it is noted in the Bible and other stories.

How and in what manner this worthy science of Geometry first began I will tell you, as I said before. Ye shall understand that there be seven Liberal Sciences by which seven sciences all the Sciences and Crafts in the world were first found, and especially the science of Geometry, for it is the cause of all other that be, the which seven sciences are called thus: – As for the first, that is called the foundation of science, its name is “Grammar,” it teacheth a man rightly to speak, and write truly. The second is “Rhetorick,” and it teacheth a man to write formably and fair. The third is “Dialecticus” (“Logic” (Watson M.S.)) , and that science teacheth a man to discern the true from the false, and most commonly it is called the art of sophistry. The fourth is called Arithmetic, the which teacheth a man the craft of numbers, for to reckon and make accounts of all manner of things. The fifth is Geometry,” the which teacheth a man mete and measures and ponderation and weightiness, in all manner of crafts. The sixth is “Music,” that teacheth a man the craft of song in notes of voice and organ and trumpet and harp and all others pertaining to them. The seventh is “Astronomy,” that teacheth a man the course of the sun and of the moon, and all other planets and stars of heaven.

Our intent is principally to treat of the first foundation of the worthy science of Geometry, and who were the founders thereof. As I said before, there are seven Liberal Sciences, that is to say seven sciences or crafts that are free in themselves, the which seven live only by one, and that is the science of Geometry. And Geometry is, as much as to say, the measure of the earth, “et sic dicetur a Gea graece quod est pro terra Latine, e metrona quod est mensura una Geometria ie mensura terae vel terrarum,” that is to say in English that Geometry is, as I said, of “geo” in Greek earth, and “metron” that is to say measure, and thus is this name Geometry compounded, and is said (to be) the measure of the earth.

Marvel ye not that I said that all sciences live only by the science of Geometry, for there is no artificial or handicraft that is wrought by man s hand but is wrought by Geometry, and a notable cause, for if a man works with his hands he worketh with some manner of tool, and there is no instrument of material things in this world, but it comes of some kind of earth, and to earth it will turn again. And there is no instrument, that is to say a tool to work with, but it hath some proportion more or less, and proportion is measure, and the tool or instrument is earth, and Geometry is said to be the measure of the earth. Wherefore I may say that men live all by Geometry, for all men here in this world live by the labour of their hands.

Many more probations I could tell you, why that Geometry is the science that all reasonable men live by, but I will leave it at this time for the long process of writing. And now I will proceed further on my matter. Ye shall understand that among all the crafts of the world of man s craft Masonry hath the most notability, and most part of this science of Geometry, as it is noted and said in history, and in the Bible, and in the Master of Stories, and in the “Polichronicon,” a chronicle proved, and in the histories that is named Beda ” de Imagine Mundi, ” et Isodorus ” themolegiarum .” “Mathodius Episcopus et Martyrus,” and others, many more, said that Masonry is principal of Geometry, as me thinketh it may well be said, for it is the first that was founded, as it is noted in the Bible, in the first book of Genesis in the 4th chapter, and also all the doctors aforesaid accordeth thereto, and some of them saith it more openly and plainly right as it saith in the Bible – Genesis.

Adam s line lineal of sons descending down the 7th age after Adam, before Noah s flood there was a man called Lamech, the which had two wives, the one called Adah and the other Zillah; by the first named Adah he begat two sons, the one named Jabal and the other named Jubal. The elder son Jabal, he was the first man that ever found Geometry and Masonry, and he made houses and is named in the Bible, “Pater habitanicum in tentoriis atque Pastorum,” that is to say father of men dwelling in tents, that is dwelling-houses. (And the fnther of Shepherds and Headsman (other MSS.)) And he was Cain s Master Mason and governor of all his works when he made the city of Enoch; that was the first city that ever was made, and that made Cain Adam s son, and gave it to his son Enoch, and gave the city the name of his son and called it Enoch, and now it is called Ephraim, and there was the science of Geometry and Masonry first occupied and contrived for a science and for a craft; and so we may say that was the cause and foundation of all crafts and sciences, and also this man Jabal was called “Pater pastorum.” (And the father of Shepherds and Headsman (other MSS.)) The Master of Stories saith, and Beda “de Imagine Mundi Polichronicon,” and others more say, that he was the first that made partition of land, that every man might know his own ground and labour thereupon, as for his own. And also he parted flocks of sheep that every man might know his own sheep, and so we may say that he was the first founder of that science. And his brother Jubal was the first founder of Music and of song as (“Pythagoras”) saith, the “Polichronicon,” and the same saith Isadore in his “Ethemolegies” in the sixth book, there he saith that he was the first founder of music in song and of organ and trumpet, and he found that science by the sound of ponderation of his brother s hammers, that was Tubal Cain.

Soothly as the Bible saith in the same chapter, that is to say the 4th of Genesis, this Lamech begat upon his other wife, that named Zillah, a son and a daughter, the names of them were called Tubal Cain, that was the son; and his daughter was called Naamah, and as the “Polichronicon” saith, that some men say that she was Noah s wife; whether it be so or no we affirm it not.

Ye shall understand that this son Tubal Cain was the founder of Smiths Craft and of other Crafts of Metal, that is to say of iron, of brass, of gold, and of silver, as sundry doctors sayeth; and his sister Naamah was founder of weavers craft, for before that time there was no cloth woven, but they did spin yarn and knit it, and made such clothing as they could, but as the woman Naamah found the craft of weaving, therefore it is called women s craft; and these three, her brethren, had knowledge before that God would take vengeance for sin either by fire or by water, and they had great care how they might do to save the sciences that they had found, and they took their counsel together and by all their wits they said that there were two manner of stones of such virtue that the one would never burn, and that stone is called marble, and that other stone would not sink in water, and that stone is named lacerus (laterus). And so they devised to write all the sciences that they had found in these two stones, so that if God should take vengeance by fire, that the marble should not burn; and if God sent vengeance by water that the other should not drown; and so they prayed their elder brother Jabal that he would make two pillars of these stones, that is to say of marble and lacerus, and that he would write in the two pillars all the sciences and crafts that they all had found, and so he did, and therefore we may say that he was the most cunning in science, for he first began and performed the end before Noah s flood.

Kindly (intuitively) knowing of that vengeance that God would send, whether it should be by fire or by water the brethren had it not by manner of prophecy; they wist that God would send one thereof, and therefore they wrote their sciences in the ii. pillars of stone, and some men say that they wrote in the stones all the seven sciences; but they had in their minds that a vengeance would come; and so it was that God sent vengeance by water, so that their came such a flood that all the world was drowned; and all men were dead therein; save viii. persons, and that was Noah and his wife and his iii. sons and their wives of which three sons all the world come of and their names were in this manner – Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And this flood was called Noah s flood, for he and his children were saved therein. And after this flood, many years, as the chronicle telleth, these ii. pillars were found, and as the “Polichronicon” saith that a great clerk that men called Pythagoras found the one and Hermes the philosopher found the other, and they taught forth the sciences that they found therein written.

Every chronicle and storiell, and many other clerks, and the Bible principally, witnesseth of the making of the tower of Babylon, and it is written in the Bible, Genesis, Capo. x., how that Ham, Noah s son, begot Nimrod, and he waxed a mighty man upon the earth, and he was a strong man like a giant, and he was a great king. And the beginning of his kingdom was the true kingdom of Babylon, and Erech, and Accad, and Calnah, and the land of Shinar. And this same Nimrod began the tower of Babylon, and he taught to his workmen the craft of measures, and he had with him many Masons, more than forty thousands, and he loved them and cherished them well: and it is written in the “Polichronicon,” and in the Master of Stories, and other stories more, and this, in part, witnesseth the Bible, in the said x. chapter, where it saith that Ashur, that was nigh of kin to Nimrod, “yede” out of the land of Shinar, and he built the city of Nineveh, and Plateas, and other more, thus it saith – “De terra illa in de Sennare egressus est Assur et edificavit Nineven et Plateas civitatis et Calen, et Resen, quoque est inter Nineven et Calen haec est civitatis magna.”

Reason would that we should tell openly how, and in what manner the Charges of Masoncraft was first founded, and who gave first the name to it of Masonry. And ye shall know well that it is plainly told and written in “Polichronicon,” and in Methodius episcopus et Martyrus, that Ashur that was a worthy lord of Shinar, sent to Nimrod the king to send him Masons and workmen of craft that might help him to make his city that he was in will to make. And Nimrod sent thirty hundred of Masons; and when he should go and send them forth he called them before him, and said to them – “You must go to my cousin Ashur, to help him to build a city; but look that ye be well governed, and I shall give you a charge profitable to you and me.

“When ye come to that Lord, look that ye be true to him, like as ye would be to me, and truly do your labour and craft, and take reasonable for your meed therefore, as you may deserve; and also that ye love together as ye were brethren, and hold together truly, and he that hath most cunning teach it to his Fellow, and look ye govern yourselves well towards your lord, and among yourselves, that I may have worship and thanks for my sending, and teaching you the craft.”

And they received the charge of the King that was their Master and their Lord, and went forth to Ashur and builded the city of Nineveh in the country of Plateas and other cities more that men call Calah and Resen that is a great city between Calah and Nineveh. And in this manner the craft of Masonry was first preferred and charged for a science and a craft.

Reason would that we should shew you how that the Elders that were before time had these Charges written (to them as we have now in our Charges of the Story of Euclid, as we have seen them written) in Latin and in French; and how that Euclid came to Geometry, we should tell you as it is noted in the Bible and in other stories. In xii. capitolo Genesis he telleth how that Abraham came to the land of Canaan, and the Lord appeared to him and said, “I shall give this land to thee and to thy seed,” but there fell a great hunger in that land and Abraham took Sarah his wife with him and went into (the land of) Egypt in pilgrimage, while the hunger endured he would bide there. And Abraham was a wise man and a great cleric, and he knew all the seven sciences, and taught the Egyptians the science of Geometry. And this worthy clerk Euclid was his scholar and learned of him; and he gave it first the name of Geometry, all be that it was occupied before it had the name of Geometry. But it is said in Isidorus, “Ethemolegiarum,” in the 5th book, Capitolo primo, that Euclid was one of the first founders of Geometry and he gave it name; for in his time there was a water in the land of Egypt that was called Nile, and it flowed so far into the land that men might not dwell therein. Then this worthy clerk Euclid taught them to make great walls and ditches to hold out the water; and he by Geometry measured the land and apportioned it in divers parts, and made every man to close his own part with walls and ditches, and then it became a plenteous country of all manner of fruit and of young people, of men and women, that there was so much fruit of young people that they could not well live. And the lords of the country drew them together and made a council how they might help their children that had no livelyhood competent and able to find for themselves and their children, for they had so many. And among them all in Council was this worthy clerk Euclid, and when he saw that they all could not bring about this matter he said to them – “Will ye (give) to me your sons in governance and I shall teach them such a science that they shall live thereby gentlemanly, under condition that ye will be sworn to me, to perform the governance that I will set you to, and them both.” And the King of the land and all the lords, by one consent, granted thereto.

Reason would that every man would grant to that thing that were profitable to himself, and they took their sons to Euclid to govern them at his own will, and he taught them the Craft of Masonry and gave it the name of Geometry, because of the parting of the ground that he had taught the people in the time of the making of the walls and ditches aforesaid, to close out the water, and Isadore saith in his “Ethemolegies” that Euclid calleth the craft Geometry; and there this worthy clerk gave it name, and taught it the lords sons of the land that he had in his teaching. And he gave them a Charge, that they should call each other Fellow and no otherwise, because they were all of one craft, and gentle birth born and lords sons. And also he that were most cunning should be governor of the work and should be called Master, and other Charges more that are written in the “Book of Charges.” And so they wrought with the lords of that land, and made cities and towns, castles, and temples, and lords palaces, and did live honestly and truly by the said craft.

What time the children of Israel dwelt in Egypt they learned the craft of Masonry. And afterwards, (when) they were driven out of Egypt, they came into the land of Behest which is now called Jerusalem, and it was occupied and Charges there held and kept. And (also) at the making of King Solomons temple that King David began. And King David loved well Masons and he gave them Charges right nigh as they be now. And at the making of the temple in Solomon s time, as it is said in the Bible, in the third book “Regum in tercio Regum capitolo quinto” that Solomon had iv. score thousand Masons at his work; and the Kings son of Tyre was his Master Mason. And in other Chronicles it is said, and in old “Books of Masonry,” that Solomon confirmed the Charges that David his father had given to Masons. And Solomon himself taught them their manners, but little differing from the manners that now are used.

And from thence this worthy science was brought into France, and into many other regions. Sometime there was a worthy king that was called Carolus Secundus, that is to say Charles the Second, and this Charles was elected King of France by the grace of God and by lineage also. And some men say that he was elected by fortune only, the which is false as by the chronicle he was of the king s blood royal. And this same King Charles was a Mason before that he was a King, and after that he was a King he loved well Masons and cherished them, and gave them Charges and manners at his device, whereof some be yet used in France, and he ordained that they should have reasonable pay and should assemble once a year and commune together of such things as were amiss, and to be ruled by Masons and Fellows.

Every honest Mason or any other worthy workman that hath any love to the Craft of Masonry and would know how the Craft came first into England, and how it was grounded and confirmed, as it is noted and written in Storialls of England and in old Charges of St. Albans time and of King Athelstan (s reign (In original the word is “declared.”) that Amphabell came out of France into England and brought St. Alban into Christendom, and made him a Christian man. And he brought with him the Charges of Masons as they were in France, and in other lands. And at that time the king of the land, who was a pagan, dwelt where St. Albans is now, and he had many masons working on the town walls, and at that time St. Alban was the King s steward, paymaster, and governor of the King s works, and he loved Masons and cherished them well and made them good pay, for (before that time throughout all England) a Mason took but a penny a day and meat and drink, and St. Alban got of the King that every Mason should have xxxd. and iiid. for their noon finding, and he got them Charges and manners as St. Amphabell had taught him, and they do but little differ from the Charges that be used at this time, and so these Charges and manners were used many years.

AFTERWARDS they were almost near hand lost through barbarous wars, until the time of King Athelstan (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) (who brought the land to rest and peace, and he loved well Masons and had a son called Edwin), (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) and the same (Edwin) loved well Geometry and applied himself busily in learning that science, and also he desired to have the practice thereof, wherefore he called to himself the best Masons that were in the realm, for he knew well that they had the practise of Geometry best of any craft in the realm, and he learned of them Masonry and loved and cherished them well, and he took unto him the Charges, and learned the manners, and afterwards for the love that he had unto the craft, and for the good grounding on which it was founded, he purchased a free charter of the King his father that they should have such freedom, to have correction within themselves, and that they might commune together, to correct such things as were amiss within themselves; and they made a great Congregation of Masons to assemble together at York, where he was himself, and let call the old Masons of the realm to that Congregation, and commanded them to bring to him all the writings of the old books of the craft that they had, out of which book they contrived the Charges by the device of the wisest Masons that were there, and commanded that these charges might be kept and holden, and he ordained that such Congregations should be called Assembly, and he ordained for them good pay that they might live honestly; the which Charges I will declare hereafter, and thus was the Craft of Masonry grounded and confirmed in England.

In England Right Worshipful Masters and Fellows that (have) been of divers Assemblies and Congregations, with the consent of the lords of this realm, hath ordained and made Charges, by their best advise, that all manner of men that shall be made and Allowed Masons, must be sworn upon a book to keep the same, in all that they may, to the uttermost of their Power. And also that they have ordained that when any Fellow shall be Received and Allowed that these Charges shall be read to him, and he to take his Charges. And these Charges have been seen and perused by our late Sovereign Lord King Henry the Sixth, and the Lords of the honourable Council, and they have allowed them well, and said they were right good and reasonable to be holden. And these Charges have been drawn and gathered out of divers ancient Books, both of the old Law and new Law, as they were confirmed and made in Egypt by the King and by the great clerk Euclid; and at the making of Solomon s temple by King David, and Salom his son; and in France by Charles King of France; and in England by St. Alban that was steward to the King; and afterwards by King Athelstan (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) that was King of England, and by his son Edwin that was king after his father (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) ; as it is rehearsed in many and divers histories, and storialls, and chapters, and ensueth as the Charges following, Particularly and severally.

The first and principal Charge is:
1. That ye shall be true man, or true men, to God and the Holy Church, and that ye shall use neither error nor heresy, by your own understanding nor discredit wise-men s teaching.
2. That ye be true liegemen to the King without treason or falsehood, and if you know any treason or treachery, look ye amend it if you can, or else privately warn the King, or his rulers, or his deputies, and officers.
3. That ye shall be true one to another; that is to say every Master and Fellow of the science and craft of Masonry, that be Allowed Masons; and to do unto them as ye would they should do unto you.
4. That every Mason keep true Council both of “Lodge” and “Chamber,” and all other councils that ought to be kept by way of Masonry.
5. That no Mason be thief, or thieves (maintainers), so far as he knoweth.
6. That he shall be true to his lord and (to his) Master, that he doth serve, and truly look to his Master s profit and advantage.
7. You shall call Masons your Fellows, or your Brethren, and by no foul name, nor shall you take your Fellow s wife in villany, nor further desire his daughter or servant.
8. And also that you pay truly for your meat or your drink, wheresoever you go to board, also ye shall do no villany in the house, whereby the Craft may be slandered.

THESE be the Charges in general that every Mason should hold, both Masters and Fellows.
NOW other singular Charges for Masters and Fellows:
1st – THAT no Master, nor Fellow, take upon him Lord s work, nor other man s, but he know himself able and cunning to perform it; so that the Craft have no slander nor disworship; so that the lord may be well and truly served.
2ly – That no Master take work but he take it reasonably so that the lords may be well and truly served with his own goods, and the Master may live honestly, and pay his Fellows truly their pay, as the manner of Craft asketh.
3ly – That no Master, nor Fellow, shall supplant other of his work, that is to say, if he have taken a work, or stand Master of any lord s work, or other. Ye shall not put him out, unless he is unable of cunning to end that work.
4ly – That no Master, nor Fellow, take no Apprentice, to be allowed his apprentice but for seven years, and that the apprentice be able, (and) of birth and living, as he ought to be.
5ly – That no Master, nor Fellow, take no allowance (nor allow any) to be Mason without the consent of V. or VI. of his Fellows at least; and that he that shall be made Mason to be (amenable in all points), that is to say, that he be free born and of good kindred, and no bondsman, and that he have his right limbs, as a man ought to have.
6ly – “That no Master, nor Fellow, take any lord s work to task that hath been accounted to be journey-work.
7ly – That every Master) give pay to his Fellow but as he may deserve, so that the worthy lord of the work may not be deceived through false workmen.
8ly – That no Fellow do slander another behind his back to make him lose his good name, or his worldly goods.
9ly – That no Fellow within Lodge, or without it, do minister evil answers to another ungodly, without reasonable cause.
10ly – That every Mason shall do reverence to his elders, and shall put him to worship.
11ly – That no Mason shall play at hazard, nor at the dice, nor at any other unlawful games, whereby the Craft might be slandered.
12ly – That no Mason be ribald in lechery, to make the Craft slandered.
13th – That no Fellow go into town in the night time without a Fellow to bear witness that he hath been in honest company; for if he do so there is to be a Lodge of Fellows to punish the sin.
14th – That every Mason and Fellow shall come to the Assembly if it be within five (fifty) miles of him, and if he have any warning to stand at the award of Masters and Fellows.
15th – That every Mason and Fellow if they have trespassed to stand at the award of Masters and Fellows to make them accord, if they may, and if they may not accord then to go to the common law.
16th – That no Master make no mould, nor square, nor rule, to layers (i.e., setters).
17th – That no Master, nor Fellow, shall set a layer within Lodge, nor without it, to shew any moulded stones, with any mould of his making.
18th – That every Master shall receive and cherish strange Masons when they come out of the country, and set them to work, as the manner is; that is to say, if they have moulded stones in the place, ye shall set him a fortnight at the least in work, and give him his pay, and if ye have no stones for him to work, then ye shall refresh him to the next Lodge.
19th – That you shall truly serve your lord for your pay, and justly and truly make an end of your work, be it task or journey-work, so that you may have your pay truly, as you ought to have.
20th – That every Mason work truly upon the working day, so that he may receive his pay and deserve it; that he may live honestly upon the holiday; and that ye, and every Mason, receive your pay godly of your paymaster, and that you shall keep due time of labour in your work, and of rest as it is ordained of the Master s counsel.
21st – That if any Fellow shall be at discord or dissention, ye shall truly treat with them to make accord and agreement, and shew no favour to either party, but act justly and truly for both, and that it be done at such times as the lord s work be not hindered.
22nd – ALSO if ye stand Warden or have any power under the Master, where you serve, ye shall be true to your said Master while ye be with him, and be a true mediator between Master and Fellows, to the uttermost of your power.
23rd – ALSO if ye stand steward, either of Lodge, Chamber, or Common House needs, ye shall give a true account of your Fellows goods, how they are dispensed, at such times as they may take account; and also if ye have more cunning than your Fellow that stands by you at his work, and see him in danger to spoil his stone, and wants counsel of you, ye shall inform and teach him honestly, so that the lord s work be not spoiled.
These Charges that we have declared and recorded unto you, ye shall well and truly keep to your power. So help you God, and your Hali-dame; and by ye holy contents of this book.

IV. “MODERN CHARGES.”

(ABBREVIATED, “circa” 1535).
The might of the Father of heaven, with the wisdom of the blessed Son, through the grace of God, and the goodness of the Holy Ghost, that be three persons in one Godhead, be with us at our beginning, and give us grace so to govern us here in this life, that we may come to His blessing, that never shall have ending.

Good brethren and Fellows, our purpose is to tell you how and in what manner this worthy science of Masonry was first founded and afterwards how it was maintained and upholden by worthy kings and princes, and many other worshipful men. And also, to them that be here, we will declare the Charges that it belongs to every Free-Mason to keep sure in good faith; and therefore take good heed hereunto, for it is a science that is worthy of being kept, for it is a worthy Craft; and is one of the seven liberal sciences.

The names of the seven liberal sciences are these: The first is “Grammar” that teacheth a man to speak and write truly; the second is “Rhetoric” that teacheth a man to speak well, in subtle terms; the third is “Dialectic,” or Logic, that teacheth a man to discern truth from falsehood. The fourth is “Arithmetic,” that teacheth a man to reckon and count all kinds of numbers; the fifth is “Geometry” that teacheth a man to mete and measure the earth and all other things, on which science Masonry is grounded. The sixth is “Music” that teacheth the craft of song and voice, of tongue, organ, and harp. The seventh is “Astronomy” that teacheth a man to know the course of the sun, moon, and stars.

These be the seven liberal Sciences, the which are all grounded upon one, that is to say Geometry. And this may a man prove that the science of all work is grounded upon Geometry, for it teacheth mete, measure, ponderation, and weight of all manner of things on earth; for there are none that work any science, but he worketh by some measure or weight, and all this is Geometry. Merchants and all Craftsmen, and others who use the Sciences, and especially the plowmen and tillers of all manner of grains and seeds, planters of vineyards and setters of fruit, none can till without Geometry; for neither in Grammar, Rhetoric, or Astronomy can any man find mete or measure without geometry. Wherefore this science may well be called the most worthy science, for it foundeth all others.

How this science was first begun I will now tell you. Before Noah s flood there was a man called Lamech, as it is written in the Bible in the 4th chapter of Genesis. And this Lamech had two wives, the one called Adah by whom he had two sons, one called Jabal and the other Jubal. And his other wife was called Zillah, by whom he had one son Tubal-Cain, and one daughter named Naamah; and these four children founded the beginning of all the sciences in the world. Jabal, the eldest son, found out the science of Geometry; he kept flocks of sheep and lambs in the fields, as it is noted in the chapter aforesaid. His brother Jubal founded the science of Music, in song of tongue, harp, and organ, and trumpet. And the third brother Tubal Cain found the science of smith s craft, in gold, silver, copper, and iron. And their sister Naamah found the craft of weaving. And these persons knowing right well that God would take vengeance for sin, either by fire or water, therefore they writ their several sciences that they had found in ii. pillars of stone, that they might be found after Noah s flood. The one stone was marble that would not burn with fire, and the other called “latres” (latens, laterns, lacerus, &c.) because it would not drown with water. Our intent is now to tell you, how and in what manner these stones were found in which were written these sciences. After the destruction of the world by Noah s flood, as histories affirm, a great clerk called Pythagoras found the one, and Hermes the philosopher (who was Cush s son, who was Shem s son, who was Noah s son) found the other, and was called the Father of wise men. These two found the two pillars in which the sciences were written, and taught them to other men.

And at the making of the Tower of Babylon masonry was much esteemed. And the king of Babylon that was named Nimrod was a Mason himself, and he loved well Masons and their science, as it is said by Masters of histories. And when the cities of Nineveh, and other cities of eastern Asia, were to be built this Nimrod sent thither three score masons (Other MSS. have it, sixty, forty, thirty hundred, see also No. 3 MS.) at the request of the King of Nineveh, his cousin, and when he sent them forth he gave them a Charge in this manner. That they should each one be true to the other; that they should love well one another; that they should serve their lord truly for their pay, that the Master may have worship and all that belong to him. And other more Charges he gave them, and this was the first time that a Mason had any Charges of his Craft.

Moreover Abraham and Sarah his wife went into Egypt, and there he taught the seven sciences to the Egyptians; and (“he had”) a worthy scholar named Euclid (“and he”) learned right well and was Master of all the vii. sciences; and in his days it befell that the lords and states of the land had so many sons, some by their wives and some by their concubines, for that land is hot and plenteous of generation; and they had not a competent proportion of estates wherewith to maintain their said children, which caused them much care; and the King of that land summoned a great Council to consult how they might provide for their children to live honestly as gentlemen; and they could find no good way. And then they made proclamation throughout all the realm, that if there were any that could inform them therein he should come to them and would be well rewarded for his labours. After this proclamation was made the worthy Clerk Euclid came and said unto the King and the nobles – “If you will accept of me to teach, instruct, and govern your children, I will teach them the vii. liberal sciences whereby they may live honestly as gentlemen. I will do it upon condition that you will grant me and them a commission, that I may have power to rule them, after the manner the science ought to be ruled.” The King and all the Council granted him this and sealed the Commission; and then this worthy doctor took to himself these lords sons and taught them the science of Geometry, and to practise work in stones, of all manner of work that belongeth to building churches, temples, castles, towers, manors, and all other sorts of buildings, and gave them a Charge in this manner: First, that they should be true to the lord that they serve; that they should love well one another; that they should call each other Fellow or Brother, and not servant, knave, or other foul name; that they should truly deserve their pay of their lord, or the master that they served; and that they should ordain the wisest of them to be masters of the work, and neither to chose for love, nor affection, nor greatness, nor richness, to set any in the work that hath not sufficient knowledge or cunning to be master of the work, whereby the Master should be evilly served and they dishonoured; and also that they should call the governor of the work Master, during the time that they work with him, and other more Charges which is too long to tell here. And to all these Charges he made them swear a great Oath, that men used at that time; and he ordained for them reasonable pay that they might live honestly thereby; also that they should assemble themselves together once every year, and consult how they might best work for their lords profit and their own credit; and correct within themselves him that had trespassed against the science. And thus was the science grounded in Egypt, and that worthy Master Euclid was the first that gave it the name of Geometry the which is now called Masonry.

And, after that, when the children of Israel were come into the land of Behest which is now called with us the country of Jerusalem (Jewry), King David began the temple that is now called Templum Dei, as is called with us the Temple of Jerusalem, and the said King David loved well Masons and cherished them much, and he gave them good wages, and also Charges and manners, as they had learned in Egypt (“from Euclid”), and other more Charges that you shall hear afterwards. After the decease of King David, Solomon his son finished the said temple that his father had begun, and he sent for Masons out of divers countries and divers lands, and gathered them together so that he had four score thousand workers of stone who were Masons, and he chose out of them three thousand that were ordained to be Masters and governors of the work. And furthermore, there was a king of another region that men called Hiram, and he loved King Solomon well, and he gave him timber for his work. And he had a son named Aman (Aymon, Hymon, Anon, Adon, &c.) and he was a Master of Geometry, and chief Master of all his gravings, carvings, and all his masons and masonry, as appears in Scripture, in libro primo Regum and chapter 5th. And this Solomon confirmed both the Charges and manners that his father had given to Masons, and thus was the worthy science of Masonry confirmed in the country of Jewry, and city of Jerusalem, and in many other kingdoms.

Curious Craftsmen walked about full wide into other countries, some to learn more craft, and some to teach others that had little skill and cunning. And it befell that there was one curious Mason named Namas Graecas (Namus Graecus, Manus Graecus, Memon Grecus, Mammungretus, Mamus Graecus, Minus Goventis, Marcus Graecus, Namus Grenaeus, etc.) that had been at the building (Buildings (query of Bro. Schnitger) – he had a Solomons temple ritual.) of Solomon s temple and he came into France and there he taught the science of Masonry to men of that land. And there was one of the royal line of France called Charles Martel, and he was a man that loved well such a craft, and he drew to this abovesaid, and learned of him the craft, and took upon him Charges and manners, and afterwards by the providence of God, he was elected King of France, and when he was in his estate he took and helped to make men Masons which before were not; and he gave them both their Charge and manners, and good pay as he had learned of other Masons, and also confirmed a Charter from year to year to hold their Assembly where they would, and cherished them right well, and thus came this famous Craft into France.

England in all this time stood void of any Charge of Masonry until St. Alban s time, and in his days the King of England (Carausius.) then a pagan did wall the town (that is now called) St. Albans about. And St. Alban was a worthy Knight and Steward of the King s household, and had the government of the realm, and had also the ordering of the walls of the said town, and he loved and cherished Masons right well, and made their pay right good, for he gave them (3s. a week – 2s. 6d. and 3d. for noon, 3s. 6d. and 3d., etc.), and before that time, throughout all the land, a Mason took but a penny a day, until St. Alban amended it; and he procured them a Charter from the King and his Council, for to hold counsel together, and gave it the name of Assembly, and thereat he was himself, and helped to make men Masons, and gave them a Charge, as ye shall after hear.

But it happened soon after the death of St. Alban that there arose great wars in England, which came out of divers nations, so that the goodly rule of Masonry was well nigh destroyed until the days of King Athelstan, (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) who was a worthy King of England, and he brought the land into good rest and peace, and builded many great works, as abbeys, castles, towns, and other buildings, and loved well Masons; and he had a son named Edwin, (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) that loved Masons, much more than his father, and he was a great practitioner in geometry, and delighted much to talk and commune with Masons and to learn of them skill and cunning, and afterwards for the love he bore to Masons and to their science, he was made a Mason, and he procured for them of the King his father a Charter and Commission to hold every year an Assembly, wheresoever they would within the realm of England, and to correct within themselves all defaults and trespasses that were done within the Craft, and he himself held an Assembly at York, and there he made Masons and gave them the Charges and taught them the manners and commanded that rule to be kept ever after, and also gave them the Charter to keep, and also gave orders that it should be renewed from king to king. And when the Assembly was gathered together he made proclamation, that all Masons who had any writings or understanding of the Charges and manners concerning the said science, that was made before in this land or any other, that they should bring them forth, and when they were viewed and examined, there were found some in French, some in Greek, some in English, and other languages, and the intent and meaning was found all one. [ (Added from “Tew MS.” W. R. Co. York; also clauses 19 to 25.) And these Charges have been gathered and drawn out of divers antient books and writings, as they were made and confirmed in Egypt by the King and the great Clerk Euclid; and by David and Solomon his son; and in France by Charles Martel who was King of France; and in England by St. Alban; and afterwards by Athelstan and Edward his son, (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) that was king after him.] And he had made a Book thereof, how the Craft was founded, and he himself counselled that it should be read when any Masons should be made, and the Charge given to them. And from that day to this the manners of Masons have been kept and observed in that form, as well as men might observe and govern it.

ADD furthermore at divers Assemblies there hath been added certain Charges more by the best advice of Masters and Fellows. Tunc unus ex senioribus teneat librum ut ille vel illi potiat vel potiant manus sup librum et tunc precepta deberent Legi.

EVERY man that is a Mason, take right good heed to these Charges, and if any man find himself guilty of any of them, let him amend himself before God. And in particular, ye that are to be charged, take good heed to keep them right well, for it is perilous and great danger for a man to forswear himself upon “a book” (the Holy Scriptures).

1st – The first Charge is that you be true man to God, and the Holy Church, and that you use neither error nor heresy, according to your own understanding, and to discreet and wise-men s teaching.
2nd – You shall be true liegemen to the King of England without any treason or falsehood, and if you know of any that you amend it privily, if you may, or else warn the King and his Council of it by declaring it to his officers.
3rd – Ye shall be true to one another, that is to say to every Mason of the Craft of Masonry that be allowed Masons, and do unto them as you would they should do unto you.
4th – You shall keep truly all the counsel of Lodge and Chamber, and all other counsel, that ought to be kept by way of Masonry.
5th – Also that you use no thievery, but keep yourselves true.
6th – Also you shall be true to the lord, or Master, that you serve, and truly see that his profit and advantage be promoted and furthered.
7th – And also you shall call Masons your Brethren, or Fellows, and no foul name.
8th – And you shall not take in villainy your Fellow s wife, nor desire his daughter, nor servant, nor put him to any discredit.
9th – And also that you pay truly for your meat and drink where you go to table, and that you do not anything whereby the Craft may be scandalised, or receive disgrace.
These be the Charges in general that belongeth to every Mason to keep both Masters and Fellows. Now come I to rehearse certain other Charges singularly, for Masters and Fellows:

1. That no Master take upon him any lord s work, or any other man s work, except he know himself to be of sufficient skill and cunning to perform and finish the same, that so the Craft receive no slander, but that the lord be well served, and have his work truly done.
2. Also that no Master take any work at unreasonable rates, but so that the lord, or owner, may be truly served with his own goods, and the Master live honestly thereby, and pay his Fellows truly their wages, as the manner is.
3. And also that no Master, nor Fellow, shall supplant another of his work; that is to say, if any Master or Fellow have taken any work to do, and so stands as Master of the said work, you shall not put him out of it, unless he be unable of skill and cunning to perform the same to the end.
4. Also that no Master nor Fellow, take any Apprentice under the term of seven years, and that such apprentice is sufficiently able of body and sound of limbs, also of good birth, free-born, no alien, but descended of a true and honest kindred, and no bondsman.
5. Also that no Mason take any apprentice unless he have sufficient occupation wherein to employ two or three Fellows at the least.
6. Also that no Master or Fellow take any lords work (in task) that was wont to be journey work.
7. Also that every Master shall give wages to his Fellows according as his work doth deserve, that he be not deceived by false work.
8. Also that none shall slander another behind his back, whereby he may lose his good name, or worldly riches.
9. Also that no Fellow, within the lodge or without it, shall misanswer or reprove another, without cause.
10. Also that every Mason shall reverence his elder brother, and put him to honour.
11. Also that no Mason shall be a common player at cards or dice, or any other unlawful game, or games, whereby the science may be slandered and disgraced.
12. Also that no Fellow at any time go from the Lodge to any town adjoining, except he have a Fellow with him to witness that he was in an honest place, and civil company.
13. Also that every Master and Fellow shall come to the Assembly of Masons, if it he within fifty (1, 5, 7, 10) miles about him, if he have any warning of the same.
14. And if he or they have trespassed or offended against the Craft, all such trespass shall stand there, at the award and arbitration of the Masters and Fellows there (present); they to make them accord if they can, or may, and if they cannot agree then to go to the common law.
15. Also that no Master, nor Fellow, make any mould, rule, or square for any layer, nor set any layer (with) or without to hew any mould stones.
16. And that every Mason shall cherish strange Fellows, when they come out of other countries and set them on work if he can, as the manner is, viz. – if he have no stones, nor moulds, in that place, he shall refresh him with money to supply his necessities until he come to the next Lodge.
17. Also that every Mason shall perform his work truly and not sleightly, for his pay, and serve his lord truly for his wages.
18. Also that every Master shall truly make an end of his work, whether it be by task or journey, viz., by measure or by days, and if he have his pay and all other covenants performed to him by the lord of the work according to the bargain.
19. Also that no Mason shall be a common ribald in lechery to make the Craft slandered.
20. Also that every Mason shall work truly upon the work day, that he may truly deserve his pay, and receive it so he may live honestly on the holiday.
21. And also that you and every Mason shall receive weekly (meekly) and godly (the) pay of your paymaster, and that you shall have due time of labour in the work, and of rest as is ordained by the Master s counsel.
22. And also if any Fellows be at discord you shall truly treat with them to be agreed, shewing favour to neither party, but wisely and truly for both, and that it be in such time that the lord s work be not hindered.
23. And also if you stand Warden, or have any power under the Master whom you serve, you shall be true to him, and a true mediator between the Master and your Fellows, to the uttermost of your power whilst you be in care.
24. Also if you stand Steward either of Lodge, Chambers, or common house, you shall give true accounts to your Fellows, at such time as they have accounts.
25. And also if you have more cunning than your Fellow that stands by you, and see him in danger to spoil his stone, and he asketh counsel of you, you shall inform and teach him honestly, so that the lord s work be not damaged.
THESE Charges that we have now rehearsed to you, and to all others here present, which belongeth to Masons, ye shall well and truly keep to your power. So help you God, and by ye contents of that book. Amen. (by your Haly-dome, Hali-dame, etc.).

V. “A SOUTH COUNTY VARIATION.”

Afterwards, soon after the decease of St. Alban there came divers wars into England, out of divers nations, so that the good rule of Masonry was destroyed and put down, until the time of King (Knight) Althelstan. (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) In his time there was a worthy King of England that brought this land into good rest, and he builded many great works and buildings, therefore he loved well Masons, for he had a son called Edwin, (Query, Edwd., and Athelstan (suggested by Bro. W. H. Upton, P.G.M., of Washington). May admit of interpretation as Edwd. the elder, and his sons Athelstan and Edwin (see IV. and V.)) the which loved Masons much more than his father did, and he was so practised in geometry that he delighted much to come and talk with Masons, and learn of them the Craft; and after for the love he had to Masons and to the Craft, he was made Mason at Windsor, (Query – Winchester.) and got of the King his father a charter and commission, once every year to have Assembly where they would within England, and to correct within themselves, faults and trespasses that were done touching the Craft, and he held them at Assembly at York, and there he made Masons.

VI.

“THE NEW ARTICLES AND APPRENTICE CHARGE.” (Harleian MS., etc., early 17th Century).
(THE NEW ARTICLES).

(1) 26. No person (of what degree soever) bee accepted a Free-Mason unless he shall have a lodge of five Free Masons; at least where of one to be a Master or Warden, of that limitt or devision, wherein such lodge shall be kept, and another of the trade of Free Masonry.
(2) 27. That noe p son shall be accepted a Free Mason but such as are of able body, honest parentage, good reputation, and observers of the laws of the land.
(3) 28. That noe pson hereafter be accepted a Free Mason, nor shall be admitted into any Lodge or Assembly until hee hath brought a certificate of the time of accep con from the Lodge yt accepted him, unto the master of that limitt and devision where such Lodge was kept which say d Master shall enrole the same in parchment in a role to he kept for that purpose, to give an account of all such Accep cions at every general Assembly. (See the acct. of such Roll at York, Ch. X.)
(4) 29. That every person whoe now is Free Mason shall bring to the Master a note of the time of his accep tion, to the end the same may be enrolled in such priority of place of the p son shall deserve and to ye end the whole Company and Fellows may the better know each other.
(5) 30. That for the future the say d Society, Company, and Fraternity, of Free Masons shall be regulated and governd by one Master, and Assembly, and Wardens, as ye said Company shall think fitt to chose at every yearly general Assembly.
(7) 31. That no p son shall be accepted a Free Mason, or know the secrets of the said Society, until he hath first taken the Oath of secrecy hereafter following: – I, A.B., doe in the presence of Almighty God and my Fellows and Brethren here present, promise and declare that I will not at any time hereafter, by any act or circumstance whatsoever, directly or indirectly, publish, discover, reveale, or make knowne, any of the secrets, priviledges, or counsells, of the Fraternity or Fellowship of Free Masons, which at this time, or at any time hereafter, shall be made knowne unto mee. So helpe mee God, and the holy contents of this booke.
(THE CHARGE BELONGING TO AN APPRENTICE).
1. You shall truly honour God and his Holy Church, the King, your Master, and Dame, you shall not absent yourself but with the license of both, or one of them, from their service by day or night.
2. You shall not purloin or steal, or be privy, or accessory to the purloining or stealing, to the value of sixpence, from them, or any of them.
3. You shall not commit adultery, or fornication, in the house of your Master, with his wife, daughter, or maid.
4. You shall not disclose your Master s or Dame s counsels, or secrets, which they have imparted to you, nor what is to be concealed, spoken, or done within the precincts of their house, by them or either of them, or by Free Masons.
6. You shall reverently behave yourself to all Free Masons, not using cards, or dice, or any other unlawful games, Christmas excepted.
7. You shall not haunt, or frequent any taverns, alehouses, or such as go into any of them, except when your Master s business, or Dame s, their, or any of their affairs, or without their or any of their consent.
8. You shall not commit adultery or fornication in any man s house, where you shall be at table or at work.
9. You shall not marry or contract yourself to any woman during your Apprenticeship.
10. You shall not steal any man s goods, but especially your said Master s, or any of his Fellow Masons, or suffer any one to steal their goods, but shall hinder it if you can, and if you cannot, then you shall acquaint your said Master, and his Fellows presently.
VII. “ADDITION TO “NEW ARTICLES,” IN” 1663.
6th. That noe p son be accepted a Ffree Mason, except he be one and twenty yeares old or more.
GRAND LODGE MS. No. 2, “circa” 1650.
32. The 6th. p. 559. (Hence the omission from Harleian MS., and some others may be an error by accident. No date.)

THE END.