Charles W. (Charles Whitlock) Moore.

The Freemason's monthly magazine online

. (page 5 of 15)
Online LibraryCharles W. (Charles Whitlock) MooreThe Freemason's monthly magazine → online text (page 5 of 15)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

pride of superior knowledge." And with regard to Geography, there are several
circumstances, and one in particular, relative to the transatlantic world, worthy
of our peculiar notice. Tangible reasons can be adduced to show that Africa
was circumnavigated by the orders of Pharaoh Necho, and the* Cape of Good
Hope actually doubled about six hundred years before Christ. This is a startling
fact In our schools, geographical beginners are taught that the Cape of Good
Hope was discovered by Diaz and Vasco de Gama, a. d. 1497. And with regard
to the far west, it is a fact no less startling, that when Solon was receiving that
instruction in the Egyptian sacerdotal colleges which rendered him the " wisest
of mankind," (among the Athenians,) besides gleaning that insight into primeval
history and geology, which subsequently induced him to compose a great poem,
wherein he treated on Africa before the Ogygian flood, and on the vast Island
which had sunk into the Atlantic Ocean, he was informed by " Sonchzs y one of
the priests, of the existence of the Jitlantic Isles, which Sonchis said were larger tfian
Africa and Asia united?* On this interesting subject, see Wilkinson's
" Thebes," p. 254, extract from Plato.

It is thus perfectly manifest, that until the re-discovery of America by Colum-
bus, the Egyptians possessed a much greater amount of geographical knowledge
than was possessed by the most learned modern nation. At a period so remote
as six hundred years before Christ, they had intercourse with India, the Spice
Islands, and China ; and in maritime skill equalled, as in geographical know-
ledge they excelled, all the other nations of antiquity.

With regard to their Social Condition, it is apparent that all the arrange-
ments of their domestic economy were conducted with the utmost order and
regularity, and that they enjoyed in abundance not only the comforts but the
luxuries of life, whilst the respect which they paid to the female sex affords an
unfailing test of superior civilization, in which their conduct and customs con-
trast most advantageously when compared with other oriental nations, both an-
cient and modern.

As to Chronology.

We now approach a part of the subject which is deeply interesting; for whilst
hieroglyphical discovery shows that it is impossible at such early periods to de-
fine dates with indisputable accuracy, it also proves that the dates recorded in the
Septuagint version of the Bible are unquestionably more correct than those
founded on the authority of Archbishop Usher, and appended to the edition of
the sacred volume in general use. It is now clearly shown that a much greater
period must have elapsed between the deluge and the advent of the Messiah than is

Digitized by VjOOQlC


assigned by JhMishop Usher. Wilkinson, and other writers upon Egyptian an-
tiquities! feel themselves compelled to assign dates to postdiluvian facts and oc-
currences, which* if Usher be correct, must have preceded the deluge ; and as thay
all, except Mr. Gliddon, fail to enter into any explanation of the apparent discre-
pancy, it becomes necessary at once to grapple with the difficulty, lest it may be
imagined that hieroglyphical archeology presents results at variance with Holy
Writ This it does not, when Biblical dates are correctly understood. It mere-
ly corrects the errors in computation, which an uninspired human mind may have
committed in common with many others, who have given their interpretation as
to dates and occurrences in history, both sacred and profane. Indeed, as will
hereafter be shown, our hieroglyphical researches tend to throw much light on
sacred antiquities; but it is totally impossible to reconcile the monumental evi-
dences of remote antiquity still existing in Egypt, with Ushers chronology, and
all attempts to confine the early history of the land of the Phnraohs within such
circumscribed limits, must be abandoned as altogether untenable.

In conducting this investigation, it should be borne in mind that antiquity is
merely a relative term. A thousand years are but a drop in the great ocean of
Eternity, and countless ages but fleeting moments in the estimation of Omnipo-

The period which elapsed between the deluge and the birth of Christ, is unques-
tionably much greater than that assigned by Usher. This is a fact which is now
incontrovertible; 9 and as we thus clearly perceive the existence of a discrepancy,
it becomes important to ascertain in what way it originated. This was a task un-
ertaken by the Rev. Dr. Hales ; and we may, therefore, avail ourselves of the re-
sult of his investigation. Having patiently, and with great labor, weighed the
various evidences in favor of the longer and shorter computations of patriarchal ge-
nealogy, he established the untenableness of the shortest, or Hebrew computation.

It appeared that the apparent discrepancy had proceeded from a manifest cor-
ruption of the text about the time of the Seder Olam Rabba, (the great Jewish
system of chronology,) A. D. 130, when the Scriptures were altered, interpolated,
and curtailed by the Jews themselves, to confuse the dates, because they found
u their own Scriptures" turned by the Christians into arms against themselves, and
were confounded by proofs drawn from their own archives, that the Saviour's ad-
vent at the exact time of his appearance, was prophesied from pahiarchal times in
the ancient Hebrew text The computation, however, from this spurious source
was adopted by Archbishop Usher, and the older translation of the Bible — the
Greek, made about JB. C. 250— disregarded. But, as Dr. Hales observes, w Usher's
date, attached to our English Bible, lias been relinquished by the ablest chronolo-
gists of the present time, from its irreconcilableness with the rise of the primitive
empires ; the Assyrian, Egyptian, Indian, and Chinese, all suggesting earlier dates
for the deluge." And it may be added, " now that we can bring Egyptian positive
annals, derived from writings on existing monuments, the chronology of the He-
brew version of the Bible, is, in the opinion of the learned, altogether exploded."

It may be here observed that no less than three hundred systems of chronology
have been constructed at various periods, all of them differing in results, and
many of them materially so.

♦The accession of Menes cannot be brought within a less period than 2400 years before
Christ ; the erection of the palace of Memphis within less than 2300 years before that event j
and the erection of the pyramid of Suphis within a less period than 2120 years before Christ.
The latter date corresponds with the chronology of Joseph us j and Sir John Herscbel ob-
serves, that if the inclined passage into the largest pyramid of Gheezah, (which could never
at the time of its building have been poimed at the polar star, that is, at a Ursa? Minoris,)
was made at an angle to correspond to a Draconis, this pyramid must have been huilt about
the year B. C. 2123 The date assigned by Josephus, however, would alone be sufficient to
% destroy Bishop Usher's chronology •, for, assuming the deluge to have occurred at the time
he mentions, two hundred and twenlyeight years w<mld be too brief a period for the Cau-
casian children of Ham to migrate Yrmn Asia into Egypt, there to acquire such a perfect
knowledge of the arts and sciences as they possessed, and such mechanical skill as to con-
struct a work so enormous as to contain 6,848,060 tons of wrought stone, brought fifteen
Biles from the quarry.

Digitized by VjOOQlC


Let us compare a few of the dates with regard to the deluge] This event oc-

According to the Septuagint version, 3246 B. C*

" Hales, 3155

* Josephus, 3146

u Samaritan text, 2998

« English Bible, 2348

u Calmet, 2344

u Hebrew text, 2288

" Vulgar Jewish computation, 2104

These chronological differences are to be regretted, but they in no manner af-
fect the validity of any scriptural fact, being mere deductions drawn by different
individuals from their various interpretations of the original text; and we are
aware that in points of interpretation as well as chronology, many eminently
pious individuals have entertained opinions of the mo9t adverse description. In
the present investigation, the Truth alone should be onr study. Being one of
the grand principles upon which our Fraternity is founded, it is the point to which
we should strenuously seek to arrive ; and it is of the utmost importance here to
observe that the truth which we seek to establish is in accordance with Revela-
tion, and is antagonistic only to the opinions of those who place on Holy Writ a
false interpretation. In thus showing that the chronology in general use, though
appended to our Bible by act of Parliament,

Oct. 1, 1847.


No. 7 Haskin's Building, opposite the Head of Hanover Street,

BXBtiuvvRS, Aprons, and erery variety of painting for Lodges, Chapters, &c>, exe-
cuted to order, with neatness aud despatch.

ETA set of paintings in frames, for Blue Degrees, including a Master's Carpet y on
hand, and for sale. Prices reasonable. ly. Oct. 1, 1647.



Encampments, eijapters an* 2,o*st0>


A. W. POLLARD, Merchant Tailor,

No. 6 Court Street,









oet. we. ly. [email protected]®m&wmm 9 [email protected]



ftyTwo Dollars per annum, (in current bills,) in Advance..^

Digitized by



MAINE.— Knox Centra S. Webb, P. M.
Portland— J S Bailey.
Augusta, Lory Bacon.
NHAMP -Portsmouth, Ths. L. Tollock.
Claremont l Luther Farewell, Jr.
Great Folk, Ichabod G. Jordan.
MASS — Pepper ell, Luther S. Bancroit.
Fitchburg, John D. Pratt.
Framingham, Jona. Greenwood.
New Bedford, L. B. Keith.
Sutton, Daniel Tenny, Esq.
Worcester— Rev. Albert Case.
Salem, William Leavitt Andover, N.Fry.
R. ISLAND— Pawtucket, Jos. T. Greene.
Providence, J as. Salisbury, A. W. Fiske.
CONNECTICUT— Hartford, Peter Cook
iV. YORK.—N Y. City Charles F. Bauer.
Genesseo— Edward R. Hammatl.
Buffalo, Robert Russell.
JV^F JERSEY— Trenton, J. H. Hough.
MARYLAND.— Baltimore,*. Robinson.
VIRGINIA —Louisa C.H. T. M. Howard.
Abingdon, Rev. F. L. B. Shaver.
Baeon Castle, Jno. A. Hunnicut.
Lynchburg, E. H. Gill.
Boykins* Depot, J. A. Williamson.
Carrsville, Dr. Francis M. Boy kin.
Clarksville, Henry Wood.
Halifax, C. JT., C. H. Davis.
Wheeling, John J. Thompson.
JV. CAROLINA.— Hertford and Elizabeth
City, Jos. M. Cox. Shiloh, G. L. Lamb.
Tar bor ought L. Bond. Nncbcrn. — T. Stow.
Wilmington, Wm. A . Burr.
Plymouth, Joseph Ramsey.
S CAROLINA— Charle*ton,$KO?\ J.Hull
Graham's Turn Out, H. B. Rice
Georgetown, R. B. Frazier.
Pleasant Hill P. O.. Andrew Mayer.
GEORGIA —Griffin, William Cline.
Talbotton, James W. Cameos.
Cuthbert, J. Buchanan.
Thomaston, J. W. W. Drake.
jltts'us/a, Lemuel Dwelle.
LOUISIANIA.—N Orleans, Dan'l Blair.
Shreveport, William Thatcher.
Farmerville, 1 T. Henderson.
MISSISSIPPL^-Columbus, A. S. Pfister.
Liberty, E. M. Davis. Grenada— William
H. Stevens. £tne 5/ore, W. C. Minter.
JVaJcAe*, Wm. P. Mellon.
Warrenton, T. W. Tompkins.
Jfotfy Springs, Gordilia Waite.
Paulding, John Watts.
Belief ontains, J. R. Golding.
Fort Gibson and G. Gulf, John G. Hastings.
Jackson, T. J. Hawkins.— Macon, E. W.
Marion, James M. Pigott. [Ferris.

Richland, Levi Hurlhert.
Kteft#6urg», Edward Parker.
Payette, Charles T. Miles.
Lexington, William T. Legrand.
KENTUCKY.— Winchester, H. Leuba.
Smithland. David Shropshire.
W£Sr TEN— Dresden, Dr.A. D. Cutler.
Memphis, D. O. Dooley.
TENNESSEE.— Nashville, J. S Dashiel.
Colleton.— W. D. Johnson.
Clarksville, E. Howard
Jackson, Thomas W. Harris,
OHIO.— Portsmouth, Arthur C. Davis.
Dresden -H. G. O. Caiy.
Masillon, G. D. Hine.

Zanesville, Geo. L. Shennick.
Chardon, Roderick White.
JHt. Vernon, B. F. Smith.
Columbus, Charles Scott.
Londonville, Ha«kell & Klemm.
Cincinnati, A. Death.

PENN.-Honesdale and Waymart, T.Clark
Pittsburg, A. McCammon.
MISSOURI— Danville, John Scott.
Hannibal, Thomas S. Miller.
Fayette, Wm. Taylor, P. M.
Palmyra, S. W. B. Carnegy.
Paris, J. H. McBride, Neosho— Rev. S.
G. Patterson. 2Voy, Francis Parker, Esq,
JWoncAssler, Dr. W. W. Bassetl.
Arrow Rock, Dr. C. M. Bradford, P. M.
Springfield, Wm. C. Jones.
Weston and Sparta, B Holliday.
Platte City, Jas. G. Spratt.
Si. Louis, Fred. L. Billon.
Independence, Samuel C. Owens.
Glasgow, Isaac P. Vaughan.
Lexington- John S. Porter.
Boonville—C. D W Johnson,
Marion, J. W. Smith.
MICHIGAN— Detroit, H. N. Church.
4Z,A flAAfA.-JYorenee, W. J. Hawkins.
Linden, Thomas J. Woolf.
Livingston, C. S. McCnnnico.
Prairie Bluff, E. H. Cook.
Gainesville, John Onelo
Lowndrsborough. John H. Caffey.
Tallageda, Samuel II . Dixon.
Montgomery, Amand P. Pfister
Wetumpka, R. H Harrison.
Mobile, T. J. Deyampert.
Demopolis, Joseph Packard, jr.
Benton, John R. Somerville.
Kienna. Dr. J. E Pearson.
Court land t Joseph C. Caker.
Lafayette, J. W. Bachelder.
Greensboro*, John Atkins.
Turnbull, James M. Stoddnrd.
Claiborne, C. H. Foster.
Moti/fon, Wiley Gallaway.
Greenville, J L. Dunklin.
INDIANA.— Bloomington, E.P. Farmer
Logansport, Isaac Bartte*tt.
Laports, Thomas D. Leman.
Indianapolis, B. F Kavanaugh.
ILLINOIS.— Quiney, J..H. Luce.
Carlyle,}. T. Bradley.
Belleville* Alex. Reaney.
Chicago, C: R. Starkweather.
Charleston, James Watson.
ARKANSAS.- Daville, Thos. W. Pound.
Magnolia, T. R. Williams.
WISCONSIN— PlattevMe, RerR. Spaoi-

TfiAAS— At/dm, Moses Johnson.
Houston, A. J. Ru&hton.

inelon, C. Wiliams.
/OW'A r^« — £/oorotn#*on, T.S. Parvin.
CjlArAZM-Toron/o, S. B. Campbell.
Kingston— Sam'l D. Fowler.
Hamilton, R. O. Duggan.
Montreal, Robert Chalmers.
Jfindaor, (C IP) Fred. C. Clark. Sand-

tctcA, James M. Cowan.
JV. BRUNSWK..-SL John, A. McMillan.
AOFil SCOTIA.— Halifax, J. Willis.
ENGLAND —London, R. Spencer.


Digitized by



Powers of Lodges under Dispensation. — Suspending of Lodges. — Initia-
tion of Minors, ........ 33

Grand Lodge Jurisdiction, ... ... 37

Mark Masters' Lodges, - ..... 39

Tribute of Respect, - ..... -40

Richland Literary Institute, ..... 41

On the Study of Masonic Antiquities, ..... 43

An Address, ......... 50

Installation at Pawtocket, R. I., - - - 63

Eulogium, .... ..... 54

Mabonic Intelligence.

Ohio, - ....-.57

Indiana, .-. - -..59

Kentucky, ,.-. - - 59

New-Hampshire, - - - - 60

Massachusetts, - - - - 62

Obituary, - - - .... 62

Register of Officers, ' - - ... - 63

Chit Chat, - - - - - 64


manufacturer* of


No. U Tremont Row, (under Winthrop Hall,)

W. E. P. Haskell,

A. P. Chapman. pet. 1846.1 y.

Received httween iht 24tt Oct and the 24ih Nov.

Remittance.— J. R. Somerville, Benton. Ala. ; Wm. Roush, Orange C. H., Vn. ; J. J.
Doty, Richland, Miss. ; Wm. T. Legrand, Lexington, Miss. 5 Wm. Q Sewell, Decatur, Ala.;
C. VV. James, Cincinnati, Ohio: James R. Wyman, Harvard, Mass.; George L. Shennick,
Zanesville, Ohio; J. Warner, Natchez, Miss. ; fA)ry Bacon, Augusta, Me.; Wm. W. Jessey,
Williamsport, Tenn. ; S. Richards, Farmersville, Ala. ; John Beer, Paris, Tenn. j S. P.
Fiske, Pawtucket, R. I.} C. Hi Hard, Haggersiown, Md.j A. Death, Cincinnati, Ohio ; Geo.
F. Daskam, Norwalk, Ct j L. Dwelle, Augusta, Ga. j J. M. Cdbper, Camden, 8. C. j Chas.
Scott, Columbus, Ohio j W.P.Camden, Portsmouth, Ohio; Samuel J. Hull, Charleston,
S. C. ; H. M. Lewis, Montgomery, Ala. ; Enoch Wilson, Newark, Ohio; C. S. McConnico,
Livingston, Ala.; Thomas B. Carroll, Helena, Ark. 5 Benj. Carter, Monroe, Ind. 5 John S.
Dashiel, Nashville, Tenn.

Business— B. P. Ferrill, Hollowsquare, Ala.; Thos. Bell, Zanesville, Ohio ; Francis
Richardson, Toronto, Canada; James Salisbury, Providence, R. I.; H. N. Church, Detroit,
Mich, i E. R. Hammatt, Geneseo, N. T. ; Thus. J. Woolf, Linden, Ala. ; A. Hollub, Frank-
lin, Wis. Ter. : P. M., Springfield, Mo. ; George Cooke, Albany, N. V. 5 A. S. Kottwitz,
Monticello, Miss. } J. W. Echols, Dyersburg, Tenn. j J. W. S. Brown, Cincinnati, Ohio ;
P. G. S. Perkins, Franklin, Tenn.; Charles Scott, Columbus, Ohio; J. W. Townsend, Mo-
bile, Ala. ; Geo. Schley, Savannah, Geo. ; Wm. Price, Arrow Rock, Mo. ; J. P. Wright,

New- York city.

£j»Mr Israel E. James is our travelling agent for the Southern and South-western
Slates, assisted by James K. Whipple, Wm. H. Weld, O. H. P Stem. John B. Weld, T. S.
Waterman, John Collins, James Deering, Isaac D. Guver, and John W. Wightman.

Mr C W. James is our travelling agent for the Western States, assisted by James R.
Smith, J. T. Dent, T. G. Smith, and Fred'k J. Hawse.

Mr Henry M. i<bwis is our travelling agent lor Alabama and Tennessee.

Digitized by VjOOQlC



Vol, VIL1 BOSTON, DECEMBER 1, 1847. [No. 2.



ClarkemOe, Mo., Aug. 31, 1847.

Ba. Moore :— Yoa will oblige us of the West, by giving your views on the
following questions :

L If an individual is initiated, passed and raised, in a Lodge under Dispensa-
tion, and immediately removes into the jurisdiction of another Grand Lodge, with-
out demitting from his Lodge, and said Lodge afterwards acts so as to gain the
displeasure of the power creating it, and the members thereof are declared sus-
pended — how does the individual stand towards the Fraternity ? And, if he is
one of the suspended, and desires to remain as one of the faithful, how should he
proceed to reinstate himself?

2L If an individual is initiated under the French rite, (aay in Canada,) at the age
of eighteen, and leaves without any knowledge of the work, so that in a few years
he nearly forgets how he was dealt with or what he saw — how should he proceed,
if he desires to learn York Masonry ?

Yours, &c, J. F. L. Jacobt.

1. Dispensations are usually granted by the Grand Master, during the
recess of the Grand Lodge, on the petition of not less than seven Master
Masons ; and are generally made returnable «t the ensuing annual com-
munication of the Grand Lodge. They authorise the petitioners to " form
and open a Lodge, after the manner of ancient free and accepted Masons,
and therein to admit and make Freemasons."

This we conceive to be the full extent of the powers delegated to, or
which can be legally exercised by, Lodges working under Dispensation.
They are Lodges in abeyance, and not in reality. Their presiding offi-
cers are not entitled to the rank of Past Masters of Lodges, nor are they
privileged with a vote as representatives in the Grand Lodge. Neither
have such Lodges the right of electing their officers, or of changing them,
except by permission of the creating power. They are in a state of pro-
bation, preparatory to being invested with the full powers and privileges
of Lodges. They differ from Lodges working under Charters, cot only

Digitized by



to the extent already named, but in that they have no power to perpetuate
themselves. They cannot add to the number of their members ; neither
can they fill vacancies, should their original number be diminished below
the constitutional requirement, except by special permission from the
competent authority. An essential difference between them and chartered
Lodges is, that Charters are granted to the petitioners, and their successors;
while Dispensations run to the petitioners only. In the latter case, the
petitioners alone are known to the Grand Lodge, and they only are respon-
sible for the acts of the body they represent Their initiates are not re-
turned to the Grand Lodge as members ; for, not having been constituted,
the Lodge possesses no power to admit members. The members of it are
themselves a mere association working " after the manner" of a Lodge,
and not in the full capacity of a Lodge. They are, therefore, required to
return their initiates for just what they are, and nothing more, viz : ini-

This view of the powers of Lodges under Dispensation being correct,
it follows that the individual referred to by our correspondent, was not a
member of the Lodge, notwithstanding that his name may have been re-
corded as such. It was not possible, therefore, for him to demit ; that is,
to withdraw his membership. Of course, he could not be affected by any
action of the Grand Lodge in relation to the members, namely, the Breth-
ren holding the Dispensation. In other words, the act suspending them,
did not, in our view of the case, affect his standing as a Mason.

But we object to the suspending of the members of a Lodge, in the
manner stated, as an irregular proceeding. It is a rule at common law,
that no man is to be adjudged guilty until an opportunity has been afforded
him to be heard in his own defence ; and that rule is against all law, and
repugnant to common sense and humanity, which condemns and punishes
an innocent man for the misdemeanors of his fellows. And yet, in ninety-
nine cases in every hundred, this would be the inevitable effect of a vote
suspending a Lodge, in the sense in which our correspondent employs the
term. But to our understanding of the law and the practice, the phrase
implies only the arrest of the Charter of the Lodge. It is at all times com-
petent for the Grand Master to arrest the Charter of a Lodge, and thereby
suspend its operations, until the complaint can be brought before the
Grand Lodge for adjudication ; and it is equally competent for him to sus-
pend a part or the whole of the members of a Lodge. But in doing so, he
must have some regard for the rules of justice. It might do for him \o
say to the Master, " Sir, by virtue of my authority as Grand Master, I sus-
pend your Lodge, and summons you to appear before the Grand Lodge,
at its next regular communication, to show cause why your Charter should
not be revoked ;" because the Master is the legal representative of the

Digitized by VjOOQlC


Lodge, and may be lawfully held to answer for the irregularity of its pro-
ceedings. But he is not the representative of the members in their indi-
vidual capacity, nor can they be individually arrested or punished through
him. It would not, therefore, be sufficient for the Grand Master to say to
the Master of the Lodge, " Sir, I suspend your members, and summons
them to appear before the Grand Lodge ;" because each member is alone
responsible for his own acts, and cannot be held to answer for the misdeeds
of another. If a member has committed an offence of sufficient magnitude
to justify the proceeding, the only proper course is to serve him, personally,
or to leave at his place of residence, a copy of the charges against him,
with a summons to appear at the proper time and place, to make his
answer; and, if need be, a notice of suspension, until his case has
been adjudicated and determined. We know of no other way in which
Brethren can be legally arraigned or suspended, except in extreme cases,
when the Grand Master may suspend viva voce.

2. The second inquiry of our correspondent opens a wide field for dis-
cussion. We shall, however, restrict our answer to a few brief remarks.
The initiation of minors is prohibited by the ancient Constitutions ; and in
our judgment, a disregard of this prohibition is hazardous to the interests
and security of the Order. Such a practice would vitiate and destroy the
regularity of a York Lodge, and mark its initiates as irregular, if not posi-
tively clandestine. It is, however, a practice authorised by the Constitu-
tions of the French, Scotch, and other modern rites ; and Brethren made
under those Constitutions, are not refused admission as visitors in York
Lodges. But if this settles the question as to the recognition of Brethren
made in those rites, it does not warrant the initiation of minors in York
Lodges, nor would it justify any participation in their initiation by Masons
acknowledging the authority of the old Constitutions.

From the preceding remarks and conclusions, it follows, that if we ac-

1 2 3 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Online LibraryCharles W. (Charles Whitlock) MooreThe Freemason's monthly magazine → online text (page 5 of 15)