Ars Quatuor Coronatorum,

ever warranted by the Grand Lodge of Ireland on the Continent of Europe , the staple manufactures of the little French town , which were wool and silk , suggest a reason , while an additional link between Dublin and Beziers is furnished by the fact that the

Senior Warden , " FRAS . P . BURTON , Esq ., " became " in process of time better known as the Rt . Hon . FRANCIS PlERPONT ( BURTON ) CONYNGHAM , who succeeded his uncle , EARL CONYNGHAM , in 1781 , as second Baron CONYNGHAM , Irom

whom is descended the Marquess CONYNGHAM of the present Peerage . " The particulars respecting these lodges are extremely meagre , but it is something to have discovered any particulars at all . What , however , adds greatly to the value of the Article is the reference to that dreadful invention of modern

American Freemasonry , to wit—the doctrine ol exclusive jurisdiction , or perhaps we should say their exaltation of the doctrine into an Ancient Landmark . In respect of this , Bro . CRAWLEY quotes , in the first place , a paragraph from a pamphlet dated

"London , x 7 65 , " and entitled " A Defence of Free-Masonry as Practised in the Regular Lodges , both Foreign and Domestic , under the Constitution of the English Grand Master , " in which occurs the remark , " it would be highly absurd for one Grand

Master to constitute Lodges in the Territories of another . He next quotes a Regulation adopted by the Grand Lodge of Ireland on the 3 rd November , 17 68 , from which if appears that that Grand Lodge was the first , so far as his knowledge goes .

" to embody in its Regulations an implicit recognition ol the principle , " and he cites a case which occurred in 179 6 , when certain brethren of the " Loyal Inverness Fenciblcs" applied to the Grand Lodge of Ireland for a warrant of constitution , and

were referred by it to the Grand Lodge of Edinburgh . In commenting upon this part of Bro . CRAWLEY ' S " Notes , " Bro . G . W SPETH enters more fully into the subject of exclusive jurisdiction , and gives at some length the views relating to it held in

America , not only as to the jurisdiction of a Grand Lodge over private lodges within its territory , but likewise as to the monstrous claim by lodges over candidates they have rejected . Bro . SPETH mentions also the acceptance of the principle as far back as 1770

by the Grand Lodge ot England , but with the limitation it has always in all subsequent cases stipulated for , that , in acknowledging a new Grand Lodge , the right of its own lodges to adhere to their English Constitution should remain undisturbed . At the same

time , it has refrained from warranting new lodges in the territorial jurisdiction of the newly-recognised Grand Lodge . With this position Bro . CRAWLEY , in a footnote to Bro . SPETH ' comments , tells us the Grand Lodge of Ireland "has always

heartily concurred , " and he adds very pointedly and very justly — " In any discussion on the subject , it must be accepted as a fundamental proposition that the doctrine is , in the first instance , due to the action of the two oldest Grand Lodges in the world .

It seems impossible to resist the conclusion that when the Law is to be interpreted , the limitations laid down by the authorities that enacted it must be accepted as part of the Law . " For ourselves , we have so often discussed the question in these columns ,

that had it not been for the very pointed reference's to it in this paper , we should gladly have left it unnoticed , but it is a satisfaction to find that the opinions we have so often expressed are thus strengthened and confirmed by the arguments of two such

competent judges as Bros . CRAWLEY and Sl'ETM . As for the other paper by Bro . CRAWLEY , it will suffice , perhaps , if we mention that it treats of certain Irish Masonic Medals , namely ( 1 ) , a " Craft Medal , 176 3 ; " ( 2 ) a " Craft and Royal Arch Medal , circa

1800 ; " and ( 3 ) a " Craft , R . A ., and H . K . T . Medal , circa 180 . 5 . '' The paper is highly interesting , and is supplemented by some Notes furnished by Bro . W . J . HUGHAN , who is an authority on Masonic Medals .

The "Notes on some Masonic Symbols , " by Bro . RYLA . VDS , is a most able contribution , which c mnot be too carefully studied , and which has the advantage of being very well illustrated . Symbolism , as the writer very justly remarks , is a

difficult subject to cope with . There is always the danger that in treating of it you may allow your fancy to run away with you . Bro . RYI . ANDS , however , has dealt , with it very ably ,

notwithstanding that he has contented himself with bringing together just a few facts which , in his opinion , were likely to prove interesting and supply food for thought lo some of his

Ars Quatuor Coronatorum,

brother members . At the outset , he expresses it as his belief that " very little of the complicated symbolism now in use coulcj be proved , even with a fair amount of probability , to have existed beyond modern times . " He then goes on to furnish

instances within his own knowledge of " early examples of the representation of the working tools of the Craft of Masonry " prominent among those to which he draws attention being the square , compasses , level , and plumb rule . Other symbols he

mentions are the Pentalpha or Pentagon and the double Triangle or Solomon ' s Seal , as regards the former of which there are several highly interesting particulars which Bro . RYLANDS has quoted from certain papers by Mr . EDWARD W . CON . The

47 th Proposition of the first Book of Euclid also has its share of attention , but as to that , and , indeed , as regards the whole of the symbols which he has introduced , we should only spoil the effect of his elaborate article if we quoted just a passage here and there

for purposes of illustration . It is enough , that 111 the comments that followed the reading of the paper , it was eulogised by every brother who took part in the discussion as well as by those who gave their remarks in the form of notes or annotations . Bro

SPETH spoke of it as "the first serious attempt to account for the presence of some of our symbols in a rational and natural manner , showing how they derive immediately from the very exigencies of the Masons' handicraft . " The Rev . Bro . HORSLEY ,

in seconding the vote of thanks to Bro . RvLANDsfor his paper , said that " Papers such as this , and the existence of the lodge , made Masonry possible , or a hearty and continuous interest in it probable , to those who had no desire to be what had been called mere knife and fork Masons . " Bro . CRAWLEY is even more

eulogistic in his Note . Says he , " The publication of Bro . \ V . H . RYLANDS' article seems to me to rank among the greatest services that our Lodge has rendered to the Craft . Lucid in its method , convincing in its argument , and accurate in its erudition

the paper leaves nothing to be added in the way of direct proof . " To such praise as this it is unnecessary to add any commendation of our own and all we need do is to impress upon those of our readers who delight in the study of Masonic symbolism , the importance o ( studying this most learned paper by Bro .

RYLANDS . Bro . GOULD ' S paper on " The Duke of Wharton , G . M ., " contains an able sketch of the career of that most eccentric nobleman , though naturally he directs his chief attention to his Grace's connection with the Craft , and the services , such as they

were , which he may be presumed to have rendered it in his capacity of Grand Master , tn his elucidation of this part of his career , the Society or Order of the Gormogons plays an important part , and having carefully read the paper , we are of

opinion that Bro . GOULD IS about right in his conclusion that WHARTON was a prominent member of that Order . " It was , " writes Bro . GOULD , " in thorough harmony with the character 0 ! PHILIP WHARTON to have first of all cast in his lot with the

Masons , and afterwards—d he did not directly originate '—to have become an active supporter of their opponents ( lie Gormogons . That he was a prominent member of the so-called ' Order' there can be no doubt whatever , and it is quite within

the limits of possibility that it sprang into existence as the creation of his lively fancy . But without crossing the boundary of reasonable presumption , we may fairly conclude that he hecame the ruling spirit of the mysterious organisation whose

periods of activity corresponded so closely with his own in certain stages of his career on which I have sought to fix your particular attention while reading the paper of this evening . " Bro . GOUI . LJ has succeeded in accumulating a mass of information which )

even if it fall short of proving all his theories , will be fouiul most interesting . Our only fear is that there may be those who will consider he has over-elaborated his sketch , and that his article would have been improved b y a little h ' attention to minuteness of detail . It is certain it would have

been far better if Bro . GOULD had altogether refrained irom mixing up the question of Masonic Degrees with the career ' WllAKTON . The former does not seem to have been ncccssaO

in forming a just and perfect estimate , of the latter , while > ts introduction was certain to provoke discussion on a m . ift cr which in such an article is necessarily of inferior important ' Had he omitted this reference , our whole interest in the pl "