“These Charges which we now reherse to you and all others ye secrets and misterys belonging to free masons you shall faithfully and truly keep, together with ye Counsell of ye assembly or lodge, or any other lodge, or brother, or fellow.â€
“These Charges which we now reherse to you and all others ye secrets and misterys belonging to free masons you shall faithfully and truly keep, together with ye Counsell of ye assembly or lodge, or any other lodge, or brother, or fellow.â€
“Then after ye oath taken and the book kissed†(i.e.the Bible) the “precepts†are read, the first being:—
“You shall be true men to God and his holy Church, and that you do not countenance or maintaine any eror, faction, schism or herisey, in ye church to ye best of your understanding.†(History of No. 53, by James Smith.)
“You shall be true men to God and his holy Church, and that you do not countenance or maintaine any eror, faction, schism or herisey, in ye church to ye best of your understanding.†(History of No. 53, by James Smith.)
TheGrand Lodge MS. No. 2provides that “You shall keepe secret ye obscure and intricate pts. of ye science, not disclosinge them to any but such as study and use ye same.â€
TheHarleian MS. No. 2054(Brit. Mus.) is still more explicit, termedThe ffree Masons Orders and Constitutions, and is in the handwriting of Randle Holme (author of theAcademie of Armory, 1688), who was a member of a lodge in Cheshire. Following the MS.Constitutions, in the same handwriting, about 1650, is a scrap of paper with the obligation:—
“There is sevrall words and signes of a free Mason to be revailed to yu wch as yu will answr. before God at the Great and terrible day of judgmt. yu keep secret and not to revaile the same to any in the heares of any p’son, but to the Mrs and fellows of the Society of Free Masons, so helpe me God, &c.†(W. H. Rylands,Mas. Mag., 1882.)
“There is sevrall words and signes of a free Mason to be revailed to yu wch as yu will answr. before God at the Great and terrible day of judgmt. yu keep secret and not to revaile the same to any in the heares of any p’son, but to the Mrs and fellows of the Society of Free Masons, so helpe me God, &c.†(W. H. Rylands,Mas. Mag., 1882.)
It is not yet settled who were the actual designers or architects of the grand old English cathedrals. Credit has been claimed for church dignitaries, to the exclusion more or less of the master masons, to whom presumably of right the distinction belonged. In early days the title “architect†is not met with, unless the term “Ingenator†had that meaning, which is doubtful. As to this interesting question, and as to the subject of building generally, an historical account of Master and Free Masons (Discourses upon Architecture in England, by the Rev. James Dallaway, 1833), andNotes on the Superintendents of English Buildings in the Middle Ages(by Wyatt Papworth, 1887), should be consulted. Both writers were non-masons. The former observes: “The honour due to the original founders of these edifices is almost invariably transferred to the ecclesiastics under whose patronage they rose, rather than to the skill and design of the master mason, or professional architect, because the only historians were monks.... They were probably not so well versed in geometrical science as the master masons, for mathematics formed a part of monastic learning in a very limited degree.†In theJournal of Proceedings R.I.B.A.vol. iv. (1887), a skilful critic (W. H. White) declares that Papworth, in that valuable collection of facts, has contrived to annihilate all the professional idols of the century, setting up in their place nothing except the master mason. The brotherhood of Bridge-builders,5that travelled far and wide to build bridges, and the travelling bodies of Freemasons,6he believes never existed; nor was William of Wykeham the designer of the colleges attributed to him. It seems well-nigh impossible to disprove the statements made by Papworth, because they are all so well grounded on attested facts; and the attempt to connect the Abbey of Cluny, or men trained at Cluny, with the original or preliminary designs of the great buildings erected during the middle ages, at least during the 12th and 13th centuries, is also a failure. The whole question is ably and fully treated in theHistory of Freemasonryby Robert Freke Gould (1886-1887), particularly in chapter vi. on “Medieval Operative Masonry,†and in hisConcise History(1903).
The lodge is often met with, either as thetabulatum domicialem(1200, at St Alban’s Abbey) or actually so named in theFabric Rollsof York Minster (1370),ye logebeing situated close to the fane in course of erection; it was used as a place in which the stones were prepared in private for the structure, as well as occupied at meal-time, &c. Each mason was required to “swere upon ye boke yt he sall trewly ande bysyli at his power hold and kepe holy all ye poyntes of yis forsayde ordinance†(Ordinacio Cementanorum).
As to the termfree-mason, from the 14th century, it is held by some authorities that it described simply those men who worked “freestone,†but there is abundant evidence to prove that, whatever may have been intended at first,free-mason soon had a much wider signification, the prefixfreebeing also employed by carpenters (1666), sewers (15th century, tailors at Exeter) and others, presumably to indicate they were free to follow their trades in certain localities. On this point Mr Gould well observes: “The class of persons from whom the Freemasons of Warrington (1646), Staffordshire (1686), Chester, York, London and their congeners in the 17th century derived the descriptive title, which became the inheritance of the Grand Lodge of England, werefree men, and masons of Gilds or Companies†(History, vol. ii. p. 160). Dr Brentano may also be cited: “Wherever the Craft Guilds were legally acknowledged, we find foremost, that the right to exercise their craft, and sell their manufactures, depended upon the freedom of their city†(Development of Guilds, &c., p. 65). In like manner, the privilege of working as a mason was not conferred before candidates had been “made free.†The regular free-masons would not work with men, even if they had a knowledge of their trade, “ifunfree,†but styled them “Cowans,†a course justified by the king’s “Maister of Work,†William Schaw, whoseStatutis and Ordinanceis(28th December 1598) required that “Na maister or fellow of craft ressaue anycowanisto wirk in his societie or companye, nor send nane of his servants to wirk wt. cowanis, under the pane of twentie pounds.†Gradually, however, the rule was relaxed, in time such monopoly practically ceased, and the word “cowan†is only known in connexion with speculative Freemasonry. Sir Walter Scott, as a member of Lodge St David (No. 36), was familiar with the word and used it inRob Roy. In 1707 a cowan was described in the minutes of Mother Lodge Kilwinning, as a mason “without the word,†thus one who was not afreemason (History of the Lodge of Edinburgh No. 1, by D. Murray Lyon, 1900).
In theNew English Dictionary(Oxford, vol. iv., 1897) under “Freemason†it is noted that three views have been propounded:—(1) “The suggestion thatfree-masonstands for free-stone-mason would appear unworthy of attention, but for the curious fact that the earliest known instances of any similar appellation aremestre mason de franche peer(Act 25 Edw. III., 1350), andsculptores lapidum liberorum, alleged to occur in a document of 1217; the coincidence, however, seems to be merely accidental. (2) The view most generally held is that freemasons were those who were free of the masons’ guild. Against this explanation many forcible objections have been brought by Mr G. W. Speth, who suggests (3) that the itinerant masons were called free because they claimed exemption from the control of the local guilds of the towns in which they temporarily settled. (4) Perhaps the best hypothesis is that the term refers to the medieval practice of emancipating skilled artisans, in order that they might be able to travel and render their services wherever any great building was in process of construction.†The late secretary of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge (No. 2076, London) has thus had his view sanctioned by “the highest tribunal in the Republic of Letters so far as Philology is concerned†(Dr W. J. Chetwode Crawley inArs Quatuor Coronatorum, 1898). Still it cannot be denied that members of lodges in the 16th and following centuries exercised the privilege of makingfreemasons and denied the freedom of working to cowans (also calledun-freemen) who had not been so made free; “the Masownys of the luge†being the only ones recognized asfreemasons. As to the prefix being derived from the wordfrere, a sufficient answer is the fact that frequent reference is made to “Brotherfreemasons,†so that no ground for that supposition exists (cf. articles by Mr Gould in theFreemasonfor September 1898 on “Free and Freemasonryâ€).
There are numerous indications of masonic activity in the British lodges of the 17th century, especially in Scotland; the existing records, however, of the southern part of the United Kingdom, though few, are of importance, some only having been made known in recent years. These concern the Masons’ Company of London, whose valuable minutes and other documents are ably described and commented upon by Edward Conder, jr., in hisHole Crafte and Fellowship of Masons(1894), the author then being the Master of that ancient company. It was incorporated in 1677 by Charles II., who graciously met the wishes of the members, but as a company the information “that is to be found in the Corporation Records at Guildhall proves very clearly that in 1376 the Masons’ Company existed and was represented in the court of common council.†The title then favoured was “Masons,†the entry of the term “Freemasons†being crossed out. Herbert erroneously overlooked the correction, and stated in hisHistory of the Twelve Great Livery Companies(vol. i.) that the Freemasons returned two, and the Masons four members, but subsequently amalgamated; whereas the revised entry was for the “Masons†only. The Company obtained a grant of arms in 1472 (12th year Hen. VIII.), one of the first of the kind, being thus described:—“A feld of Sablys A Cheveron silver grailed thre Castellis of the same garnysshed wt. dores and wyndows of the feld in the Cheveron or Cumpas of Black of Blakâ€; it is the authority (if any) for all later armorial bearings having a chevron and castles, assumed by other masonicorganizations. This precious document was only discovered in 1871, having been missing for a long time, thus doubtless accounting for the erroneous representations met with, not having the correct blazon to follow. The oldest masonic motto known is “God is our Guide†on Kerwin’s tomb in St Helen’s church, Bishopgate, of 1594; that of “In the Lord is all our trust†not being traced until the next century. Supporters consisting of two doric columns are mentioned in 1688 by Randle Holme, but the Grand Lodge of England in the following century used Beavers as operative builders. Its first motto was “In the beginning was the Word†(in Greek), exchanged a few years onward for “Relief and Truth,†the rival Grand Lodge (Atholl Masons) selecting “Holiness to the Lord†(in Hebrew), and the final selection at the “Union of December 1813†beingAudi Vide Tace.
Mr Conder’s discovery of a lodge of “Accepted Masons†being held under the wing of the Company was a great surprise, dating as the records do from 1620 to 1621 (the earliest of the kind yet traced in England), when seven were made masons, all of whom were free of the Companybefore, three being of the Livery; the entry commencing “Att the making masons.†The meetings were entitled the “Acception,†and the members of the lodge were calledAcceptedMasons, being those soacceptedand initiated, the term never otherwise being met with in the Records. An additional fee had to be paid by a member of the Company to join the “Acception,†and any not belonging thereto were mulct in twice the sum; though even then such “acceptance†did not qualify for membership of the superior body; the fees for the “Acception†being £1 and £2 respectively. In 1638-1639, when Nicholas Stone entered the lodge (he was Master of the Company 1632-1633) the banquet cost a considerable sum, showing that the number of brethren present must have been large.
Elias Ashmole (who according to his diary was “made a Free Mason of Warrington with Colonel Henry Mainwaring,†sevenbrethernbeing named as in attendance at the lodge, 16th of October 1646) states that he “received a summons to appear at a Lodge to be held next day at Masons’ Hall, London.†Accordingly on the 11th of March 1682 he attended and saw six gentlemen “admitted into the Fellowship of Free Masons,†of whom three only belonged to the Company; the Master, however, Mr Thomas Wise, the two wardens and six others being present on the occasion as members in theirdualcapacity. Ashmole adds: “We all dyned at the Halfe Moone Tavern in Cheapside at a noble dinner prepaired at the charge of the new-accepted Masons.â€
It is almost certain that there was not an operative mason present at the Lodge held in 1646, and at the one which met in 1682 there was a strong representation of the speculative branch. Before the year 1654 the Company was known as that of the Freemasons for some time, but after then the old title of Masons was reverted to, the terms “Acception†and “Accepted†belonging to the speculative Lodge, which, however, in all probability either became independent or ceased to work soon after 1682. It is very interesting to note that subsequently (but never before) the longer designation is met with of “Free and Accepted Masons,†and is thus a combination of operative and speculative usage.
Mr Conder is of opinion that in the Records “there is no evidence of any particular ceremony attending the position of Master Mason, possibly it consisted of administering a different oath from the one taken by the apprentices on being entered.†There is much to favour this supposition, and it may provide the key to thevexata quaestioas to the plurality of degrees prior to the Grand Lodge era. The fellow-crafts were recruited from those apprentices who had served their time and had their essay (or sufficient trial of their skill) duly passed; they and the Masters, by theSchaw Statutesof 1598, being only admitted in the presence of “sex Maisteris andtwa enterit prenteissis.†As a rule a master mason meant one who was master of his trade,i.e.duly qualified; but it sometimes described employers as distinct from journeymen Freemasons; being also a compliment conferred on honorary members during the 17th century in particular.
In Dr Plot’sHistory of Staffordshire(1686) is a remarkable account of the “Society of Freemasons,†which, being by an unfriendly critic, is all the more valuable. He states that the custom had spread “more or less all over the nationâ€; persons of the most eminent quality did not disdain to enter the Fellowship; they had “a largeparchment volumcontaining the History and Rules of the Craft of Masonryâ€; St Amphibal, St Alban, King Athelstan and Edwin are mentioned, and these “charges and manners†were “after perusal approved by King Hen. 6 and his council, both as to Masters and Fellows of this right Worshipfull craft.†It is but fair to add that notwithstanding the service he rendered the Society by his lengthy description, that credulous historian remarks of its history that there is nothing he ever “met with more false or incoherent.â€
The author of theAcademie of Armory, previously noted, knew better what he was writing about in that work of 1688 in which he declares: “I cannot but Honor the Fellowship of the Masons because of its Antiquity; and the more,as being a member of that Society, called Free Masons†Mr Rylands states that inHarl. MS. 5955is a collection of the engraved plates for a second volume of this important work, one being devoted to the Arms of the Society, the columns, as supporters, having globes thereon, from which possibly are derived the two pillars, with such ornaments or additions seen in lodge rooms at a later period.
In the same year “A Tripos or Speech delivered at a commencement in the University of Dublin held there July 11, 1688, by John Jones, then A.B., afterwards D.D.,†contained “notable evidence concerning Freemasonry in Dublin.†The Tripos was included in Sir Walter Scott’s edition of Dean Swift’s works (1814), but as Dr Chetwode Crawley points out, though noticed by the Rev. Dr George Oliver (the voluminous Masonic author), he failed to realize its historical importance. The satirical and withal amusing speech was partly translated from the Latin by Dr Crawley for his scholarly introduction to theMasonic Reprints, &c., by Henry Sadler. “The point seems to be that Ridley (reputed to have been an informer against priests under the barbarous penal laws) was, or ought to have been, hanged; that his carcase, anatomized and stuffed, stood in the library; and thatfrath scoundrellusdiscovered on his remains the Freemasons’ Mark.†The importance of the references to the craft in Ireland is simply owing to the year in which they were made, as illustrative of the influence of the Society at that time, of which records are lacking.
It is primarily to Scotland, however, that we have to look for such numerous particulars of the activity of the fraternity from 1599 to the establishment of its Grand Lodge in 1736, for an excellent account of which we are indebted to Lyon, the Scottish masonic historian. As early as 1600 (8th of June) the attendance of John Boswell, Esq., the laird of Auchinleck, is entered in the minutes of the Lodge of Edinburgh; he attested the record and added his mark, as did the other members; so it was not his first appearance. Many noblemen and other gentlemen joined this ancientatelier, notably Lord Alexander, Sir Anthony Alexander and Sir Alexander Strachan in 1634, the king’s Master of Work (Herrie Alexander) in 1638, General Alexander Hamilton in 1640, Dr Hamilton in 1647, and many other prominent and distinguished men later; “James Neilsone, Master Sklaitter to His Majestie,†who was “entered and past in the Lodge of Linlithgow, being elected a joining member,†2nd March 1654. Quarter-Master General Robert Moray (or Murray) was initiated by members of the Lodge of Edinburgh, at Newcastle on the 20th of May 1641, while the Scottish army was in occupation. On due report to their Alma Mater such reception was allowed, the occurrence having been considered the first of its kind in England until the ancient Records of the Masons’ Company were published.
The minute-books of a number of Scottish Lodges, which are still on the register, go back to the 17th century, and abundantly confirm the frequent admission of speculatives as members and officers, especially those of the venerable “Mother LodgeKilwinning,†of which the earl of Cassillis was the deacon in 1672, who was succeeded by Sir Alexander Cunningham, and the earl of Eglinton, who like the first of the trio was but an apprentice. There were three Head Lodges according to the Scottish Code of 1599, Edinburgh being “the first and principall,†Kilwinning “the secund,†and Stirling “the third ludge.â€
The Aberdeen Lodge (No. 1tris) has records preserved from 1670, in which year what is known as theMark Bookbegins, containing the oldest existing roll of members, numbering 49, all of whom have their marks registered, save two, though only ten were operatives. The names of the earls of Finlater, Erroll and Dunfermline, Lord Forbes, several ministers and professional men are on the list, which was written by a glazier, all of whom had been enlightened as to the “benefit of the measson word,†and inserted in order as they “were made fellow craft.†The Charter (Old Charges) had to be read at the “entering of everie prenteise,†and the officers included a master and two wardens.
The lodge at Melrose (No. 1bis) with records back to 1674 did not join the Grand Lodge until 1891, and was the last of those working (possibly centuries before that body was formed) to accept the modern system of government. Of the many noteworthy lodges mention should be made of that of “Canongate Kilwinning No. 2,†Edinburgh, the first of the numerous pendicles of “Mother Lodge Kilwinning, No. 0,†Ayrshire, started in 1677; and of the Journeymen No 8, formed in 1707, which was a secession from the Lodge of Edinburgh; the Fellow Crafts or Journeymen not being satisfied with their treatment by the Freemen Masters of the Incorporation of Masons, &c. This action led to a trial before the Lords of Council and Session, when finally a “Decreet Arbitral†was subscribed to by both parties, and the junior organization was permitted “to give the mason word as it is called†in a separate lodge. The presbytery of Kelso7in 1652 sustained the action of the Rev. James Ainslie in becoming a Freemason, declaring that “there is neither sinne nor scandale in that word†(i.e.the “Mason Wordâ€), which is often alluded to but never revealed in the old records already referred to.8One Scottish family may be cited in illustration of the continuous working of Freemasonry, whose membership is enshrined in the records of the ancient Lodge of “Scoon and Perth No. 3†and others. A venerable document, lovingly cared for by No. 3, bears date 1658, and recites how John Mylne came to Perth from the “North Countrie,†and was the king’s Master Mason and W.M. of the Lodge, his successor being his son, who entered “King James the sixt as ffreman measone and fellow craftâ€; his third son John was a member of Lodge No. 1 and Master Mason to Charles I., 1631-1636, and his eldest son was a deacon of No. 1 eleven times during thirty years. To him was apprenticed his nephew, who was warden in 1663-1664 and deacon several times. William Mylne was a warden in 1695, Thomas (eldest son) was Master in 1735, and took part in the formation of the Grand Lodge of Scotland. Others of the family continued to join the Lodge No. 1, until Robert, the last of the Mylnes as Freemasons, was initiated in 1754, died in 1811, and “was buried in St Paul’s cathedral, having been Surveyor to that Edifice for fifty years,†and the last of the masonic Mylnes for five generations. The “St John’s Lodge,†Glasgow (No. 3bis), has some valuable old records and a “Charter Chest†with the words carved thereon “God save the King and Masons Craft, 1684.â€Loyalty and Charityare the watchwords of the Society.
The Craft Gilds (Corps d’État) of France, and their progeny theCompanionage, have been fully described by Mr Gould, and theSteinmetzenof Germany would require too detailed notice if we were to particularize its rules, customs and general character, from about the 12th century onward. Much as there was in common between the Stonemasons of Germany and the Freemasons of Great Britain and Ireland, it must be conceded that the two societies never united and were all through this long period wholly separate and independent; a knowledge of Freemasonry and authority to hold lodges in Germany being derived from the Grand Lodge of England during the first half of the 18th century. The theory of the derivation of the Freemasons from theSteinmetzenwas first propounded in 1779 by the abbé Grandidier, and has been maintained by more modern writers, such as Fallou, Heideloff and Schneider, but a thorough examination of their statements has resulted in such an origin being generally discredited. Whether theSteinmetzenhad secret signs of recognition or not, is not quite clear, but that the Freemasons had, for centuries, cannot be doubted, though precisely what they were may be open to question, and also what portions of the existing ceremonies are reminiscent of the craft anterior to the Revival of 1717. Messrs Speth and Gould favour the notion that there were two distinct and separate degrees prior to the third decade of the 18th century (ArsQ.C., 1898 and 1903), while other authorities have either supported theOne degreetheory, or consider there is not sufficient evidence to warrant a decision. Recent discoveries, however, tend in favour of the first view noted, such as theTrinity College MS., Dublin (“Free Masonry, Feb. 1711â€), and the invaluable9Chetwode Crawley MS.(Grand Lodge Library, Dublin); the second being read in connexion with the Haughfoot Lodge Records, beginning 1702 (Hist, of Freemasonry, by W. F. Vernon, 1893).
Two of the most remarkable lodges at work during the period of transition (1717-1723), out of the many then existing in England, assembled at Alnwick and at York. The origin of the first noted is not known, but there are minutes of the meetings from 1703, the Rules are of 1701, signed by quite a number of members, and a transcript of theOld Chargesbegins the volume. In 1708-1709 a minute provided for a masonic procession, at which the brethren were to walk “with their aprons on and Comon Square.†The Lodge consisted mainly of operative “free Brothers,†and continued for many years, a code of by-laws being published in 1763, but it never united with the Grand Lodge, giving up the struggle for existence a few years further on.
The other lodge, the most noteworthy of all the English predecessors of the Grand Lodge of England, was long held at York, the Mecca of English Freemasons.10Its origin is unknown, but there are traces of its existence at an early date, and possibly it was a survival of the Minster Lodge of the 14th century. Assuming that theYork MS. No. 4of 1693 was the property of the lodge in that year (which Roll was presented by George Walker of Wetherby in 1777), the entry which concludes that Scroll is most suggestive, as it gives “The names of the Lodge†(members) and the “Lodge Ward(en).†Its influence most probably may be also noted at Scarborough, where “A private Lodge†was held on the 10th of July 1705, at which the president “William Thompson, Esq., and severall others brethren ffree Masons†were present, and six gentlemen (named) “were then admitted into the said ffraternity.†These particulars are endorsed on theScarborough MS.of the Old Charges, now owned by the Grand Lodge of Canada at Toronto. “A narrow folio manuscript Book beginning 7th March 1705-1706,†which was quoted from in 1778, has long been missing, which is much to be regretted, as possibly it gave particulars of the lodge which assembled at Bradford, Yorkshire, “when 18 Gentlemen of the first families in that neighbourhood were made Masons.†There is, however, another roll of records from 1712 to 1730 happily preserved of this “Ancient Honble. Society and Fraternity of Free Masons,†sometimes styled “Company†or “Society of Free and Accepted Masons.â€
Not to be behind the London fratres, the York brethren formed a Grand Lodge on the 27th of December 1725 (the “GrandLodge ofallEngland†was its modest title), and was flourishing for years, receiving into their company many county men of great influence. Some twenty years later there was a brief period of somnolence, but in 1761 a revival took place, with Francis Drake, the historian, as Grand Master, ten lodges being chartered in Yorkshire, Cheshire and Lancashire, 1762-1790, and a Grand Lodge of England, south of the Trent, in 1779, at London, which warranted two lodges. Before the century ended all these collapsed or joined the Grand Lodge of England, so there was not a single representative of “York Masonry†left on the advent of the next century.
The premier Grand Lodge of England soon began to constitute new Lodges in the metropolis, and to reconstitute old ones that applied for recognition, one of the earliest of 1720-1721 being still on the Roll as No. 6, thus having kept company ever since with the three “time immemorial Lodges,†Nos. 2, 4 and 12. Applications for constitution kept coming in, the provinces being represented from 1723 to 1724, before which time it is likely the Grand Lodge of Ireland11had been started, about which the most valuableCaementaria Hibernicaby Dr Chetwode Crawley may be consulted with absolute confidence. Provincial Grand Lodges were formed to ease the authorities at headquarters, and, as the society spread, also for the Continent, and gradually throughout the civilized globe. Owing to the custom prevailing before the 18th century, a few brethren were competent to form lodges on their own initiative anywhere, and hence the registers of the British Grand Lodges are not always indicative of the first appearance of the craft abroad. In North America12lodges were held before what is known as the first “regular†lodge was formed at Boston, Mass., in 1733, and probably in Canada13likewise. The same remark applies to Denmark, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden and other countries. Of the many scores of military lodges, the first warrant was granted by Ireland in 1732. To no other body of Freemasons has the craft been so indebted for its prosperity in early days as to their military brethren. There were rivals to the Grand Lodge of England during the 18th century, one of considerable magnitude being known as the Ancients or Atholl Masons, formed in 1751, but in December 1813 a junction was effected, and from that time the prosperity of the United Grand Lodge of England, with few exceptions, has been extraordinary.
Nothing but a volume to itself could possibly describe the main features of the English Craft from 1717, when Anthony Sayer was elected the first Grand Master of a brilliant galaxy of rulers. The first nobleman to undertake that office was the duke of Montagu in 1721, the natural philosopher J. T. Desaguliers being his immediate predecessor, who has been credited (and also the Rev. James Anderson) with the honour of starting the premier Grand Lodge; but like the fable of Sir Christopher Wren having been Grand Master, evidence is entirely lacking. Irish and Scottish peers share with those of England the distinction of presiding over the Grand Lodge, and from 1782 to 1813 their Royal Highnesses the duke of Cumberland, the prince of Wales, or the duke of Sussex occupied the masonic throne. From 1753 to 1813 the rival Grand Lodge had been busy, but ultimately a desire for aunitedbody prevailed, and under the “ancient†Grand Master, H.R.H. the duke of Kent, it was decided to amalgamate with the original ruling organization, H.R.H. the duke of Sussex becoming the Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge. On the decease of the prince in 1843 the earl of Zetland succeeded, followed by the marquess of Ripon in 1874, on whose resignation H.R.H. the prince of Wales became the Grand Master. Soon after succeeding to the throne, King Edward VII. ceased to govern the English craft, and was succeeded by H.R.H. the duke of Connaught. From 1737 to 1907 some sixteen English princes of the royal blood joined the brotherhood.
From 1723 to 1813 the number of lodges enrolled in England amounted to 1626, and from 1814 to the end of December 1909 as many as 3352 were warranted, making a grand total of 4978, of which the last then granted was numbered 3185. There were in 1909 still 2876 on the register, notwithstanding the many vacancies created by the foundation of new Grand Lodges in the colonies and elsewhere.14
Distribution and Organization.—The advantage of the cosmopolitan basis of the fraternity generally (though some Grand Lodges still preserve the original Christian foundation) has been conspicuously manifested and appreciated in India and other countries where the votaries of numerous religious systems congregate; but the unalterable basis of a belief in the Great Architect of the Universe remains, for without such a recognition there can be no Freemasonry, and it is now, as it always has been, entirely free from party politics. The charities of the Society in England, Ireland and Scotland are extensive and well organized, their united cost per day not being less than £500, and with those of other Grand Lodges throughout the world must amount to a very large sum, there being over two millions of Freemasons. The vast increase of late years, both of lodges and members, however, calls for renewed vigilance and extra care in selecting candidates, that numbers may not be a source of weakness instead of strength.
In its internal organization, the working of Freemasonry involves an elaborate system of symbolic ritual,15as carried out at meetings of the various lodges, uniformity as to essentials being the rule. The members are classified in numerous degrees, of which the first three are “Entered Apprentice,†“Fellow Craft†and “Master Mason,†each class of which, after initiation, can only be attained after passing a prescribed ordeal or examination, as a test of proficiency, corresponding to the “essays†of the operative period.
The lodges have their own by-laws for guidance, subject to theBook of Constitutionsof their Grand Lodge, and the regulations of the provincial or district Grand Lodge if located in counties or held abroad.
It is to be regretted that on the continent of Europe Freemasonry has sometimes developed on different lines from that of the “Mother Grand Lodge†and Anglo-Saxon Grand Lodges generally, and through its political and anti-religious tendencies has come into contact or conflict with the state authorities16or the Roman Catholic church. The “Grand Orient of France†(but not the Supreme Council 33o, and its Grand Lodge) is an example of this retrograde movement, by its elimination of the paragraph referring to a belief in the “Great Architect of the Universe†from itsStatuts et règlements généraux. This deplorable action has led to the withdrawal of all regular Grand Lodges from association with that body, and such separation must continue until a return is made to the ancient and inviolable landmark of the society, which makes it impossible for an atheist either to join or continue a member of the fraternity.
The Grand Lodge of England constituted its first lodge in Paris in the year 1732, but one was formed still earlier on the continent at Gibraltar 1728-1729. Others were also opened in Germany 1733, Portugal 1735, Holland 1735, Switzerland 1740, Denmark 1745, Italy 1763, Belgium 1765, Russia 1771, andSweden 1773. In most of these countries Grand Lodges were subsequently created and continue to this date, save that in Austria (not Hungary) and Russia no masonic lodges have for some time been permitted to assemble. There is a union of Grand Lodges of Germany, and an annual Diet is held for the transaction of business affecting the several masonic organizations in that country, which works well. H.R.H. Prince Frederick Leopold was in 1909 Protector, or the “Wisest Master†(Vicarius Salomonis). King Gustav V. was the Grand Master ☩ of the freemasons in Sweden, and the sovereign of the “Order of Charles XIII.,†the only one of the kind confined to members of the fraternity.
Lodges were constituted in India from 1730 (Calcutta), 1752 (Madras), and 1758 (Bombay); in Jamaica 1742, Antigua 1738, and St Christopher 1739; soon after which period the Grand Lodges of England, Ireland and Scotland had representatives at work throughout the civilized world.
In no part, however, outside Great Britain has the craft flourished so much as in the United States of America, where the first “regular†lodge (i.e.according to thenewregime) was opened in 1733 at Boston, Mass. Undoubtedly lodges had been meeting still earlier, one of which was held at Philadelphia, Penna., with records from 1731, which blossomed into a Grand Lodge, but no authority has yet been traced for its proceedings, save that which may be termed “time immemorial right,†which was enjoyed by all lodges and brethren who were at work prior to the Grand Lodge era (1716-1717) or who declined to recognize the autocratic proceedings of the premier Grand Lodge of England, just as the brethren did in the city of York. A “deputation†was granted to Daniel Coxe, Esq. of New Jersey, by the duke of Norfolk, Grand Master, 5th of June 1730, as Prov. Grand Master of the “Provinces of New York, New Jersey and Pensilvania,†but there is no evidence that he ever constituted any lodges or exercised any masonic authority in virtue thereof. Henry Price as Prov. Grand Master of New England, and his lodge, which was opened on the 31st of August 1733, in the city of Boston, so far as is known, began “regular†Freemasonry in the United States, and the older and independent organization was soon afterwards “regularized.†Benjamin Franklin (an Initiate of the lodge of Philadelphia) printed and published theBook of Constitutions, 1723 (of London, England), in the “City of Brotherly Love†in 1734, being the oldest masonic work in America. English and Scottish Grand Lodges were soon after petitioned to grant warrants to hold lodges, and by the end of the 18th century several Grand Lodges were formed, the Craft becoming very popular, partly no doubt by reason of so many prominent men joining the fraternity, of whom the chief was George Washington, initiated in a Scottish lodge at Fredericksburg, Virginia, in 1752-1753. In 1907 there were fifty Grand Lodges assembling in the United States, with considerably over a million members.
In Canada in 1909 there were eight Grand Lodges, having about 64,000 members. Freemasonry in the Dominion is believed to date from 1740. The Grand Lodges are all of comparatively recent organization, the oldest and largest, with 40,000 members, being for Ontario; those of Manitoba, Nova Scotia and Quebec numbering about 5000 each. There are some seven Grand Lodges in Australia; South Australia coming first as a “sovereign body,†followed closely by New South Wales and Victoria (of 1884-1889 constitution), the whole of the lodges in the Commonwealth probably having fully 50,000 members on the registers.
There are many additional degrees which may be taken or not (being quite optional), and dependent on a favourable ballot; the difficulty, however, of obtaining admission increases as progress is made, the numbers accepted decreasing rapidly with each advancement. The chief of these are arranged in separate classes and are governed either by the “Grand Chapter of the Royal Arch,†the “Mark Grand Lodge,†the “Great Priory of Knights Templars†or the “Ancient and Accepted Rite,†these being mutually complementary and intimately connected as respects England, and more or less so in Ireland, Scotland, North America and wherever worked on a similar basis; the countries of the continent of Europe have also their ownHautes Grades.
(W. J. H.*)
1If history be no ancient FableFree Masons came from Tower of Babel.(“The Freemasons; an Hudibrastic poem,†London, 1723.)2The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry and Medieval Builders, by Mr G. F. Fort (U.S.A.), and theCathedral Builders: The Magestri Comacini, by “Leader Scott†(the late Mrs Baxter), take rather a different view on this point and ably present their arguments. The Rev. C. Kingsley inRoman and Teutonwrites of theComacini, “Perhaps the original germ of the great society of Freemasons.â€3The service rendered by Dr W. Begemann (Germany) in his “Attempt to Classify the Old Charges of the British Masons†(vol. 1 Trans. of theQuatuor CoronatiLodge, London) has been very great, and the researches of the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford and G. W. Speth have also been of the utmost consequence.4Findel claims that hisTreatiseon the society was the cause which “first impelled England to the study of masonic history and ushered in the intellectual movement which resulted in the writings of Bros. Hughan, Lyon, Gould and others.†Great credit was due to the late German author for his important work, but before its advent the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, D. Murray Lyon and others in Great Britain were diligent masonic students on similar lines.5It is not considered necessary to refer at length to theFratres Pontis, or other imaginary bodies of freemasons, as such questions may well be left to the curious and interested student.6“No distinct trace of the general employment of large migratory bands of masons, going from place to place as a guild, or company, or brotherhood†(Prof. T. Hayter-Lewis, Brit. Arch. Assoc., 1889).7The Associate Synod which met at Edinburgh, March 1755, just a century later, took quite an opposite view, deciding to depose from office any of their brethren who would not give up their masonic membership (Scots Mag., 1755, p. 158). Papal Bulls have also been issued against the craft, the first being in 1738; but neither interdicts nor anathemata have any influence with the fraternity, and fall quite harmless.8“We have theMason Wordand second sight,Things for to come we can fortell aright.â€(The Muses Threnodie, by H. Adamson, Edin., 1638.)9TheChetwode Crawley MS., by W. J. Hughan (Ars.Q.C., 1904).10TheYork Grand Lodge, by Messrs. Hughan and Whytehead (Ars Q.C., 1900), andMasonic Sketches and Reprints(1871), by the former.11The celebrated “Lady Freemason,†the Hon. Mrs Aldworth (néeMiss St Leger, daughter of Lord Doneraile), was initiated in Ireland, but at a much earlier date than popularly supposed; certainly not later than 1713, when the venturesome lady was twenty. All early accounts of the occurrence must be received with caution, as there are no contemporary records of the event.12History of Freemasonry, by Dr A. G. Mackey (New York, 1898), and theHistoryof the Fraternity Publishing Company, Boston, Mass., give very full particulars as to the United States.13SeeHistory of Freemasonry in Canada(Toronto, 1899), by J. Ross Robertson.14The Masonic Records 1717-1894, by John Lane, and the excellentMasonic Yearbook, published annually by the Grand Lodge of England, are the two standard works on Lodge enumeration, localization and nomenclature. For particulars of the Grand Lodges, and especially that of England, Gould’s History is most useful and trustworthy; and for an original contribution to the history of the rival Grand Lodge or Atholl Masons, Sadler’sMasonic Facts and Fictions.15“A peculiar system of Morality, veiled in Allegory and illustrated by Symbols†(old definition of Freemasonry).16The British House of Commons in 1799 and 1817, in acts of parliament, specifically recognized the laudable character of the society and provided for its continuance on definite lines.
1
If history be no ancient FableFree Masons came from Tower of Babel.(“The Freemasons; an Hudibrastic poem,†London, 1723.)
If history be no ancient Fable
Free Masons came from Tower of Babel.
(“The Freemasons; an Hudibrastic poem,†London, 1723.)
2The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry and Medieval Builders, by Mr G. F. Fort (U.S.A.), and theCathedral Builders: The Magestri Comacini, by “Leader Scott†(the late Mrs Baxter), take rather a different view on this point and ably present their arguments. The Rev. C. Kingsley inRoman and Teutonwrites of theComacini, “Perhaps the original germ of the great society of Freemasons.â€
3The service rendered by Dr W. Begemann (Germany) in his “Attempt to Classify the Old Charges of the British Masons†(vol. 1 Trans. of theQuatuor CoronatiLodge, London) has been very great, and the researches of the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford and G. W. Speth have also been of the utmost consequence.
4Findel claims that hisTreatiseon the society was the cause which “first impelled England to the study of masonic history and ushered in the intellectual movement which resulted in the writings of Bros. Hughan, Lyon, Gould and others.†Great credit was due to the late German author for his important work, but before its advent the Rev. A. F. A. Woodford, D. Murray Lyon and others in Great Britain were diligent masonic students on similar lines.
5It is not considered necessary to refer at length to theFratres Pontis, or other imaginary bodies of freemasons, as such questions may well be left to the curious and interested student.
6“No distinct trace of the general employment of large migratory bands of masons, going from place to place as a guild, or company, or brotherhood†(Prof. T. Hayter-Lewis, Brit. Arch. Assoc., 1889).
7The Associate Synod which met at Edinburgh, March 1755, just a century later, took quite an opposite view, deciding to depose from office any of their brethren who would not give up their masonic membership (Scots Mag., 1755, p. 158). Papal Bulls have also been issued against the craft, the first being in 1738; but neither interdicts nor anathemata have any influence with the fraternity, and fall quite harmless.
8
“We have theMason Wordand second sight,Things for to come we can fortell aright.â€(The Muses Threnodie, by H. Adamson, Edin., 1638.)
“We have theMason Wordand second sight,
Things for to come we can fortell aright.â€
(The Muses Threnodie, by H. Adamson, Edin., 1638.)
9TheChetwode Crawley MS., by W. J. Hughan (Ars.Q.C., 1904).
10TheYork Grand Lodge, by Messrs. Hughan and Whytehead (Ars Q.C., 1900), andMasonic Sketches and Reprints(1871), by the former.
11The celebrated “Lady Freemason,†the Hon. Mrs Aldworth (néeMiss St Leger, daughter of Lord Doneraile), was initiated in Ireland, but at a much earlier date than popularly supposed; certainly not later than 1713, when the venturesome lady was twenty. All early accounts of the occurrence must be received with caution, as there are no contemporary records of the event.
12History of Freemasonry, by Dr A. G. Mackey (New York, 1898), and theHistoryof the Fraternity Publishing Company, Boston, Mass., give very full particulars as to the United States.
13SeeHistory of Freemasonry in Canada(Toronto, 1899), by J. Ross Robertson.
14The Masonic Records 1717-1894, by John Lane, and the excellentMasonic Yearbook, published annually by the Grand Lodge of England, are the two standard works on Lodge enumeration, localization and nomenclature. For particulars of the Grand Lodges, and especially that of England, Gould’s History is most useful and trustworthy; and for an original contribution to the history of the rival Grand Lodge or Atholl Masons, Sadler’sMasonic Facts and Fictions.
15“A peculiar system of Morality, veiled in Allegory and illustrated by Symbols†(old definition of Freemasonry).
16The British House of Commons in 1799 and 1817, in acts of parliament, specifically recognized the laudable character of the society and provided for its continuance on definite lines.
FREEPORT,a city and the county-seat of Stephenson county, Illinois, in the N.W. part of the state, on the Pecatonica river, 30 m. from its mouth and about 100 m. N.W. of Chicago. Pop. (1890) 10,189; (1900) 13,258, of whom 2264 were foreign-born; (1910 census) 17,567. The city is served by the Chicago & North-Western, the Chicago, Milwaukee & St Paul, and the Illinois Central railways, and by the Rockford & Interurban electric railway. The Illinois Central connects at South Freeport, about 3 m. S. of Freeport, with the Chicago Great Western railway. Among Freeport’s manufactures are foundry and machine shop products, carriages, hardware specialties, patent medicines, windmills, engines, incubators, organs, beer and shoes. The Illinois Central has large railway repair shops here. The total value of the city’s factory product in 1905 was $3,109,302, an increase of 14.8% since 1900. In the surrounding country cereals are grown, and swine and poultry are raised. Dairying is an important industry also. The city has a Carnegie library (1901). In the Court House Square is a monument, 80 ft. high, in memory of the soldiers who died in the Civil War. At the corner of Douglas Avenue and Mechanic Street a granite boulder commemorates the famous debate between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas, held in Freeport on the 27th of August 1858. In that debate Lincoln emphasized the differences between himself and the radical anti-slavery men, and in answer to one of Lincoln’s questions Douglas declared that the people of a territory, through “unfriendly†laws or denial of legislative protection, could exclude slavery, and that “it matters not what way the Supreme Court may hereafter decide on the abstract question whether slavery may or may not go into a territory under the Constitution.†This, the so-called “Freeport doctrine,†greatly weakened Douglas in the presidential election of 1860. Freeport was settled in 1835, was laid out and named Winneshiek in 1836, and in 1837 under its present name was made the county-seat of Stephenson county. It was incorporated as a town in 1850 and chartered as a city in 1855.
FREE PORTS,a term, strictly speaking, given to localities where no customs duties are levied, and where no customs supervision exists. In these ports (subject to payment for specific services rendered, wharfage, storage, &c., and to the observance of local police and sanitary regulations) ships load and unload, cargoes are deposited and handled, industries are exercised, manufactures are carried on, goods are bought and sold, without any action on the part of fiscal authorities. Ports are likewise designated “free†where a space or zone exists within which commercial operations are conducted without payment of import or export duty, and without active interference on the part of customs authorities. The French and German designations for these two descriptions of ports are—for the formerLa Ville franche, Freihafen; for the latterLe Port franc, FreibezirkorFreilager. The English phrase free port applies to both.1The leading conditions under which free ports in Europe derived their origin were as follows:—(1) When public order became re-established during the middle ages, trading centres were gradually formed. Marts for the exchange and purchase of goods arose in different localities. Many Italian settlements, constituting free zones, were established in the Levant. The Hanseatic towns arose in the 12th century. Great fairs became recognized—the Leipzig charter was granted in 1268. These localities were free as regards customs duties, although dues of the nature of octroi charges were often levied. (2) Until the 19th century European states were numerous, and often of small size. Accordingly uniform customs tariffs of wide application did not exist.Uniform rates of duty were fixed In England by the Subsidy Act of 1660. In France, before the Revolution (besides the free ports), Alsace and the Lorraine Bishoprics were in trade matters treated as foreign countries. The unification of the German customs tariff began in 1834 with the Steuerverein and the Zollverein. The Spanish fiscal system did not include the Basque provinces until about 1850. The uniform Italian tariff dates from 1861. Thus until very recent times on the Continent free ports were compatible with the fiscal policy and practice of different countries. (3) Along the Mediterranean coast, up to the 19th century, convenient shelter was needed from corsairs. In other continental countries the prevalent colonial and mercantile policy sought to create trans-oceanic trade. Free ports were advantageous from all these points of view.