Ancient Masonic Lodges, No. 3.

cepting Lyon ' s grand work . The Minutes of 22 nd Dec ., 1702 , read as follows : "Haitgltfoot , the same day Sir James Scott of Gala , Thomas Scott his brother , David Murray , Philip Hough , James Pringle in Haughfoot ,

Robert Laurie , Stow Townhead and John Pringle ( Wright ) gave in petitions each for themselves earnestly desiring to bo admitted into tho society of Masons and Fellow Crafts , which their desire being maturely

considered was accordingly agreed to and granted , and they each of them by themselves were duly and orderly admitted apprentice and Fellow Craft , and there was imposed the sums following to be paid into

the box which they accordingly each himself promised to pay viz . ( one seven pounds , another three pounds , and the remainder one pound each " Scots . " ) "Thereafter the meeting resolved with

one voice that there should be one yearly meeting of those concerned in this Lodge at Haughfoot , in all time coming upon St .

John ' s Day . " On 27 thDec . 1705 , the Laird of Torsonee was styled " Presses" ( or Master ) and not a minute can be found which refers to operative Masonry , so that the " bread and Initter" theory which professes to account

for the meeting of Masons prior to 1717 , and which denies tho existence of purely speculative Masons , before the "Eevival" is to say the least untenable and opposedto facts . Tho annual meetings being held on St .

John ' s Day simply showed the preference of the members to be considered under the patronage of that Saint , other lodges preferred Saint Michael , others Saint Thomas , and some apparently fared as well without

the aid of any Saints . Any five of their number wore allowed to " admit qualified persons to tho society of apprentice or Fellow . Craft" ( Dec . 27 th , 1707 ) . There is not an allusion to the three

degrees from first to last , so that for a period of sixty-one years ( from 1702 to 1763 ) , the members kept faithful to their

old traditions and customs , and never joined tho Grand Lodge . Tho fact of these Minutes and other old Lodge Minutes being all silent as to '• Three Degrees" has led Brothers . Findel , Lyon , Dr . Mackay ,

and myself to consider such distinctions , divisions , and separcde degrees were the work of the "Revivalists , " although our most distinguished scholar , Brothbrthe Rev . A . " F . A . Woodford thinks otherwise . To

our readers we simply say that Bro . Woodford ' s opinions are entitled to great consideration , for few if any have done more to advance the study of Masonic Archteology , and no one takes more pains to verify his conclusions , still the labour

of the remaining brethren we have mentioned have been thorough and equally as conscientious , and we are bound to state that so far , the weight of evidence , is in favour of the majority in number . We

know not what may yet be brought to light for it is only within the last ton years that Masonic History has been fairly successful as far as the discovery and examination of old MSS . and Records of Lodges are

concerned—so we must be patient and not assume the matter in dispute to bo finally settled—meantime let us , as wo have in

the past , aid one another to our utmost in tracing various memorials of early Craft Masonry of which we have as yet but stray allusions , and so long as we are content to bo guided by tho evidence forthcoming we

cannot be far wrong . In conclusion , and to save the time that a lengthy notice of the minutes of the Haughfoot Lodge would occupy , we present to' our readers the valuable summary prepared by Bro .

Sanderson from an actual examination he made of them in 1870 , { Freemason ' s Magazine . , August 20 th , 1870 , ) "As far as my humble opinion goes , 1 am still inclined to think that the old lodge

at Haughfoot and Galashiels has stronger claims to the speculative than the operative theories . In support of which I adduce the following reasons . w 2