These Must Be Done.

men better than they would otherwise have been . It is true that Masonry is not intended to remedy all the ills of life , nor does it give without receiving , for its charities are not and cannot , be universal . Necessarily they are

limited to those who come within the scope of Masonic knowledge . To say that Masons , even in the distribution of their charities , make mistakes , is only to admit that

they are human , and subject , to the same errors that other human beiugs are ; and though we do make mistakes we correct them without undue punishment or disgrace .

A Mason should never belittle the great character of the Craft by boldly defending those who possess neither character nor honour of their own , for the character of Masonry as an Institution is judged by the character of

the men composing it . We do not expect to build a house except upon a firm foundation , but when the house is so built we would support its tottering walls against every blast that beats against it . Masonry does not defend

crime or criminals , nor does it seek to hide them from the penalties which the law of the land imposes upon them ; for the influence of Masonry should always be directed

toward every good cause , in the Order or out of it , as the Masonic character is a good character , and can only be maintained by good works .

It therefore becomes all important for us to jadge well of the character of those we admit into our Lodsres . It is

perhaps too frequent a thing that we increase the membership thereof by admitting into our ranks those who are ill-fitted to come amongst us ; but we should not use the black ball to keep a good man out of the Order . Absolute

justice is a living principle of Masonry . It is most important to guard against proselyting . It is not only important , but it is a direct violation of Masonic usages to ask any one to become a member of our Order . Let those

who wish to know us seek us , arid they will find what we are . Once let it be known that we are not trying to outnumber other associations , or to excel them in popularity , and good men will seek admission to the Craft , and bad

men will avoid us . It is the best men we want , not the most . The great mistake after all is that we are trying to popularize Masonry too much . By this I mean that we

try sometimes to make everybody like ourselves , and like the Institution of Masonry , when in fact we should only seek to deserve every good man ' s esteem and not to expect his

praise . Masonry is , however , the most important social Institution for still another reason—it organizes the moral forces of the people . It occupies a plain different to that of the

churches ( though it gives strength to them ) , because it has no religious creed . Its services in the field of politics are no less important ( though it has no politics and belongs to no party ) , because it teaches respect to organised

government and obedience to law , and because every Lodgeroom is a little republic where each brother is taught that he is a unit in the great organization of which he is a

» ember , and in which he may rise step by step to the highest position in its gift . Thus a laudable ambition is encouraged in the minds of the young , which reaches its full fruition in advancing years .

And so , too , in the Lodge-room the impetuosity of youth is softened by the milder couusels of age and experience . The old and the young in the Lodge are on an even plain , equal in their rights ; and yet every member has to earn

his reward by long and faithful service . Promotion in our Order is not often a matter of accident , and never should be gained by social position or electioneering devices . It comes as the breath of heaven comes , to strengthen and

invigorate , not to weaken or destroy . Masonry holds out to every good man a higher and loftier aim in life than that afforded by the reward which comes of gratified ambition . It gives every member the opportunity to benefit

his fellow men . The consciousness of duty performed ; tbe belief that one has lived with a purpose , and that purpose a noble one ; that he has made bright spots along the pathway of others ; that he has given to the poor and cared for

the sick ; that be has buried the dead and made glad tbe heart of the stranger ; are among the higher aims ancl loftier purposes of Masons and Masonry . Whatever else we leave undone , these must be done . Failing in these , we fail in all tbe best and noblest purposes of the Order .

Ar00301

„ £ 20 . —TOBACCONISTS COMMBITCIHG . —An illustrated guide , re"d . ( 13 B no ) How to Open Respectably from £ 20 to MIOW . " 3 Stamps . ' II . MYKBS * Co ., Cigar and Tobacco Merchants , 107 to Hi Eu * ton Road . London . Wholesale only . Telephone No . 7541 . General Suoplitters . Estimates five .

Bro. Lane And No. 79, Once More.

BRO . LANE AND No . 79 , ONCE MORE .

BY BRO . JACOB NORTON . Q OMEHOW a rumour reached Boston that the only 1 ^ mistake in Bro . Lane ' s book was discovered by

himself , and that the said mistake referred to something in the paragraph relating to Lodge No . 79 . To my surprise , however , I find that Bro . Lane was doubly mistaken ;

for what he thought wrong was right , and vice v & i'sa . Briefly , the paragraph in Bro . Lane ' s book is given thus :

THE HOOP , IN WATER STREET , PHILADELPHIA - - 1731 This is the Dublin List of 1735 . Warranted for America , Ud probably Warrant never used . CASTLE , IN HIGHGATE , LONDON - . - 1732

Now the fault Bro . Lane found in the above was for placing " 1731 " at the side of the Philadelphia Lodge . He seems to have believed that both charters were issued in 1732 , but the truth is , assuming that two charters with

No . 79 were issued , or , as he once believed , but doubts now , that the Dublin reprinter of the " Pocket Companion " copied "The Hoop , " & c , from the Lodge List of 1731 , then the Philadelphia Lodge must have been chartered in 1731 , for how could a Lodge that was chartered in 1732 have been engraved on a Lodge List of 1731 ?

The " Highgate , " No . 79 , must also have originated in 1731 , for it is an indisputable fact that in all the Lodge Lists from 1731-2 to 1737 inclusive , No . 79 is on the said lists placed between Nos . 78 and 80 , and as no one doubts that 78 and 80 were constituted in 1731 , hence No . 79

must also have been constituted in 1731 . But , says Bro . Lane , the Highgate No . 79 did not pay for its warrant before November 1732 , hence he imagines that it was chartered in 1732 . However , I thank

Bro . Lane for enabling me to show that his reasoning is not O . K ., for ' bis article in the Freemason , of 19 th March , shows that Lodges constituted in Juno aud in August 1732 did not pay for their respective warrants before 15 th

November 1732 . Bro . Lane then proves in . the first place that it was customary in those days to trust new Lodges for tbe payment of their Charters , and second , that the payment made by tbe said Lodge in November did not

affect their real dates of constitution ; hence our No . 79 at Highgate remained , and continued to remain , a Lodge constituted in 1731 , though it did not pay for its Charter before 1732 .

But the greatest mistake , and the parent of all subsequent errors Bro . Lane was led into , was , for putting any faith in the Dublin reprinter of the Pocket , Companion of 1735 . Among those errors was his denial that Lodge No . 79 did not hold its meetings in Highgate in 1731 , and that the

Grand Lodge of England chartered a multiplicity of seventy-niners , one of which Lodges was in Philadelphia , another in Highgate , and still another was in Little St . Martin's Lane . While I maintain that the Lodge at

the Hoop , in Philadadelphia , if there was a Lodge there , was never chartered by the Grand Lodge of England at any time , and that the Highgate Lodge of 1731—having been erased from the Lists during 1733 and 1734—was

restored by the Grand Lodge in 1735 . From Anderson I learn that on the 19 th February 1724 the Grand Lodge ordered that

" The Officers of particular Lodges shall bring to the Grand Lodge the list of the members of their respective Lodges , to be inserted in the Grand Lodge book . "

A similar order was issued early in 1731 , not for " particular Lodges , " but for all the Lodges . The order was obeyed ; a book was provided for that purpose , and one of its pages is headed with " No . 7 \ ) , Castle in

Highgate , " which was followed with the names of twenty-six members . This I saw with my own eyes , in 1880 , but of course did not examine the book with the care Bro . Lane did . Bro . Gould copied tho headings from all the pages in

the said book , which forms his List No . 11 , at the head of which Bro . Gould quotes from the original , " List of the names of the members of all the regular Lodges , " & c ,

and the last number on Bro . Gould ' s list is 104 , and is followed with the List . Now , the same as I followed Anderson about the engraved Lodge Lists , I followed Bro . Gould also . I confess that I have made some

mistakes elsewhere , when trusting to memory . In no case , however , was it done for the purpose of betteii > g my arguments , for it would not have made the slightest difference if I had been better informed upon the said