Multum In Parbo, Or Masonic Notes And Queries.

berries . " Why does R . XV . L . say that the most conclusive evidence is " only to be found in the rituals of the Order " ? Surely these may be of modern composition , and can be no proofs of the statements they contain . Does the pencil memoranda on the box at

Freemasons' Hall , " MSS . of the degree was borrowed but never returned , " mean that there were no documents at all t elating to the Red Cross degree , found in the box ? If there were any such , what is their date ? Can any opinion be formed of the date of the pencil memoranda ? They were probably written by an official whose

handwriting is known m the office , and whose period of service there can consequently be ascertained . It is clear that when the writing was endorsed the degree was only to be had in Scotland , and if it there belonged to the Masonic Templars we have strong evidence that it was invented since 1800 .

The summons , dated rSio , does not identify itself with the Constantinian Order . The seal attached to it is probably that which is common to the " high degrees " •perhaps R . W . L . will describe it heraldically ? I hope he will excuse me if I do not confess that the question of the

identity of the Red Cross Masonic Order with the Constantinian name is " settled" by a quotation from a book 32 years old , and the discovery of a box from which , as far as we are at present informed , the documents are missing . We are dealing with an Order which makes a distinct

claim upon an ancient and noble ( foreign ) public institution , yet existing , and which makes that claim in terms no less measured than that it " is the only legitimate representative of the Order in the world . " The honour of the Masonic fraternity is somewhat involved in such a statement

as this , and I think we are entitled to say , and to repeat , where are any reasonable proofs ? The Abbe Giustiniani was the author of a book on the Chivalric Orders of Christendom in which he made great blunders as to the Constantinian Order ; he , however , does not explain the powers

of the Knights Grand Cross to found the Order in the manner he is said to have done in England , and , still more remarkable , he does not say one word about his own performance in that respect in this our own fair land . Bishop Eusebius wrote

a book too , and , unfortunately , his Right Reverence was afflicted with a similar reticence . Poor Francis II ., of Naples , appears to he quite left out in the cold •verily may he say , " This was the most unkindest cut of all . " LUPUS .

" LUPUS AND THE " RED CROSS . " In common with many members of the " Red Cross of Rome and Constantine , " I am highly pleased to see the interest Bro . " Lupus " is taking in the inquiry respecting the Masonic

claims of the above degree , and I trust the esteemed Grand Recorder of the Order ( Bro . R . W . Little ) will soon be able to publish , or otherwise make known the evidence at present in the hands of only a few , which abundantly confirms what has been written on the history ofthe degree in connection with Freemasonry .

The discovery of " Red Cross documents " at the Freemasons' Hall , which have been so handsomely returned to the present chief of the Order , Lord Kenlis , by the M . W . the Grand Master , is after all not the only evidence in favour of the existence of this degree before the

" Union ' ofA . D . 1813 , as conclusive information on this important point was previously given in the History of the " Red Cross " by Bro . Little , and which now can be procured bound up with the statutes at a small outlay . W . J . HUGHAN .

DOCUMENTS FOUND AT FREEMASONS * HALL . At page 16 3 " R . W . L . " tells us of the discovery of documents , amongst others are Templar , Kadosh Ilarodim , and Rosicrucian ; and there appears " to be a note , ' Ne plus

ultra , ' should be conferred by the Grand Master in person , " & c . What is the general nature and date of these documents ? Have they been given up to the institutions to which they appear to relate ? Is the " Grand Master" referred to the Grand Master of the Craft ? And if so ,

Multum In Parbo, Or Masonic Notes And Queries.

may this be taken as settling the question of whether the Grand Lodge of England ever recognised the degrees above mentioned ? LUPUS . BROS . " LEO " AND W . . HUGHAN ON MOTHER

KILWINNING . Bro . Hughan is making two bites of a cherry . Although I might be the first to use the exact words , " all the , others being offshoots from it , " yet it is simply the old idea . If " all these

derived their existence from the Mother Lodge , " of course they were " offshoots " from it . Then , again , these immediate offshoots might in process of time be themselves the parents of other offshoots , so that although Kilwinning was not

the immediate parent or " mother of these last , yet as the grandmother , she could call them her children—as they all caifle originally from her , and had her blood in their veins . Consequently , if the Kilwinning idea were true ( which , however ,

it is not ) , all Scottish lodges could claim her as their mother , grandmother , or great-grandmother , as the case might be ; just as the Jews , e . g ., say , " We be Abraham ' s children . " However , as we are agreed the idea is a dream , we need say

little more about it . Now as to " Mother Kilwinning ' s " daughters . I care little , so far , how many she had after 1717 . The great point is how many she had before that date ? I known only one , so if she

had no more she would be equal with Mary ' s Chapel . And we must get a list of other mother lodges , and see if any others had daughters as well as them . The origin of the Canongate

Kilwinning in 1677 , looks more like a branch establishment than an entirely independent lodge . The candidates are entered " in name and behalf of the lodge of Kilwinning , " see your contemporary , January 23 rd 186 9 . LEO .

HISTORY OF MOTHER KILWINNING . It is to be regretted this work is not to be had in book form ; let us hope to see it soon . CIPES .

AFFILIATION TO OTHER LODGES . The modes of affiliation vary in different jurisdictions . In Scotland the usual mode of affiliation is that after a brother has been regularly proposed and seconded , having previously

signed an application somewhat similar to the petition for entrance , the lodge members then ballot for him , and if found clear , he is then introduced into the lodge , and the R . W . M . requests him to advance to the altar , when he is

there obligated to observe the laws ofthe Grand Lodge , and the bye-laws of the lodge after so doing . He is then invested with the clothing of

the lodge which is mostly different in colour , the various lodges adopting colours of their own , and a short address delivered to him . CHALMERS I . PATON .

THE HEREDITARY GRAND MASTER OF SCOTLAND ( pages 151 and 1 C 3 ) . In reply to Bro . Warner , permit me to observe that if either he or the Dep . G . M . of Scotland can prove that any St . Clair of Rosslyn was ever

" Grand Master " of the Scottish Masons before A . D . 6 , we shall most gladly admit it . With our present light we don ' t believe it •nevertheless we shall always be most happy to receive more light . It is rather curious , however , that

Bro . Hughan ( p . 163 ) is equally sceptical with ourselves . I have read of a grant from King James VI . to Patrick Coipland of Udancht constituting him " Wardane and Justice " ofthe " airt and craft of Masonrie " within the shires of

Aberdeen , Banff , and Kincardine , with full powers to him " in all respectis as ony uther Wardane . " His father held the office before him . Ergo , is Coipland another , " Hereditary Grand Master ?" This grant is dated from Holyrood , in 1590 . LEO .

" Warner" feelingly alludes to " the disgraceful and unfounded attacks " upon the Hereditary Grand Mastership of Scotland ; we sympathise deeply with him , having no doubt he will be able to show that they are really " unfounded . " LEGEND .

Multum In Parbo, Or Masonic Notes And Queries.

History relates the following : — " William Earl of Orkney and Caithness , was the first o his family who held the office of Grand Master Mason of Scotland . The office was

granted by James II . of Scotland , to him and to his heirs and successors in the Barony of Roslin , on account of the attention which he had paid to the interests of the Order . " CHALMERS I . PATON .

BRO . 13 UCHAN AND THE 8 l 2 TH ANNIVERSARY LATELY HELD IN GLASGOW . Allow me to inform Bro . " Edinburgh " that I did take action in this matter , with the idea that prevention was better than cure . However , my objection was over-ruled ; and supposing that I

had attended this pretended " 812 th Anniversary , " and as " Edinburgh " suggests entered my " protest , " what then ? Will " Edinburgh " say how he would have made that serve any practical purpose , or how he would have followed it up ?

A committee was appointed in 1 S 68 to examine into the history of the lodge , and in your contemporary for October 3 rd , 1 S 6 S ( page 277 ) , will be found an interesting account of the meeting at which " the Report of the Historical

Committee was read . " This Report completely showed up the falsehood of the Malcolm Can more pretensions , and as I fondly hoped would have settled them for ever ; but , no ! On went " 811 th Anniversary" upon the next festival

tickets ; down came Bro . Buchan upon the pretension in the Glasgow papers , and by giving a sketch of the early history of the city , showed the evident absurdity of the idea . Down came the lodge upon him , demanding him to retract

his statements , or else . Bro . Buchan refused to retract , unless any mistake could be pointed out ( all as recorded in your contemporary for January 16 th , 1 S 6 9 , pages 56 and

57 ) . Then a Masonic court-martial was the order , I being accused of lowering the status and dignity of the lodge ; and for this I was to be made an example of for the edification of all Masonic students who dared to interfere with

such sacred matters as Masonic legends or charters I Said " court-martial" was held upon February 4 th , 1 S 6 9 , butthe only result was smoke I Ovte man with truth upon his side may

fearlessly face an army ; and such were my feelings then . More , the truth will yet have to be adopted , although , to satisfy what seems to be a law of history , it has to pass through the fire first . W . P . BUCHAN .

Perhaps the following will answer Bro . " Edinburgh , " as taken from your contemporary ' s report of the lodge meeting held on the 7 th December , 1 S 69 ( December iSth , page 495 ) . " In reference to the coming festival of the

lodge , Bro . Buchan observed that it might be judicious for the Committee to consider the advisability of discontinuing the further propagation of the idea contained in the title 'Si 2 th Anniversary , ' seeing said idea was in . reality

groundless . Bro . Baud ( R . W . M . ) , in reply , stated that 'Si 2 th Anniversary' would be put upon the festival tickets in conformity , with past usage , until it was proved to be wrong . The reply was satisfactory to the majority of the brethren . " LEO .

I 1 R 0 . I 5 UCHAN AND THE 1717 THEORY ( page 164 ) . Bro . Buchan admits that the Lodge of Kilwinning was in existence in 1677 , but not that it " granted a charter" then . There were some

Kilwinning Masons in the Canongate meeting as a lodge , who hail some mutual relations with tlieir brethren in Kilwinning , but although the Kilwinning records show this agreement , I know of no formal charter of erection as we now understand

the term . However , we allow that Masonic meetings were held in and after 1677 , as well as before that time ; but the query is—What was done then ? To which I answer , that , similar to other trades , they had their bit of apron-washing ,

then a pay-off , and a good drink ; but as to practising , & c , the degrees , doctrines , rituals , and ceremonies of our speculative Freemasonry , they did not do so before 1717 . The old Masons had their friendly , society ,