The English Rite Of Freemasonry.

they can be of no disservice in nny future attempts to evolve the truth , and in the hope that they may prove to be of some . service , however slight . But , before lavincr down onr theory , it will be as well ,

perhaps , if we clear the way somewhat by stating it as our opision , frankly and unhesitatingly , that whatever may have led to the Schism , it cannot well havo been those innovations in the ritual on which some havo felt inclined to

lay so much stress . The bulk of the irregularities to which Bro . Hughan has referred concern the " Making of Masons . " Thus , on 15 th September 1730 , Past Grand Master Sayer was " publicly admonished " in Grand Lodge for having taken part " in the proceedings of one of those clandestine

lodges , " and he was recommended by the D . G . M . ' to do nothing so irregular for the future , "—the " clandestine lodges" referred to being such as had been irregularly constituted in defiance of the regulations promulgated in

1724 "for the due constitution of regularly warranted lodges . " In March 1735 tbe Grand Master referred to " the grievance of making extraneous Masons in a private and clandestine manner npon small and unworthy considerations . " In Jnne 1730 there was made a similar "

complaint concerning irregular making of Masons , " while , as Bro . Hughan points ont , " other complaints were made later on , but as it has never transpired of what the irregularities consisted , save the assembling of brethren to ' make Masons , ' without regular warrants , we are at a loss to find

any justification for the statement that the innovations at that time consisted in a different mode of working the Third Degree . The minntes of the Grand Lodge , however , do not specify any changes in the ritual , but irregularities in

the constitution of the Lodges , as also the insufficiency of the fees . The correctness of the ceremonies , though irregular in their surroundings , is virtually admitted by the means taken to prevent such persons visiting the legitimate lodges "

In Chapter IV ., entitled " Advent of Royal Arch Masonry , " will be found many statements which confirm our view that changes or innovations in the ritual can have had liltle , if anything , to do with bringing about the Schism . Among them will be found one contained in the

report of " the joint Committee " of the " Regular " and " Atholl" Lodges of South Carolina , " appointed by those two bodies to make the preliminary arrangements for a union , " to the effect that " from the reciprocal examina . tions by the several Committees already had in Grand

Lodge , it doth appear that there exists no difference in the mode of passing and raising , instrncting , obligating , and clothing , in the respective Grand Lodges . " Then , in a further quotation from Bro . Joseph Robbins P . G . M . Illinois , Bro . Hughan , using the words of the latter , says ,

" If in view of these facts , there is longer any room to doubt , that doubt is disposed of by the fact that the Rituals extant of the period extending from 1723 to 1730 inclusive , five in all , show that they had the same modes of recognition that we have now . This period antedates by

twenty or thirty years the first appearance of the Royal Arch , and the identity of the essentials of the Ritual then and now is conclusive that the alleged mutilation of the Third Degree , to form the basis of that Order , is pure fiction . " Later on , Bro . Hughan points out why it was

"impossible that any very violent changes could have been made in the Rituals of the Craft Degrees by either of the two rival Grand Lodges—first , because , had they so done , they would have been opposed by the foreign G . Lodges , and thus cut themselves off from the Fraternity generally ; and

secondly , it would not have been likely , under such circumstances , that Lodges in England would have been working under warrants from both the ' Regular' and ' Atholl' Grand Lodges , as several did , first accepting the one , and then obtaining the other , after which they

acknowledged , for a time , first one and then the other , according to their fancy , until the ' Union , ' when they held fast to the charters from the ' Atholl' Masons , because of securing higher positions on the United Roll of Lodges . " If we take this view , it is fairly arguable that , if neither of the

rival Grand Lodges made " Any very violent changes in the " Rituals of the Craft Degrees , " the Schism cannot have beeu brought about by any such changes . That there were some differences between the two systems is very

properly admitted . " There must , undoubtedly , ' says Bro . Hughan , " have been some minor differences between the two { opposing Grand Lodges to account for the fact that on brethren from the one society joining the other they had to be 're-made" in either case ; ' Moderns' made

The English Rite Of Freemasonry.

{ Ancients , ' or vice versa ; but all this can well be granted without the material a'terations having been agreed to , as so many claim . " Then , as to the various so-called " " Exposures" of 1723 , 1724 , 1730 , and later , Bro . Hughan points out how contradictory they are , and consequentl y

how untrustworthy as evidence they must be ; "Still , " he writes , " accepting them as guides , what does their evidence amount to , and where do they lead us ? They do not give any countenance to the theory that tho ' Moderns '

aud the ' Ancients' were so much at variance in the modes of working the three degrees ; so that , supposing we accepted their testimony , there would not be aught fonnd against the general view we have propounded . "

Here , then , we find ourselves in this position . The chief subject of complaint in the regular Grand Lodgethe only one in existence in London till 1753—appears to have been that of making Masons irregularly , and for small and unworthy considerations . We are further informed

that there were no material differencea in the manner in which tho Craft Degrees were worked by the rival Grand Lodges , and consequently there can have been none to induce the Schism . Such differences in working aa existed between the Grand Lodges were probably the effect ,

not the cause , of the Schism . But so serious a dissension among the members of the Craft is unlikely to have bad its origin in a cause or causes of a trifling character . These may have had the effect of widening the breach

and making it more enduring , but they cannot well have originated it . The question which next presents itself is—Where shall we find a cause of sufficient gravity to have induced such a dissension ? and we think an answer

may be found in connection with the disturbance that arose in Grand Lodge over the special privileges accorded to the Grand Stewards' Lodge , founded in 1735 . Brother Hughan quotes from the Grand Lodge records as followswe have noted the passage before , but it will bear

repetition— " A petition and appeal was presented and read , signed by several Masters of lodges , against the privileges granted to the Grand Stewards' Lodgo at the last Quarterly Communication . The appellants were heard at large , and the question being put whether the determination of the

last Quarterly Communication relating to this matter should be confirmed or not . In the course of collecting the votes on this occasion there appeared so much confusion that it was not possible for the Grand Officers to determine with any certainty what the numbers on either side of the

question were , they were therefore obliged to dismiss the debate and close the lodge . " Here , then , we have a very substantial difference happening at the close of the year 1735 , and we may be very certain that the closing of the Lodge did not summarily determine the angry feelings to

which such a difference must have given rise . It mast be borne in mind that tbe granting of these special privileges to this newly-constituted Stewards' Lodge was tantamount to the establishment , if not exactly of an imperium in imperio , at all events of a kind of aristocracy in the ranks

of a society of which the members presumably met on a footing of equality . There were , of course , the usual gradations of rank attached to brethren holding certain official positions in the Lodges and Grand Lodge , but otherwise this doctrine of equality had been fairly well upheld

up to the time when these privileges were granted , and it seems only reasonable to suppose that such an innovation into the system which had been built up from 1717 onwards , must have met , as in fact from the passage quoted we know it did meet , with the most serious

disfavour . The more stringent regulations passed before and subsequently to this event , must be set down as neither more nor less than certain necessary safeguards against the admission of unworthy persons into the Graf b ; but this establishment of the Grand Stewards' Lodge , with its

exceptional privileges was , as we have said , the setting up of an aristocracy , and what is worse still , of an aristocracy founded upon wealth . Kloss , according to Findel , includes this among the causes of the Schism ; we feel inclined to go further and erect it into the cause , all other differences being of subordinate value . ( To be continued . )

At the Alwyne Castle Tavern , St . Paul ' s Road , the North London Chapter of Improvement , held a meeting on Thursday , the 9 th instant , at 8 o ' clock . Companion Sheffield was the M . E . Z ., Knight H ., Radcliffe J ., Minstrell acting S . E ., Williams S . N ., Phillips P . S . There was a goodly attendance of R . A . Masons .