tunetelling from the Necromancers; the morals from the Jesuits; and the horrid oaths of the order, from its own bowels. But the time that all these were first publicly stitched together to form Speculative Masonry, was when the only four companies of Operative Masons in the south of England, met at the Appletree tavern in London, Feb. 1717, and constituted themselves "the Grand Lodge" of England pro tempore in due form. Vide Preston p. 166. ANTHONY SAYER, Grand Master.

The proof that it had no earlier existence is perfectly conclusive. Speculative Masonry, or Freemasonry, is a matter of great notoriety. Any question in a future age, of its existence in the 18th or 19th centuries, could be answered satisfactorily by pointing to splendid Masonic Halls, to quarto volumes of constitutions, and octavo histories, to medals and monuments and deeds of parchment, as well as deeds of wickedness. The literature of this age abounds with it. Those who read the account of laying the corner stone of the Bunker-hill Monument, will point to that pillar of national glory, as a proof that Freemasonry existed A. D. 1825; and, if that is not enough, the foundation may be removed, and there a medal be found with inscriptions of vanity, which in this republic can only belong to Most Worshipful Freemasonry unless an indignant people should justly tear the disgraceful plate from its proud resting place.

In vain we search for any proof of this sort existing earlier than the 18th century. We find constitutions of Jesuits, Rosicrusians, and Alchymists. We find histories of political parties, religious sects, and Bucaneers. We find text books of Cabala, necromancy, astrology, magic, fortunetelling, and various proofs of witchcraft; but not a particle of evidence to show the existence of Freemasonry, or Speculative Masonry. It is not mentioned or alluded to; it is not painted on canvass, or stamped on paper, or indented on plate. That its universal language must have been spoken; that its mystic characters were certainly understood, and its omnific word even then possessed some share of omnipotence, no one who believes in Freemasonry, can for a moment doubt. But all the proof is found in pages and documents, in fraternities and monuments of the 18th and 19th centuries; and this

in such abundance, as quite to supply the failure of five hundred years preceding; although it admits of a doubt, whether there is enough to supply the deficiency of the other five thousand years from the year of light. Fifty centuries are a long period for the active labors of a great mystery spread over the face of the whole world, to pass entirely unobserved: and there is no accounting for it, only as a great mystery, and such, Freemasonry may undoubtedly be; for men do not well understand it, when it is fully revealed.

We have read the volumes of Hume and Smollet and Bisset with care. They give a connected history of England from the earliest dates to the 19th century, and no mention is made of Freemasonry to our recollection. Then we have run over Mosheim, who gives a faithful history of the church, century by century, from the year of our Lord, to the 18th century, and Freemasonry entirely escapes either his notice or our memory.

*

*

We lay them away, and turn to honest Scotland. Robertson tells its story in the most exquisite manner; he spreads upon his page every fact of importance, and Walter Scott fills the world with the poetry of its history. But where is the mention of Freemasonry, or Speculative Masonry, or the men of the cabletow? In the lights and shadows, in the tales and legends, in the songs and histories of Scotland, as well as of England, where is the mention of Freemasonry prior to the 18th century? We know of none.

* *

It is too much after this to search Gibbon, Gillies, Ferguson, and Rollin for Freemasonry; if we did, it would be of no use; they take no notice of it.

*

*

Neither poet nor moralist, politician nor controversialist, historian, biographer, antiquary, or novelist of continental Europe, previous to the 18th century, can be named, who mentions such a thing of oaths and degrees, as modern speculative masonry; or who so much as writes the name 'Freemasonry,' or any of its present modifications, in any language of Europe. We do not pretend to have read all, but we understand enough to challenge the most learned professor of masonic lore, the very sublime, elect, and perfect masons, to show any author with a title page older than one hundred and six years, who mentions or

alludes to the mystery in any part of the earth; or to produce any medal, or manuscript, or monument, or well authenticated copy of any inscription upon any medal or monument, naming, or having allusion to Speculative Masonry, or Freemasonry, of a date earlier than the beginning of the 18th century, in any country on the face of the earth.-Anti Masonic Review.

THE PRETENSIONS OF FREEMASONRY TO AN ORIGIN IN THE DAYS OF SOLOMON.

Extract from Letters of Rev. Henry Jones.

At a time like the present, when the institution of Freemasonry is undergoing the faithful scrutiny of the public, it seems to be of very great importance, that the question, so frequently asked, "What is the origin of the Institution ?" should receive the answer which it demands, in order that an impartial and correct judgment may be more readily formed. If it originated with the people of God; and was patronized as a good and useful institution by many of the most eminent characters whose names are recorded in holy writ; at a time too, when they were enjoying the special guidance and approbation of the Most High; a favorable judgment must be rendered of it, at least while in its native purity, though now so degenerated and perverted :-But if, on the other hand, this institution originated with men of corrupt principles, who have falsely founded it, on pretended important facts, which never existed; then of course, considering also, its present deformed character, it must be condemned by the public, as a base and wicked fabrication, an insult upon community, and only worthy to be utterly expunged from all ranks of society. Each of these suppositions, for the origin of the institution, is considered correct, by the opposite parties who feel interested in the subject, and are exhibited by them, respectively, as proof of its merits, or demerits.

It is my design on this occasion to show, that its mon claims to an origin at the building of the temple of Solo

mon, among wise and holy men, are unfounded, and that consequently, it must have had its origin since that time, among false and wicked men, so that those wise and holy men had no part nor lot in the matter.

It is well known to all the fraternity who have become somewhat familiar with the lectures of the first three degrees, that they do teach us, that Speculative, or Freemasonry, originated at the building of Solomon's temple, and that a large share of the mysteries of the institution are established on certain events, which are said to have transpired at that time and place. I shall not consider it necessary to repeat over those parts of the lectures to which I allude; but for the benefit of some who may still be unacquainted with the subject, I would concisely bring into view some of the pretensions of masonry, as to its having its origin at the building of the temple with Solomon and others, which I am to endeavor to show, as being false.

Passing by much in the first and second degrees, which teaches the same, I shall confine my remarks to the third degree; and would observe, First, that the lecture of this "sublime" degree, teaches us that Freemasonry was founded at the building of the temple, by these important circumstances, which it professes to record, viz. that there were employed in building it, three Grand Masters; Solomon king of Israel, Hiram king of Tyre, and Hiram "Abiff," as he is designated in masonry, but in the scripture, Hiram the son of a widow, &c. who alone constituted the Master's lodge at that time, and who alone possessed the Master's secrets or word, holding their secret meetings in the sanctum sanctorum, or holy of holies of the temple. They are represented also, in this degree, as having agreed together, never to give the Master's word to any other person, unless they all three were together in doing it; so that, when Hiram "Abiff" is represented in this degree, as being slain, before any of the craftsmen had received this secret word of the Masters', it could not afterwards be given, for want of the three Grand Masters together, and was, in consequence of this, for many years lost, having another word substituted in its stead.

Having brought forward these things as the pretended

matters of fact, on which the institution of Freemasonry professes to be founded; I would observe, that they bring with themselves no proof that they are matters of fact in reality, unless we are bound to consider them so proved by the bare assertion of an individual, who says that he was secretly told so, by a second person in the preceding generation, who in like manner, received his information from a third, and so on through fifty or an hundred generations, to go back to the days of Solomon: But no tribunal has ever been authorised to allow the least credit to a witness like this, on any important question between opposite parties.

Although it is often difficult to prove a negative in such a case as this; I am prepared to prove, unless I greatly mistake, that these masonic pretensions to the origin of the institution at the building of the temple, are false; by showing from scripture history, that Hiram King of Tyre and Hiram "Abiff" never were associated with Solomon as Grand Master in the building of the temple, so that they three, never constituted a Master's lodge there, assembling in the sanctum sanctorum for their secret meetings. Every one must know, who is acquainted with this history, 1 Kings, 2 Chron., that Solomon was Master alone, over all the work of the building, that he was especially endowed with wisdom from above to qualify him to form so great a work, and that the Lord furnished him with particular directions, through the agency of David his father, which was equal to a pattern of the building, and more than this, Hiram king of Tyre, as it seems from scripture and reason, never left his kingdom to go and dwell at Jerusalem, while the temple was building, as he only bartered with Solomon in a friendly manner, by furnishing timber for the temple, and sending his servants to cut and prepare it, &c. for which Solomon made satisfaction in wheat, barley, wine and oil; with twenty cities. It is evident, also, beyond dispute, that Hiram "Abiff" was not a Grand Master with Solomon in building the temple, and with him constituting a Master's lodge, meeting privately in the sanctum sanctorum, as the third degree represents; because

*

* 1 Chron. xxviii. 11, 12, 19.