Masonic Notes And Queries.

whilst the latter contends that , according to such theory , it did exist , before the year 1717 . The Fellow-Craft's proof consists of the five ensuing passages , taken from communications of the Contributor to the " Freemasons' Magazine , " in the month of October 1869 .

, 1 . " Since Bro . J . A . H . asserts that Speculative Masonry was in existence before 1717 , it is his place to prove the affirmative , not mine to prove the negative . "

2 . " I mean by speculative Masonry our present system , which system was instituted about A . D . 1717 . " 3 . " I shall be glad to hear what constituted the speculative Masonry , which , we are told , existed before 1717 ? I am quite sure it was not the Speculative Masonry , or Freemasonrywe now posses .

There-, fore , what was it ? 4 . " Are we always to hear about , and never to see these precious evidences of the antiquity of Speculative Masonry before 1717 . " 5 . " First prove if you can , ( but I am afraid you cannot ; that our Speculative Masonry existed before

last century . " The Entered Apprentice ' s proof consists of the following communication , made to the " Freemasons ' Magazine , " in the month of May last : — " Bro . B . does not deny the existence of the doctrines which our system of Freemasonry teaches

before 1717 . He only denies that our Masonic Society as such , promulgated them before that time . These doctrines existed before 1717 , and what the founders of Speculative Masonry then did , was to take hold upon them , and use them for their own purposes . " —A PAST PROVINCIAL GEAND MASTER .

BIENSEANCE . It is better , although right , to be thought wrong , than to be wanting in what the French call "Bienseance . " But there are members of the Craft who are wrong , and are wanting in Bienseancealso . —A PAST PROVINCIAL GEAND MASTER .

UNSEEMLINESS . In Masonry where there is unseemliness , look not for usefulness . — A PAST PEOVINCIAL GEAND MASTER . A CONTRIBUTOR . An Entered Apprentice says that in December , 1869

, a certain Contributor wrote "As to finding proof of the existence of our Speculative Freemasonry before 1717 , I beg to confess my inability to do so , the search on my part being fruitless . " Whilst in May , 1871 , he writes " he does not deny the existence of the Doctrines which our system of Freemasonry teaches before 1717 . " He adds . " these doctrines existed before 1717 .- —A PAST ProvnrciAi , GRAND MASTER .

THREE ASSERTIONS AND THEIR ANSWERS , ( P . 106 ) . In reply to Bro . C . P . Cooper , permit me to observe that the German and English Masonic Historians upon whom he relies at page 107 , have made several mistakes , e . g . Bro . Findel , at page 113 of the second edition of his History of Freemasonry , says that Thomas Boswell was chosen Warden of St . Mary ' s Lodge at Edinburgh in the year 1600 and

that Robert Moray was made a Master Mason in 1641 , yet at page 652 Bro . Findel admits that he was mistaken in saying so , and Bro . D . Murray Lyon , who is examining the old records of the Lodge ot Edinburgh Mary ' s Chapel , explains that Eobert Moray was not " made a Master Mason" but like

, other non-operatives had an honorary connection with that body . And seeing also that no longer ago than Sth inst ., Bro . Hughan says that " Masonic degrees were unknown before A . D . 1716 , " it appears to me that instead of Bro . Buchan being wrong in his " assertions" at page 249 of the Magazine for April

1 st 1871 , it is the English and German Masonic Historians referred to who were deficient in their knowledge of the subject when they wrote . It must be remembered that owing to many masonic documents having been carefully examined by various brethren within the last three years" more light" has been

, shed upon many points that were until then exceedingly obscure . Consequently if any brother wishes to keep abreast of our present position in the attainment of the true history of our Order it will never do to ignore the progress made within the last three years Seeing therefore that our system did

, not exist before 1716—17 , it follows that it was impossible for the four London Lodges to impart what they did not possess themselves . It was only in 1716-17 they got it . —W . P . BUCHAN .

EARLIEST NON-PROFESSIONAL MASONIC OFFICE . HOLDERS . There is unfortunately a misprint at page 129 , eleventh line from top , for " under date of 1672 , " read " under date of 1670 . "—W . P . B . MARKS AND WHO RECEIVED THEM IN THE

SEVENTEENTH CENTURY A . D . Two centuries ago the Entering Prenteise , when being entered , received his mark on payment of "ane merk piece for his meason merk . " Afterwards when admitted to the privileges of a Fellow-of-Craft , his mark had to be recorded along with his name . No extra secret however in the ease . —W . P . BUCHAN .

THE MASTER DEGREE AND THE ROYAL ARCH . The Master Degree never existed until about A . D . 1717 ; and the Eoyal Arch , so far as I have been able to discover , not until the fourth decade of last century . It is also my own opinion , in accordance with Bro . Hughan ' sthat the Grand Lodge of England " went

, out of its way to adopt the Eoval Arch in A . D . 1813 . "—W . P . B . THE HOLY SAINTS JOHN . From the " Keystone" we learn we learn that the following resolution was introduced before the Grand

Lodge of New York , and very properly laid on the table : — Whereas , The use of the words " Holy Saints John " as practised in the standard work and lectures of this M . "W " . Grand Lodge , is a sectarian interpolation , and in its tendencies subversive of the primary principles , the tolerant and universal character of Preemasonryand

; Whereas , The " Holy Saints John" were entirely unknown as " Eminent Patrons of Masonry" before the year 1755 ; and Whereas , The Grand Lodge of England , the Grand Lodge of France , and other Continental Grand Bodies ,