Correspondence.

Thus the Athol Grand Lodge minutes themselves contradict Bro . Lane ' s assertion that the warrant No . 157 was transferred to an entirely new lodge in Whitehaven , some of whose members had belonged to the former lodge .

Fortunately there is reliable information to be obtained respecting the old warrant , No . 157 besides that contained in the Athol Grand Lodge minutes , to show that Bro . Lane ' s deductions are misleading .

I find that from the ori ginal minutes of the Sun , Square , and Compasses Lodge , No . 157 ( now No . 119 ) , Whitehaven , that the lodge was held at the sign of the Duke of Athol , Ginns , on the 13 th of December , 1806 . It must have been between that date and the

4 th of February , 1807 ( the date given in the Athol Grand Lodge minutes ) that the Grand Lodge must have interfered on account of some alleged un-Masonic conduct : It appears that Bro . James Byrne , mine host of the Duke of Athol , had been , on the 13 th December , 1806 , unanimousl y re-elected W . M . of the Lodge No .

157 for the ensuing six months , the usual term of office at that time . At this time a very grave scandal was raised against Bro . Byrne by a visitor to the lodge , and it must have been owing to the serious charges made againt Bro . Byrne that the Grand Lodge interfered , and that Bro . Byrne and a few other brethren left the lodge .

These charges against Bro . Byrne were afterwards investigated by a Committee , consisting of twelve members of lodge No . 157 , and on the 13 th of November , 1807 , the Committee declared Bro . Byrne was guiltless , and reprimanded very severely the visiting brother who had created all the unpleasantness . The warrant was withdrawn from Bro . Byrne ' s house and

taken to the George Inn . With the sanction of the Grand Lodge , so say the minutes of Lodge No . 157 , another election of W . M . took place , and the minutes of the lodge at which the fresh election took place were recorded by Bro . E . Dalton , who was Secretary of the lodge when it was held in the Ginns , and who was appointed Secretary in the reformed lodge , if it may be so termed .

The minutes state that a meeting of " Lodge No . 157 was held for the purpose of re-establishing it on the warrant having been suspended and withdrawn , when the same was restored by the W . M ., Wm . Campbell Heatley , of Lodge No . 154 , to the W . M ., James Nicholson , who was chosen unanimousl y by the members present . "

I he list of members show that Bro . Nicholson , his officers , and the members present were members of the same lodge that met at the Duke of Athol Inn . Furthermore , the same minute and cash books which were used for the lodge at the Duke of Athol were continued by the lodge that assembled at the George Inn .

Excepting Bro . Byrne and the few brethren who had retired with him , the lodge at the George Inn was identical in every respect with that which was held at the Duke of Athol , being composed , as the Athol Grand Lodge minutes declare , of " many respectable brothers

formerly of the said lodge . " The period during which this change of the lodge room and the W . M . was made must have been very brief . The last regular lodge under the Byrne regime of which there is any account in the old minute book was held on the 13 th of December , 1806 .

The Athol Grand Lodge minutes , according to Bro . Lane , state that on the 4 th of February , 1807 , Lodge No . 157 had been withdrawn from the Ginns , and had taken up its quarters at the George Inn . Thus there would be an interval between those dates of about seven weeks—the longest possible time during which the

transition could take place . But there is no evidence to show when the first meeting of the lodge assembled at the George . It must have been some considerable time before the 4 th of February , 1807 , for in those anti-railway days news would not be conveyed very rapidly from Whitehaven to London ; and

it is scarcely likel y that the Grand Lodge of England would be disturbed from the even tenour of its way and hold a lodge of emergency immediatel y on receipt of the intelligence that an old warrant had been removed safely from one public-house to

another in Whitehaven , with the unanimous consent and approbation of the respectable Lodge 154 . " It is not only possible but probable that the usual monthly meetings were held both in January and February in 1807 , and that there was no hiatus in the continuity of the proceedings of Lodge No . 157 .

I aking a common sense view of the whole of the circumstances , it will , I think , be generally agreed that the so-called withdrawal was nothing more than a change of address , and the brief suspension was cancelled by the act of the restoration of the warrant .

It may be perfectl y true , as Bro . Lane says , that Grand Lodge at that time rarel y issued new warrants , but one can scarcel y imagine that Grand Lodge or any sane person would grant " an entirel y new lodge , " in 1807 a warrant purporting to be issued in 1768 without

any remark or endorsement upon it . The old warrant No . 157 ( now 119 ) , dated 1768 , is the only one the Sun , Square , and Compasses Lodge , Whitehaven , possesses , and it is without any remark , either on its face or back , to show that it had ever been transferred , as Bro . Lane says it was .

The Grand Lodge in 1885 apparently took a similar view to mine of the so-called withdrawal , because it granted the Sun , Square , and Compasses Lodge , No . 119 , a centenary warrant ( under the si gn-manual of the Grand Master , H . R . H . the Prince of Wales ) which contained a recital of the foundation of the lodge in 1768 ,

Correspondence.

and the different changes of the number by which it has been registered on the roll of the Grand Lodge of England . But Bro . Lane , who , to prove his argument , can regard the Athol Grand Lodge minutes of 1887 as conclusive , doubts the work of recent officers of the Grand Lodge . According to him , centenary warrants have been issued

to lodges , besides No . 119 , that were not entitled to them . Indeed , it would appear that Bro . Lane is a higher authority than Grand Lodge , for has he not altered the date of Lodge No . 119 in the "Masonic Calendar" for 18 90 from 1768 , as it has hitherto been , to 1803 , when the Grand Lodge has distinctly declared

that Lodge No . 119 was warranted in 1768 . In conclusion , I have to say that this discussion cannot have been initiated b y Bro . George J . McKay in the interests of Freemasonry in the province for which he is Secretary . This controversy is doing , and will do , the Sun , Square , and Compasses Lodge ,

Whitehaven , much injury . It is a pity it had not been started years ago , when older Masons than I am could have better defended the position of Lodge No . 119 . But doubts about the antiquity of the lodge , which have never been uttered in the lodge by either " Masonic students " or others , can now be expressed

by outsiders , when those brethren , who could more easil y have dispelled them than I can are dead and gone . Finally , I claim to have demonstrated , in the foregoing remarks , that it is Bro . G . J . McKay , Prov . Grand Secretary of Cumberland and Westmorland , who is " hopelessly wrong , " and not—Yours faithfully and

fraternally , R . W . MOORE . December 5 . A QUESTION OF LODGE PRECEDENCE .

To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , My opinion has been asked under the following circumstances : A number of the members of a lodge agree to present a jewel to another member . Nc

general canvas is made , nor is it ( naturally ) believed to be intended as a lodge matter . At the conclusion of the business , at a recent regular meeting , in fact , during " Hearty good wishes , " a brother rises in his place , and makes the presentation in the name of the lodge .

There does not seem to be much difficulty about it , I gave my opinion that the jewel could not be said to be the gift of the lodge , though , of course , it was quite competent for any number of brethren to subscribe in such way and present a jewel , but even then I thought the lodge could hardly be the place in which to make

the presentation , unless by special leave of the W . M ., and a notification , private or otherwise , as circumstances required , to all the members . I added that were such a course pursued it was very probable the brethren might then make it a lodge matter by their own resolution and postponement for a month .

But I ask your opinion mainly because I believe there is very great looseness allowed in such matters , so much so that the presentation jewels we wear will depreciate in their owner ' s estimation because depreciated in the eyes of the Craft . Not only is the dignity of the Craft lowered b y irregularities of this kind , but

( as I believe in this case ) a worthy brother is done a grave injustice , for half a dozen brethren , it seems to me , are just as much entitled to present a jewel bearing an inscription that it has been presented by the lodge to the individual it has already asked to resign , if he . has so many sympathisers in his conduct . I mi ght go

further , and point out results , but will content myself by commending this subject to such lodges as may have alread y suffered from " piques and quarrels " attributable to loose lodge discipline , any encouragmentof which in time brings about due punishment . — Yours fraternally ,

WEST YORKSHIRE . December 7 . THE NEW ZEALAND GRAND LODGE .

To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , By the copies of your paper arriving last Mail I find you have made several references to articles and statements prepared by me for the information of the brethren . in support of this movement . I , with your

permission , claim the ri ght of reply . In the leading article in which you adversel y discuss the financial statement you lay great stress on the amount of money sent home b y the various lodges ; now , although this is a very secondary matter in our opinion , yet after all it is a serious amount to leave the Colony

year after year and for which we do no get any return but council and advice that however valuable , does not cost anything . It may be said that we get grants made from the Fund of Benevolence , but , so far as I can find , there has been for many years only one case belonging to local lodges and then the recipient was in London

, and if enquiry had been made it would have been proved to be neither a deserving case nor one qualified to receive the money , so that if it had been dealt with on the spot this amount would have been saved . You object to our estimate of the cost of working our Grand Lodge . The amount may seem low , but as

our intention is to have strong District Lodges and the Supreme Grand Lod ge on similar lines to the Canadian one , we should not require the full time of the Secretaries and with the drastic economy now in vogue in our impoverished Colony the services of brethren of experience qualified for the office could be secured for

Correspondence.

the amount named . The most important column of figures , however , you quite ignore , that with reference to " Charity , " showing our three Grand Lodges in this city with an annual increase of £$ 32 4 s . 4 d ., expending in the same time £ 12 16 s . for Charity . Now it is the fact that our present unfortunate state of division

with its conflicting interests and jealousies , prevents us from getting even the brethren to work on the common platform of Charity and so carry out the principle of our Order . This has incited the movement for the amalgamation of the three Constitutions into one homogenous Constitution , and with no wish of cutting the painter , & c ,

the reason it has been pressed on to completion is to take the favourable opportunity of having Bro . the Earl of Onslow , our Governor , take the first Mastership and so prevent any jealousy between the various District Grand Masters in New Zealand if one of them had been chosen for the office .

Your remarks of the various Constitutions at home working harmoniously together do not apply , as here they clash with each other in every town and Masonic Hall , and not as at home , where they are confined each to their own country ; nor is it a fact that the English , Scotch , and Irish join lodges of their various

nationalities . For instance , in the three Grand Lodges in Auckland , the Grand Master ( E . C . ) is a Scotchman , but Scotch and Irish , both English , and it was remarked that the first lodge that voted on this question , although Scotch , yet the five Past Masters present of three were English and two Irish , but no Scotch . But what

about the young Colonials who are daily initiated into the Craft , and , recollect , these comprise the bulk of the new members ; are they not entitled to have lodges of their own ? Your objection of the possibility of governing the Craft from one centre of the . colony is also not correct , as all the Irish lodges are under the

jurisdiction of the Auckland Irish Grand Lodge , and they have carried on their duties satisfactorily . and efficiently for many years , and why cannot the new Grand Lodge do the same thing ? There are other points 1 should like to touch on , but must not take up too much of your space .

I cannot close , however , without expressing the hope that as the promoters of this amalgamation have conducted the whole of the agitation in a perfectly fair and constitutional manner they consider they are entitled to the generous support and consideration of

the brethren in the Old Country in their endeavours to secure that privilege and rig ht which has been granted to the Craft in Australasian colonies , and which , therefore , the brethren in New Zealand cannot see any

reason why it should not be granted to them . —I am , dear Sir and Brother , yours faithfully and fraternally , W . H . COOPER , P . M ., P . Z ., & c . Auckland , New Zealand , Oct . 31 .

Masonic Notes And Queries.

Masonic Notes and Queries .

Through the courtesy of Bro . T . Lamb-Smith , P . P . J . G . W . Worcester , I have examined the minute book and ledger of Lodge Mercy and Truth , Evesham , warranted in 1818 , No . 703 . It does not appear to have been a successful lodge , notwithstanding the assistance it received from Cheltenham and other

places . There are , however , a few points worth noting , viz ., the members held a lodge of instruction on three Sundays in September and three Sundays in October , 1818 , and a lodge of emergency on another Sunday in the latter month . One of the members paid the large sum of ^ 30 for his " entrance , " although the usual fee

at the time , according to the ledger , for entrance or initiation was £ 4 4 s only . On 30 th December , 1818 , Bros . Monk and Snepp " passed the chair in due form . " These were the two Wardens , the former of whom was elected W . M . at the same meeting . On 28 th April , 1819 , the members resolved to hold a lodge

of instruction every Wednesday , " and the non-attendants to forfeit Threepence . " No place of meeting is recorded in the old Calendars , but the minutes show that the lodge met at the Rose and Crown in 1818 , removing to the Crown Inn at the end of 1 S 19 , and to the Cross Keys in 1824 , where it continued until its

demise in 1831 . It , however , " adjourned " on three several occasions , viz ., to Bro . Bowen's Ship Inn , Pershore , on 17 th May , 1 S 26 , and 18 th April , 1 S 27 , and to the Coach and Horses Inn , Pershore , on 29 th August , 1827 . These two books , with other property of the

lodge , were in the possession of the last Master until his death about 10 years ago . Bro . Lamb-Smith ' s indefatigable efforts to unearth them has been crowned with success . Will other brethren imitate his example and report the result ?

JNO . LANE . 86 3 ] EARLY FREEMASONRY .

From report of Historical MSS . Commission , 1885 , of documents of the Earl of Eglintoun , edited b y William Eraser , C . B ., LLD . " The statutes and ordinances to be observed by all Master Masons within this realm , set down by William Schaw , Master of

work to his Majesty and general Warden of the said Craft , with consent of the Master Masons , 28 th Dec , 1 599 . " His Majesty is James VI . of Scotland , who , after the death of Elizabeth in 1603 , became James I . of England . The document is of considerable length ,