The fusion of the two rival Grand Lodges - the "Ancients" and the "Moderns" - was the most important event that has occurred in the history of Speculative Freemasonry since the organization of 1717. The mutual denunciations of two bodies, each practicing almost the same rites and ceremonies, each professing to be actuated by the same principles, and each tending to the accomplishment of the same objects, and each claiming to be the supreme Head of the Masonic Institution while it accused its antagonist of being irregular in its organization and a usurper of authority, could not have failed eventually to impair the purity and detract from the usefulness of the Institution. The sentiment of active opposition on the part of the "Moderns" had grown with the increasing success of their rivals.

In 1777 the constitutional Grand Lodge had declared "that the persons who assemble in London and elsewhere in the character of Masons, calling themselves Ancient Masons, and at present said to be under the patronage of the Duke of Atholl, are not to be countenanced or acknowledged by any regular lodge or Mason under the constitution of England; nor shall any regular Mason be present at any of their conventions to give a sanction to their proceedings, under the penalty of forfeiting the privileges of the Society, nor shall any person initiated at any of their irregular meetings be admitted into any lodge without being re-made.'' *

(* Preston gives this degree in full; Northouck only summarizes it. see Preston, "Illustrations," Oliver's edition, p. 242, and Northouck, " Constitutions," p. 323.)

This anathema was followed at different periods during the rest of the century by others of equal severity. The "Modern Masons," knowing the legality of their own organization and the false pretensions of the "Ancients," are to be excused and even justified for the intensity of their opposition and even for the harshness of their language. Feeling assured, from all the historical documents with which they were familiar, that the Grand Lodge organized in 1717 was the only legitimate authority in English Masonry, it was natural that they should denounce any pretension to the possession of that authority by others as an imposture.

The "Ancients," who, notwithstanding the positiveness with which they asserted their claim to a superior antiquity, must, unconsciously at times, have felt their weakness, never displayed so acrimonious a spirit. On the contrary, they were unwilling to enter into discussions which might elicit facts detrimental to the solidity of their pretensions. Hence, we find Dermott saying: " I have not the least antipathy against the gentlemen of the modern society; but, on the contrary, love and respect them; " * and though in a subsequent edition he complains that this amicable sentiment was not reciprocated, he admits the equal right of each society to choose a Grand Master, and expresses the hope to see in his life-time a unity between the two. **

(* "Ahiman Rezon," edition of 1764, p. 24.)

(** Ibid., edition of 1778, pp. 43-44)

In 1801 the Grand Lodge of "Ancients," in a circular addressed to the Craft, made the following declaration: "We have too much respect for every Society that acts under the Masonic name, however imperfect the imitation, to enter into a war of reproaches; and, therefore, we will not retort on an Institution, established in London, for some years, under high auspices, the unfounded aspersions into which a part of their body have suffered themselves to be surprised."*

(* Ibid., edition of 1807, p.124.)

About the beginning of the 19th century many leading Masons among the "Moderns" began to recognize the necessity of a union of the two Societies. I am compelled to believe, or at least to suspect, that at first the success of the "Ancients" was a controlling motive in this desire for a fusion of the two Grand Lodges. At this time there were Grand Lodges of "Ancients," or as they styled themselves, "Grand Lodges of Ancient York Masons," which had emanated from the London body, in Canada, Pennsylvania. Maryland, South Carolina, New York, Massachusetts, Nova Scotia. Gibraltars and most of the provinces and islands of the East and West Indies, and a recognition by the Grand Lodges of Ireland and Scotland. *

(* Ahiman Rezon," edition of 1807, p. 117.)

THE UNION OF THE TWO GRAND LODGES

Elated with this success and with the diffusion of their authority, the "Ancients" did not at first incline favorably to the idea of a union of the Craft. They were willing to accept such a union, but it must be without the slightest compromise or concession on their part. Long before the close of the 18th century the "Ancients" had made an important change in the character of the claim for regularity which they had advanced in the beginning of the contest. Some time after the Grand Lodge of England, according to the "Old Institutions," was organized by a secession of several lodges from the Constitutional Grand Lodge, Lawrence Dermott, writing in its defense, sought to attribute to it an origin older than that claimed by the Grand Lodge which had been instituted in 1717, and asserted that that organization " was defective in number and consequently defective in form and capacity." *

(* Ibid., edition of 1778, p. 14.)

Again he declares that when this Grand Lodge was about to be established, "some joyous companions," who were only Fellow-Crafts, met together, and being entirely ignorant of the "Master's part" had invented a "new composition" which they called the third degree. *

(* Ibid., p. 35. It will be noted that Dermott did not make these grave accusations in his previous editions of the "Ahiman Rezon." They are first advanced in the edition published in 1778.)

At a later period the "Ancients" appear to have abandoned, or at least to have ceased to have pressed this claim to a priority of existence and to a greater regularity of organization. More mature reflection and the force of historical evidence led their leaders to the conviction that both of these claims were wholly untenable.

After the death of Laurence Dermott they began to confine their claim to legality, and their defense of the secession from the Constitutional Grand Lodge upon the single ground that the latter had made innovations upon the ancient landmarks, and by their change of words and ceremonies had ceased any longer to maintain the pure system of Speculative Freemasonry. While these "variations in the established forms" were maintained by the Grand Lodge of "Moderns," the Grand Lodge of "Ancients" declared it to be impossible to hold Masonic intercourse with those who thus deviated from the legitimate work of tithe Order. Hence, though, as has been seen, the Ancients were less aggressive in their language toward their rivals and did not indulge in the harsh censures which characterized the Constitutional Grand Lodge, they were, until after the commencement of the 19th century, more averse than that body to a union of the two divisions of the Fraternity, and met all advances toward that object with something more than indifference.

The evidence of this fact is abundantly shown in the transactions of both bodies. We learn, on the authority of Preston, that in November, 1801, a charge was presented to the Constitutional Grand Lodge against some of its members for patronizing and officially acting as principal officers in a lodge of "Ancients." The charge being proved, it was determined that the laws should be enforced against them unless they immediately seceded from such irregular meetings. They solicited the indulgence of the Grand Lodge for three months, hoping that they might be enabled in that time to affect a union between the two societies. This indulgence was granted, and that no impediment might prevent the accomplishment of so desirable an object, the charges against the offending brethren were for the time with drawn. A committee of distinguished Masons, among whom was the Earl of Moira, who was very popular with the Craft of "Moderns," was appointed to pave the way for the intended union, and every means were ordered to be used to effect that object. Lord Moira declared, on accepting the appointment as a member of the Committee, that he should consider the day on which such a coalition should be formed as one of the happiest days of his life, and that he was empowered by the Prince of Wales, then Grand Master of the "Moderns," to say that his arms would be ever open to all the Masons in the kingdom, indiscriminately. *

(* Preston, "Illustrations," old edition, p. 329.)

This was the first open and avowed proposition for a union of the two Grand Lodges. It emanated from the "Moderns," and up to that date none had ever been offered by the "Ancients," who were silently and successfully pursuing their career - in extending tending their influence, making lodges at home and abroad, and securing the popular favor of the Craft. *

(* There is no doubt that at that day, in America certainly, the "Ancients" were more popular than the "Moderns." Hence there appears to have been a settlement of expedience exhibited in the desire of the latter to affect a coalition.)

The effort, however, was not successful. After suspending all active opposition, the Constitutional Grand Lodge learned in February, 1803, that no measures had been taken to effect a union; it resumed its antagonistic position, punished the brethren who had been charged with holding a connection with the "Ancients," and unanimously resolved that "whenever it shall appear that any Masons under the English Constitution shall in future attend or countenance any lodge or meeting of persons calling themselves Ancient Masons under the sanction of any person claiming the title of Grand Master of England, who shall not have been duly elected in the Grand Lodge, the laws of the Society shall not only be strictly enforced against them, but their names shall be erased from the list and transmitted to all the regular Lodges under the Constitution of England." *

(* Preston, "Illustrations," old edition, p. 330.)

What were the means adopted by the Constitutional Grand Lodge to accomplish the much-desired object are not now exactly known. But that they were highly distasteful to the "Ancients" is very clear from the action of their Grand Lodge adopted on March 2, 1802. This action was evidently intended as a reply to the proposition of the rival body of "Moderns," tendered in the preceding November. The declaration of the Grand Lodge of "Ancients" is printed in Harper's edition of the Ahiman Rezon, published in 1807. *

(* Pages 125-131.)

As this work is not generally accessible to the Fraternity, and as the document presents a very full and fair expression of the position assumed by the "Ancients" at that advanced period in the history of their career, I shall copy it without abbreviation. "It was represented to this Grand Lodge, that notwithstanding the very temperate notice which was taken in the last Quarterly Communication, of certain unprovoked expressions used toward the Fraternity of Ancient Masons, by a Society generally known by the appellation of the Modern Masons of England, that body has been further prevailed on to make declarations and to proceed to acts at once illiberal and unfounded with respect to the character, pretensions, and antiquity of this institution.

It was not a matter of surprise that from the transcendent influence of the pure and unchanged system of Ancient Masonry, practiced in our regular lodges, the solidity of our establishment, the progressive increase of our funded capital, the frequency and extent of our benevolence, and, above all, from the avowed and unalterable bond of union, which has so long and so happily subsisted between us and the Ancient Grand Lodges of Scotland, Ireland, America, and the East and West Indies, it should be a most desirable object to the body of Modern Masons to enroll the two societies under one banner by an act of incorporation; but we did not expect that they would have made use of the means which have been attempted to gain the end. Bearing, as they do, the Masonic name, and patronized by many most illustrious persons, we have ever shown a disposition to treat them with respect, and we cannot suppress our feelings of regret, that unmindful of the high auspices by which they are, for the time, distinguished, they should here condescend to the use or language which reflects discredit on their cause.

Truth requires no acrimony, and brotherhood disclaims it. It is a species of warfare so inconsistent with the genuine principles of Masonry, that they may wage it without the fear of a retort. Actuated by the benignity which these principles inspire, we shall content ourselves with a tranquil appeal to written record. It is not for two equal, independent and contending institutions to expect that the world will acquiesce in the apse digit of either party. We shall not rest our pretensions, therefore, on extracts from our own books, or on documents in our own possession - but out of their own mouths shall we judge them."

In their Book of Constitutions, quarto edition, anno 1784, p. 240, they make this frank confession: "Some variations were made in the established forms." This is their own declaration, and they say that these were made "more effectually to debar them and their abettors (that is, us, the ancient masons) from their lodges." Now what was the nature of these changes? Fortunately, the dispute did not rest between the two rival bodies; it was not for either to decide which had the claim of regular descent from the ancient stock of the "York Masons."

There was a competent tribunal. The Masonic world alone could exercise the jurisdiction and pronounce a verdict on the case. Accordingly, after frequent visitations made to our lodges by the brethren from Scotland and Ireland, who repaired to England, the two Grand Lodges of these parts of the united empire pronounced in our favor and declared that in the Ancient Grand Lodge of England the pure, unmixed principles of Masonry the original and holy obligations - the discipline and the pure science, were preserved. It was not in the forms alone that variations had been made by the modern order. They had innovated on the essential principles, and consequently the Masonic world could not recognize them as brothers.

"In the strict and rigorous, but beautiful, scheme of Ancient Masonry, every part of which was founded on the immutable laws of truth, nothing was left for future ages to correct. There can be no reforms in the cardinal virtues; that which was pure, just, and true as received from the eternal ordinance of the divine Author of all good, must continue the same to all eternity. In this grand mystery, every part of which contributes to a sacred end, even the exteriors of the science were wisely contrived as the fit emblems of the white and spotless lamb, which is the type of Masonic benignity.

"The Grand Lodge can not be more explicit. They will not follow the blame able practice of entering into a public discussion of what ought to be confined to the sanctuary of a regular lodge. Suffice it to say, that after mature investigation by the only persons who were authorized to pronounce a judgment on the subject, resolutions of correspondence were passed by the Ancient Grand Lodges of England, Ireland, and Scotland, which were entered in their respective archives, and which the Fraternity will find in our Book of Constitutions.

"These resolutions have been constantly acted upon from that time to the present day. We have since been further strengthened by the formal accession of the Grand Lodges of America and of the East and West Indies to the Union. And it may now be said, without any impeachment of the modernized order, that the phalanx of Ancient Masonry is now established to an extent of communication that bids defiance to all malice, however keen, and to all misrepresentation, however specious, to break asunder. May the Eternal Architect of the World preserve the Edifice entire to the latest posterity; for it is the asylum of feeble man against the shafts of adversity, against the perils of strife, and what is his own enemy against the conflict of his own passions. It draws more close the ties of consanguinity where they are, and creates them where they are not; it inculcates this great maxim as the means of social happiness, that, however separated by seas and distances, distinguished by national character or divided into sects, the whole community of man ought to act toward one another, in all the relations of life, like brothers of the same family, for they are children of the same Eternal Father, and Masonry teaches them to seek, by amendment of their lives, the same place of rest.

"The Ancient Grand Lodge of England has thought it due to its character to make this short and decisive declaration, on the unauthorized attempts that have recently been made to bring about a union with a body of persons who have not entered into the obligations by which we are bound, and who have descended to calumnies and acts of the most unjustifiable kind.

"They desire it therefore to be known to the Masonic world and they call upon their regular lodges, their Past and Present Grand Officers, and their Royal Arches and Masters, their Wardens and Brethren throughout the whole extent of the Masonic communion, to take notice, that they can not and must not receive into the body of a just and perfect lodge, nor treat as a Brother, any person who has not received the obligations of Masonry according to the Ancient Constitutions, as practiced by the United Grand Lodges of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the regular branches that have sprung from their sanction. And this our unalterable decree, 'By Order of the Grand Lodge." A careful perusal of this document will show that the position which had been assumed by the "Ancients" at the middle of the 18th century, when they organized their Grand Lodge, was abandoned by them at its close. Dermott maintained that his Grand Lodge was regular in its organization on the ground that the organization of the other body was irregular and illegal, and illegitimate.

One of the reasons he assigned for this illegality was that it had been formed by a less than lawful number of lodges. There were but four lodges engaged in the organization of the Grand Lodge at London in the year 1717. But, says Dermott, with the utmost effrontery, knowing, as he must have known, that there was no such law or usage in existence nor ever had been, "to form a Grand Lodge there must have been the Masters and Wardens of five regular lodges;" and he adds that "this is so well known to every man conversant with the ancient laws, usages, customs, and ceremonies of Master Masons, that it is needless to say more.'' *

(* "Ahiman Rezon," edition of 1778, p. 13.)

Hence the Grand Lodge of 1717 "was defective in number and consequently defective in form and capacity." Another charge made by Dermott against the "Moderns" was that they were ignorant of the true Third degree and had fabricated a mere imitation of it, a "new composition" as he contemptuously calls it. But at the close of the century both these charges were abandoned and a new issue was joined. The ground on which the "Ancients" rested the defense of their secession in 1738 from the Constitutional Grand Lodge was that that body had made "variations in the established forms;" in other words, that it had introduced innovations into the ritual. Now this would seem to be a singularly surprising instance of mental aberration, if we did not know the perversity of human nature.

When charging the "Moderns" with the introduction of innovations, the "Ancients" appear to have completely forgotten that far more serious innovations had been previously introduced by themselves. The "Moderns" had only made a transposition of a couple of words of recognition; the "Ancients" had mutilated the Third degree and fabricated out of it a Fourth, hitherto unknown to the Craft. It ill became these bold innovators to condemn others for the very fault they themselves had committed to a far greater extent. We are ready to exclaim with the Roman satirist: "Quis tulerit Gracchos de seditione querenges?" *

(* Juvenal, Satire II, 24)

"Who could endure the Gracchi when they complained of sedition?" Having thus, by implication, at least, admitted the legality of the original organization of the Constitutional Grand Lodge and the correctness of its primitive work, and restricting their charge of irregularity to the single fact of the existence of innovations, the "Ancients," notwithstanding the emphatic language in their address of 1802, in which they had declared the impossibility of recognizing their rivals, had certainly made the way more easy for future reconciliation and union. Had they continued to maintain the theory of Dermott that the Grand Lodge of "Moderns" was an illegal and un-Masonic body, which had never known or had the Master's part, I do not see how the "Moderns" could, with consistency and self-respect, have tendered, or the "Ancients" listened to, any offer of union and a consolidation. But about the beginning of the 19th century there were many Masons, especially among the "Moderns," who felt the necessity of reconciliation, since the protracted dissension was destructive of that harmony and fellowship which should properly characterize the institution.

We have seen that the Prince of Wales had in 1801, when he was Grand Master of the "Moderns," expressed his willingness for a union of all English Masons. This sentiment was shared at a later period by his brothers, the Dukes of Kent and Sussex. But of all the distinguished members of the Constitutional Grand Lodge, none was so zealous and indefatigable in the effort to accomplish a reconciliation as the Earl of Moira, who in 1795 had been Acting Grand Master under the Grand Mastership of the Prince of Wales. *

(* To no person, says Preston, had Masonry for many years been more indebted than to the Earl of Moira (now Marquis of Hastings). Toward the end of the year 1812 his Lordship was appointed Governor-General of India; and it was considered by the Fraternity as only a just mark of respect to invite his Lordship to a farewell banquet previous to his departure from England, and to present him with a valuable Masonic Jewel, as a memorial of their gratitude for his eminent services. Preston, "Illustrations of Masonry," old edition, p. 346.)

In 1801 he had been appointed one of a committee to attempt to affect a union of the two Grand Lodges - a mission which was unsuccessful in its results. But he was more felicitous two years afterward in his efforts to induce a good understanding between the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the Constitutional Grand Lodge of England. It has been heretofore seen that at an early period in the career of the Atholl Grand Lodge, the Grand Lodges of Ireland and Scotland had been induced, through the influence and misrepresentations of Dermott, to take the part of the "Ancients" and to recognize them as the only legal Masonic authority in England.

In 1782 the Constitutional Grand Lodge, supposing, it seems fallaciously, that there was some prospect of establishing a friendly correspondence with the sister kingdoms, concurred in a resolution recommending the Grand Master to use every means which in his wisdom he might think proper, for promoting a correspondence with the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland, so far as should be consistent with the laws of the Society. *

(* Northouck, "Constitutions," p. 340.)

As this last provision necessarily required, on the part of the Irish and Scottish brethren, a denunciation of their friends the ancient Masons," we may infer this to have been the cause of the unsuccessful result of the negotiation. Notwithstanding this resolution, says Preston, the wished for union was not then fully accomplished. *

(* "Illustrations," old edition, p. 257.)

But twenty years had to elapse before a spirit of conciliation was shown by the Grand Lodge of Scotland, and eight more before the Grand Lodge of Ireland exhibited a similar spirit. At the annual session of the Grand Lodge of Scotland in November, 1803, the Earl of Moira being present, addressed the Grand Lodge in what Laurie calls an impressive speech, equally remarkable for the eloquence of its sentiments and the energy of its enunciation. As the account contained in Laurie's History is a contemporary one, it may be considered as reliable and is worth giving in the very words of the author of his work. *

(* Laurie's "History of Freemasonry" was published at Edinburgh in 1804 - the last entry in the book is the account of this speech.)

"The Earl of Moira stated that the hearts and arms of the Grand Lodge of England had ever been open for the reception of their seceding brethren, who had obstinately refused to acknowledge their faults and return to the bosom of their Lodge; and that though the Grand Lodge of England differed in a few trifling observances from that of Scotland they had ever entertained for Scottish Masons that affection and regard which it is the object of Freemasonry to cherish and the duty of Freemasons to feel. His Lordship's speech was received by the brethren with loud and reiterated applause the most unequivocal mark of their approbation of its sentiments. *

(* Laurie's "History," p. 295.)

It was afterward stated by the Earl of Moira, that at that communication the Grand Lodge of Scotland had expressed its concern that any difference should subsist among the Masons of England and that the lodges meeting under the sanction of the Duke of Atholl should have withdrawn themselves from the protection of the Grand Lodge of England, but hoped that measures might be adopted to produce a reconciliation, and that the lodges now holding irregular meetings would return to their duty and again be received into the bosom of the Fraternity. *

(* Preston, "Illustrations," old edition, P. 338.)

This was certainly an unqualified admission by the Grand Lodge of Scotland that in its previous action in respect to the contending bodies in England it had been in error. It did not now hesitate to style the "Ancients" whom it had formerly recognized irregular Masons, and to acknowledge that their organization was illegal. The inevitable result was soon apparent.

The Grand Lodge of Scotland entered into fraternal correspondence with the Constitutional Grand Lodge of England and recognized it as the Supreme Authority of English Masonry. This good feeling was still further augmented by the election in 1805 of the Prince of Wales as Patron and Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the appointment of the Earl of Moira as Acting Grand Master, both of which high offices were respectively held at the same time by the same persons in the Constitutional Grand Lodge of England. Here then was a thorough reversal of the conditions which had previously existed.

In the year 1772 the office of Grand Master, both in England and in Scotland, had been filled by the same per son, the Duke of Atholl. But it was over the irregular and illegal English body that he presided. The result was a close and friendly alliance between the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the schismatic Grand Lodge in England. Again in the year 1805 we see the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Lodge of Scotland united under one and the same Grand Master, the Prince of Wales. But now it was the regular Grand Lodge of England that shared the honor of this royal headship with the Scottish Grand Lodge.

The result in this latter case was of course exactly contrary to that which had ensued in the former. From this time there was no question as to the relations existing between the two Grand Lodges. Still further to strengthen the cement of this union, if such strengthening were necessary, was the occurrence soon after of an event in Scottish Masonry. Schism, which had wrought so much evil in English Masonry, at length made its appearance among the Scottish lodges. In the year 1808 several lodges had seceded, from political motives, it is believed, from the Grand Lodge of Scotland. They had organized an independent body with the title of "The Associated lodges seceding from the present Grand Lodge of Scotland " and on July 4th had met in the Cannongate Kilwinning Lodge room, and elected a Grand Master. *

(* It is unnecessary and irrelevant to enter here into the history of this secession. The details will be found at full length in Bro. Lyon's "History of the Lodge of Edinburgh," pp. 264-281. We are here interested only in its supposed influence upon the relations of the Grand Lodges of Scotland and England.)

The Grand Lodge of Scotland announced this rebellious action to the Grand Lodge of England, which expressed its fullest sympathy with the Grand Lodge, approved of the methods it pursued to punish the seceders and to check the secession, and proclaimed the doctrine now universally accepted in Masonic law, that a Grand Lodge, as the representative of the whole Craft, is the sole depository of supreme power. Thus was the union of the two Grand Lodges still more closely cemented, and the Grand Lodge of Scotland became an earnest advocate and collaborator in the effort to extinguish the English schism. In the same year the Grand Lodge of Ireland addressed a communication to the Grand Lodge of England, in which it took occasion to applaud the principles of Masonic law enunciated by that Grand Lodge in its reply to its Scottish sister.

The Grand Lodge of Ireland also expressed its desire to co-operate with that of England in maintaining the supremacy of Grand Lodges over individual lodges It also pledged itself not to countenance or receive as a Brother any person standing under the interdict of the Grand Lodge of England for Masonic transgression. It thus cut itself aloof from its former recognition of the Atholl Grand Lodge. *

(* Preston, "Illustrations," old edition, p. 340.)

It is scarcely necessary to say that this act was received by the Constitutional Grand Lodge with a reciprocal feeling of fraternity. Thus from the year 1808 the three regular and legitimate Grand Lodges of Great Britain were united in an alliance, the prominent object of which was the extinction of the schism which had prevailed in England for three-quarters of a century and the consolidation of all the jarring elements of English Freemasonry under one head. With such powerful influences at work, it is not surprising that the happy and "devoutly wished-for consummation" was soon effected. The leading Freemasons of England, on both sides of the contest, readily lent their aid to the accomplishment of this result. The Prince of Wales having been called, in consequence of the King's mental infirmity, to the Regency, the established etiquette required that he should resign the Grand Mastership, a position which he had occupied for twenty-one years. On his retirement the Duke of Sussex was elected Grand Master of the Constitutional Grand Lodge.

He was recognized as an ardent friend of the proposed union. Through his influence, as Preston supposes, * the Duke of Atholl, who was Grand Master of the "Ancients," had been led to see the desirableness of a union of the two societies under one head. A similar desire for union began now to prevail among the Freemasons of both sides, especially among the "Ancients," who had hitherto rejected all proposals for a compromise of any kind that did not include the concession of everything on the part of the "Moderns."

(* Ibid, p. 358.)

In 1809 a motion looking to a union was submitted to the Grand Lodge of "Ancients," but ruled out by the presiding officer, who refused to put the question. *

(* Haghan's "Memorials," p. 14.)

Nevertheless, the right spirit prevailed, and in 1810 a "Union Committee" was appointed by the Grand Lodge of "Ancients," which held a joint meeting with a similar committee of the Grand Lodge of "Moderns," on July 21, 1810, on which occasion the Earl of Moira, Acting Grand Master of the Constitutional Grand Lodge, presided. At a meeting of the Grand Lodge of "Moderns" on April 12, 1809, that body rescinded all its former resolutions which forbade the admission of the "Ancients" into their regular lodges, * and thus really took the first step toward a formal recognition of the seceders.

(* Hughan's "Memorials," p. 15.)

In 1810 the "Ancients" began to make concessions. They directed all resolutions relating to the union to be published and submitted to the Craft for their consideration. They also made alterations in their regulations to conform to those of the "Modern." *

(* Their regulations, says Hughan, were also altered so as to conform as much as possible to those of the regular Grand Lodge. "Memorials of the Masonic Union," p. 15.)

But the time had now arrived when the necessities of concord and harmony imperatively demanded a cessation of the antagonism which had so long existed between the two rival Grand Lodges and their consolidation under a common head, so that Speculative Freemasonry in England should thereafter remain "one and indivisible." The "Moderns" had long been desirous of a union, which, on the other hand, the Ancients" had always strenuously opposed. "It is," says Bro. Hughan, "to the credit of the "Moderns" that they were the firm supporters of the Union, even when the 'Ancients' refused the right hand of fellowship." *

(* lbid.)

It is not to be denied that the success of the "Ancients" in winning popularity among the Craft, especially in America, where they had largely extended they influence, was a principal reason for their rooted aversion to any sort of compromise, which would necessarily result in the extinction of their power and their independent position. But many events had recently begun to create a change in their views and greatly to weaken their opposition to a union of the two Grand Lodges. In the first place, the charge that the "Moderns" had made innovations on the landmarks was losing the importance which had been given to it in the days of Laurence Dermott. It was still maintained, but no longer urged with pertinacious vigor.

History was beginning to vindicate truth, and those "Ancients" who thought at all upon the subject, must have seen that their secession from the regular Grand Lodge had preceded the innovations of that body, and that they themselves had been guilty of far greater innovations by the disruption of the Third degree and the fabrication of a Fourth one. In the second place, the theory maintained by Dermott and accepted by his followers, that the regular Grand Lodge of England, instituted at London in the year 1717, was an illegal body, defective in numbers at its organization and without the true degrees, had long been abandoned as wholly untenable.

History was again exercising its functions of vindicating truth. It is very evident, and the "Ancients" knew it, that if the Grand Lodge organization of 1717 was illegal, their own of 1753 must have been equally so, for the latter had sprung out of the former. It was felt to be dangerous, when men began to investigate the records, to advance a doctrine which logically led to such a conclusion. A third reason, and a very strong one, which must have controlled the "Ancients" in arriving at a change of views, must have been the defection of the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland. These two bodies which had at first entered into an alliance with the Atholl Grand Lodge at the expense of the Constitutional Grand Lodge, had changed sides, and had now recognized the latter body as the only legal head of Freemasonry in England, had admitted that the "Ancients" were irregular, and had refused to give them recognition as Masons.

A fourth reason was that the Duke of Atholl, who had long been at the head of the Grand Lodge which bore his name and that of his father, and who for two generations had been identified with its existence, had been won by the arguments or influenced by the friendship of the Duke of Sussex, the Grand Master of the Constitutional Grand Lodge, and had resolved to resign his Grand Mastership in favor of the Duke of Kent, for the avowed purpose of preparing for a union of the Craft. Yielding to these various influences and perhaps to some others of less note, the Grand Lodge of "Ancients" in the year 1813 abandoned its opposition to a union, and accepted the preliminary measures which had been adopted by the friends of that union. At a special meeting of the "Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of England, according to the Old Institutions" held on November 8, 1813, at the "Crown and Anchor Tavern," in the Strand, a letter was read from the Duke of Atholl intimating his desire of resigning the office of Grand Master in favor of his Royal Highness, the Duke of Kent. *

(* The minutes of this meeting will be found in Hughan's "Memorials of the Union," p. 16.)

At the same meeting the resignation of the Duke of Atholl was accepted and the Duke of Kent was unanimously elected to succeed him as Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of "Ancients." Edward, Duke of Kent and Strathcarne, the fourth son of George the Third, was then forty-six years of age. He was initiated into Freemasonry in a lodge at Geneva, in Switzerland. At the time of this election he was and had long been the Grand Master of the "Ancient Masons" of Canada. He was, therefore, identified with the cause of the "Ancients," but like his brothers, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Sussex, he was greatly desirous of a consolidation of the two Grand Lodges. At as early a period as January, 1794, he had expressed this sentiment in his reply to an address from the Masons of Canada, when he said: "You may trust that my utmost efforts shall be exerted, that the much-wished for union of the whole Fraternity of Masons may be effected."*

(* Freemasons' Magazine, vol. iii., July, 1794, p. 14 been made participant in their mysteries.)

On December 1, 1813, the Duke of Kent was installed as Grand Master of the "Ancients." On this occasion the Duke of Sussex, as Grand Master of the Constitutional Grand Lodge, was present with several of his Grand Officers. To qualify them for visitation they were previously "made Ancient Masons in the Grand Master's Lodge No. 1, in a room adjoining." The transactions on that day must be considered as a conclusive settlement of the vexed question of legality. The fact that the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of "Moderns" was present, and by his presence sanctioned the installation of the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of "Ancients," and that to qualify himself to do so had submitted to an initiation in the system of the "Ancients," forever precluded the "Moderns" from making a charge of irregularity against their rivals; these in turn were equally precluded from denying the Masonic legality of a body whose Grand Master had and had taken a part in the solemn ceremonies of installation of their presiding officer. Indeed, the union had already been virtually accomplished, and all that was now needed was its formal ratification by the two Grand Lodges.

On September fist the Duke of Kent, not then Grand Master, had been associated by the Grand Lodge of Ancients" with Deputy Grand Master Harper and Past Deputy Grand Masters Perry and Agar as a Committee to take the preliminary steps for effecting a union of the two fraternities. This Committee had held several conferences with the Duke of Sussex, who was assisted by three of his Grand Officers, Bro. Wright, Provincial Grand Master of the Ionian Isles, and Past Grand Wardens Tegart and Deans.

The joint committee had drawn up articles of union between the two Grand Lodges which had been signed and sealed in duplicate at Kensington Palace, the residence of the Duke of Sussex. Early in December, at the Quarterly Communications, these Articles had been submitted to both Grand Lodges and solemnly ratified, and the following Festival of St. John the Evangelist had been appointed for the Assembly of the Grand Lodges in joint communication to carry out the provisions which had been agreed upon. Each Grand Master had appointed "nine worthy and expert Master Masons or Past Masters," to whom were assigned by the Articles of Union the following important duties.

Under the Warrant of their respective Grand Lodges they were to meet together in some convenient central place in London, when each party having opened a lodge according to the peculiar forms and regulations of each, they were reciprocally and mutually to give and receive the obligations of both Fraternities, deciding by lot which should take priority in the giving and receiving. They were then to hold a lodge under dispensation, to be styled the "Lodge of Reconciliation," or they were then to visit the different lodges and having obligated their officers and members to instruct them in the forms of both the systems. *

(* See "Articles of Union," Article V. 27, 1813)

These and other preliminary arrangements having been complied with, the two Fraternities, with their Grand Lodges, met on December at Freemasons' Hall, which had been fitted up agreeably to a previously devised plan, and the whole house tiled from the outer porch. *

(* This account is condensed from Oliver's edition of Preston, pp. 368-373.)

On each side of the room the Masters, Wardens, and Past Masters of the several lodges were arranged on benches, and so disposed that the two Fraternities were completely intermixed. The two Grand Lodges were opened in two adjoining rooms, each according to its peculiar ceremonies, and a Grand Procession being formed, the two bodies entered side by side the Hall of Assembly, the Duke of Sussex closing one procession and the Duke of Kent the other. On entering the Hall the procession advanced to the Throne, and opening inward the two Grand Masters proceeded up the center and took seats on each side of the Throne.

The Past Grand officers and illustrious visitors occupied the platform, and the two Senior Grand Wardens, the two Junior Grand Wardens, and the two Grand Secretaries and Grand Treasurers occupied the usual stations in the West, South, and North. Silence having been proclaimed, the services began with prayer, offered up by Rev. Dr. Barry, the Grand Chaplain of the "Ancients." After the act of union had been read by Sir George Naylor, Grand Director of Ceremonies, the following proclamation was made by the Rev. Dr. Coghlan, Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of "Moderns." "Hear ye: This is the Act of Union engrossed in confirmation of Articles solemnly concluded between the two Grand Lodges of Free and Accepted Masons of England, signed, sealed, and ratified by the two Grand Lodges respectively: by which they are hereafter and forever to be known and acknowledged by the style and title of THE UNITED GRAND LODGE OF ANCIENT FREEMASONS OF ENGLAND. How say you, Brothers, Representatives of the two Fraternities? Do you accept of, ratify and confirm the same?" To which the whole Assembly answered: "We do accept, ratify any confirm the same."

The "Order of Proceedings" to be observed on the occasion are given by Bro. Hughan in his Memorials. They do not essentially differ from the details by Preston, and the latter has the advantage of being in the past tense. The Grand Chaplain then said: "And may the Great Architect of the Universe make the Union perpetual." To which all the Brethren replied: "so mote it be." The Articles of Union were then signed by the two Grand Masters and six Commissioners, and the seals of both Grand Lodges were affixed to the same. Proclamation was then made by Rev. Dr. Barry in the following words: "Be it known to all men that the Act of Union between the two Grand Lodges of Free and Accepted Masons of England is solemnly signed, sealed, ratified and confirmed, and the two Fraternities are one, to be henceforth known and acknowledged by the style and title of "The United Grand Lodge of Ancient Freemasons of England: and may the Great Architect of the Universe make their Union perpetual." The Brethren all responded "Amen," and a symphony was played by the Grand Organist, Bro. Samuel Wesley.

The Ark of the Masonic Covenant, which had been placed in front of the Throne, was then approached by the two Grand Masters, their Deputies and Wardens. The Grand Masters standing in the East, the Deputies on their right and left, and the Grand Wardens in the West and South, the square, level, plumb, and mallet were successively delivered to the Deputy Grand Masters and by them presented to the two Grand Masters, who having applied the square, level, and plumb to the Ark and struck it thrice with the mallet, they made the following invocation: "May the Great Architect of the Universe enable us to uphold the grand edifice of union, of which this Ark of the Covenant is the symbol, which shall contain within it the instruments of our brotherly love and bear upon it the Holy Bible, Square, and Compasses, as the light of our faith and the rule of our works. May He dispose our hearts to make it perpetual." And the Brethren all responded, "so mote it be."

The Masonic elements of consecration, corn, wine, and oil, were then poured upon the Ark, according to the ancient Rite, by the two Grand Masters, accompanying the act with the usual invocation. This constituted the impressive ceremony by which the union of the hitherto rival Fraternities was consecrated. The Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland were not represented, in consequence of the shortness of the notice, but letters of congratulation were received from each, with copies of resolutions which had been passed by both. As the two Fraternities differed in their forms and ceremonies, it was necessary that some compromise should be affected so that a universal system might be adopted by the united Grand Lodge. The determination of what that system of forms should be, had been entrusted to the "Lodge of Reconciliation" as its most important, and doubtless its most difficult duty. This duty was accomplished in the following manner: After the ceremonies of ratification had been performed, the "Lodge of Reconciliation" retired to another apartment, accompanied by the Count Lagardje, Past Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Sweden, Dr. Van Hess of the Grand Lodge of Hamburgh, and other distinguished Masons, when the forms and ceremonies which had been previously determined upon by the "Lodge of Reconciliation" were made known.

On their return to the Assembly-room, Grand Master the Count Lagardje announced that the forms which had been settled and agreed on by the "Lodge of Reconciliation" were "pure and correct." They were then recognized as the only forms to be thereafter observed and practiced in the United Grand Lodge and by the lodges under its obedience. The recognized obligation was then administered by the Rev. Dr. Hemming, standing before the Bible, Square and Compasses lying on the Ark, and repeated by all the Brethren, who solemnly vowed, with joined hands, to abide by the same. The next step was the organization of the new Grand Lodge by the election of its officers. For this purpose the Officers of the two Grand Lodges divested themselves of their insignia, and the chairs were taken by Past Grand Officers of the two Fraternities. The Duke of Kent addressed the assembly.

He stated that the great object, for which he had taken upon himself the office of Grand Master of the Ancient Fraternity, as declared at the time, was to facilitate the accomplishment of the union. He then nominated the Duke of Sussex as Grand Master of the united Grand Lodge. The Duke of Sussex was unanimously elected and placed upon the throne by the Duke of Kent and Count Lagardje.

The Grand Master nominated the Grand officers for the year ensuing. The Grand Lodge was then called to refreshment, and on returning, some necessary business having been transacted, the Grand lodge was closed in ample form. It is impossible to arrive at any absolutely accurate knowledge of the numerical strength of the two Fraternities at the time of the union. This arises from the fact that the lists made by both Grand Lodges at that date contained the names of many lodges which were either extinct or had passed over to other jurisdiction. Thus in the list of the "Moderns" ending in 1812, as given by Bro. Gould in his Four Old Lodges, the number of lodges runs up to 640; but of these many, as the list commences with the year 1721, must have long ceased to exist, and several are recorded as being in Germany and France, where the English Grand Lodge had no longer any jurisdiction, and nineteen are credited to the United States of America, where independent Grand Lodges had long been established. In the same inaccurate way we find that the list of the "Ancients," published in 1813 in their Ahiman Rezon, records 354 lodges as being under its jurisdiction. Many of these, however, had passed from its jurisdiction or must have ceased to exist.

Ten lodges, for instance, are credited to the United States, and some to other foreign countries where the Grand Lodge no longer possessed any authority. We may, however, estimate the comparative strength of the two Fraternities at the union by the registry of lodges made at that time, when the members were assigned by lot. In that list, which is given by Bro. Hughan in his Memorials of the Union, 636 lodges are enrolled. Of these, 385 were "Moderns," and 251 "Ancients." If, however, it be considered that the former had been in existence for ninety-six years and the latter only sixty, * it will be seen that the relative proportion of successful growth was greatly in favor of the "Ancients."

(* The Grand Lodge of "Moderns" was instituted in 1717, that of the "Ancients" its 1753. The former commenced with four Lodges, the latter with seven.)

Notwithstanding that the Constitutional Grand Lodge had secured the adhesion of a much higher class in the social element, that from the fifth year of its existence it had been presided over by an uninterrupted succession of Peers of the realm, and that at the very period of the Union its Grand Master was a son of the reigning monarch, and that its acknowledged Patron was the heir apparent of the Crown, * the Atholl Grand Lodge without these advantages enjoyed a much greater share of popularity among the masses of the Craft. This popularity can properly be attributed only to that innovation on the accepted ritual of the Constitutional Grand Lodge which produced the secession.

(* Whatever influence these circumstances must have naturally exerted in a monarchy, its importance will hardly be appreciated at its full value by the citizens of a republic. Anderson says that at first the Freemasons were content "to choose a Grand Master from among themselves, till they should have the honor of a Noble Brother at their head.")

The dismemberment of the Master's degree and the fabrication of a Fourth degree called the Royal Arch, gave to the seceders a prestige not-enjoyed by their rivals. Candidates eagerly repaired for initiation to the body, which promised them a participation in a larger amount of mystical knowledge. The "Moderns" soon became aware of this fact, and it was not very long before, notwithstanding their outcry against innovation, they adopted the same degree or at least quietly suffered its intrusion into their own system. A Royal Arch Chapter and then a Grand Chapter was established by some "Moderns" about the year 1766, and though it was not actually countenanced, it was not denounced by the Constitutional Grand Lodge. It has been supposed by some writers that the "Ancients" were sustained by and indeed represented the Operative element of the Craft in opposition to the purely Speculative, which was represented by the "Moderns." But of this there is no satisfactory historical evidence.

In 1723 the Operative Freemasons who, in 1717, had taken a part in the organization of the Grand Lodge, had been laid upon the shelf by that body, nor is it likely that at a long interval they would renew the contest in which they had been so signally defeated. The excellent results which followed from the union of the two Fraternities, in the restoration of peace and concord, and the consequent strengthening of the Institution, have preserved the method in which this union was effected from adverse criticism. The union was a compromise, and in all compromises there are necessarily mutual concessions. But it is a question whether these concessions by both parties did not involve the sacrifice of certain principles which both had hitherto deemed important.

The "Articles of Union" which constituted the ground work on which the consolidation of the two Grand Lodges was framed, are twenty- one in number. Most of these relate to local regulations made necessary by the circumstances. Only three - the second, third, and fourth - have reference to the concessions made in the ritual and in the system of Speculative Freemasonry. These articles are in the following words:

II It is declared and pronounced that pure Ancient Masonry consists of three degrees, and no more, viz.: those of the Entered Apprentice, the Fellow-Craft, and the Master Mason, including the Supreme Order of the Holy Royal Arch. But this article is not intended to prevent any lodge or Chapter from holding a meeting in any of the degrees of the Orders of Chivalry, according to the Constitutions of the said Orders.

III There shall be the most perfect unity of obligation, of discipline, of working the lodges, of making, passing and raising, instructing and clothing the Brothers; so that one pure, unsullied system, according to the genuine landmarks, laws and traditions of the Craft shall be maintained, upheld and practiced, throughout the Masonic World, from the day and date of the said union until time shall be no more.

IV To prevent all controversy or dispute as to the genuine and pure obligations, forms, rules and ancient traditions of Masonry and further to unite and bind the whole Fraternity of Masons in one indissoluble bond, it is agreed that the obligations and forms that have, from time immemorial, been established, used and practiced in the Craft, shall be recognized, accepted and taken, by the members of both Fraternities, as the pure and genuine obligations and forms by which the incorporated Grand Lodge of England, and its dependent lodges in every part of the World shall be bound: and for the purpose of receiving and communicating due light and settling this uniformity of regulation and instruction (and particularly in matters which can neither be expressed nor described in writing), it is further agreed that brotherly application be made to the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland, to authorize, delegate and appoint, any two or more of their enlightened members, to be present at the Grand Assembly on the solemn occasion of uniting the said Fraternities; and that the respective Grand Masters, Grand Officers, Masters, Past Masters, Wardens and Brothers, then and there present, shall solemnly engage to abide by the true forms and obligations (particularly in matters which can neither be described nor written), in the presence of the said Members of the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland, that it may be declared, recognized and known, that they are all bound by the same solemn pledge, and work under the same law." An examination of these three articles will clearly demonstrate that both Grand Lodges made concessions to each other, which involved the sacrifice in turn of the very points of ritualism on which each had, for nearly three-fourths of a century, maintained its right to supremacy.

In Article II the Royal Arch is recognized as an inherent portion of "Ancient Craft Masonry." Yet when about 1738 the Freemasons began soon after to call themselves "Ancient Masons," their lodges were erased from the roll and their members expelled because they had practiced this same degree. Nothing then and long after so much incensed the "Moderns" as this innovation, as they called it, of a new degree. "Our society," said their Grand Secretary, Spencer, "is neither Arch, Royal Arch, nor Ancient." On this point the "Ancients" certainly achieved a victory. The attempted qualification in the declaration that Ancient Craft Masonry consisted of only three degrees, which was a concession to preserve the consistency of the "Moderns," was without meaning, since it was immediately followed by the admission that there was a Fourth degree.

In Article III it is declared that the methods of initiation and instruction should be according to the genuine landmarks, laws, and traditions of the Craft. But the United Grand Lodge adopted the changes in the words of the degrees, which had been introduced by the Constitutional Grand Lodge, to prevent the intrusion of the seceders into the regular lodges. The preservation of these words and certain other changes was certainly not in accordance with the "landmarks," supposing these landmarks to be the usages of the Craft, adopted at or soon after the organization in the year 1717. The result has been to create in these respects a difference between the Continental and the English-speaking Masons, the former adhering to the original forms. *

(* The Gordian knot presented by the change in the Master's Word made by the "Moderns" was cut, by the adoption or sanction of both words, and they are still so used in English lodges. In the United States of America the word of the "Moderns" has long since passed out of the memory and the knowledge of the Craft, and the original word of Desaguliers and his collaborators alone is used.)

This would be a victory for the "Moderns," but not one of so much importance as that achieved by the "Ancients" in the recognition of the Royal Arch degree. The assertion in Article IV that the obligations and forms which were agreed upon at the Union were those which " from time immemorial have been established, used and practiced by the Craft," is thus found to be merely a "facon de parler" too much in vogue even at the present day, when referring to the antiquity of usages. The "time immemorial" thus vaunted, dwindles down, in fact, to the date of the organization of the "Lodge of Reconciliation," to which the regulation of these "obligations and forms" had been entrusted. The confirmation of this new system by the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland, which was provided for in the same article, was not carried into effect, for no representatives of these bodies were present. The Grand Lodge of Ireland, it may be presumed, as the Irish Masons had long favored the high degrees, would give its implicit assent to the First Article in which even the degrees of Chivalry were recognized by sufferance. But the Grand Lodge of Scotland had always contended that Ancient Craft Masonry, or as it was styled, "St. John's Masonry," consisted of only three degrees. *

(* "The Constitution of the Grand Lodge of Scotland.")

In 1800 it had prohibited its lodges from holding any meetings above the degree of Master Mason under penalty of the forfeiture of their charter. *

(* Lyon "History of the Lodge of Edinburgh," p. 293.)

And only four years after the United Grand Lodge of England had recognized the Royal Arch as a part of Ancient Craft Masonry, the Grand Lodge of Scotland resolved that no person holding official position in a Royal Arch Chapter should be admitted to membership in the Grand Lodge.*

(* Ibid., p. 295.)

But in fact we must look for a defense of these compromises by the two Grand Lodges of England to the peculiar and threatening condition in which they were placed. Without compromise and mutual concession of many things the maintenance of which both had once deemed essential, no union could have been affected, and without a Union the success and permanency of one, if not of both bodies, would be seriously endangered. It must therefore be acknowledged, notwithstanding any criticism on the methods pursued, which were demanded by the claims of historic truth that, here at least, the generally to be condemned maxim of the Jesuits, which justifies the means by the end accomplished, may find some excuse. Looking back, at this distant period, upon the history of the Craft from the middle of the 18th to the beginning of the 19th century, when the passions and prejudices which distracted the Fraternity have ceased to exist, we recognize the fact that the rivalry of the two factions was destined to be ultimately of advantage to the institution. Oliver, speaking of this and other secessions which occurred in the 18th century, says:

"I am persuaded that these schisms, by their general operation, rather accelerated than retarded the outward progress of Masonry; for at the precise time when they were most active, we find the science spreading over all the European nations and exciting the attention of all ranks and classes of mankind." *

(* "Historical Landmarks," ii., p. 313)

Antagonism, in the long run, leads to development. The protracted struggle which finally terminated in the recognition of the Royal Arch, not only gave to the Master's degree a completeness which it had before wanted, but by the establishment of a new ritual, which more nearly approached perfection than the old one, tended to develop a more philosophic spirit in the system of Speculative Freemasonry. Of this fact ample evidence is given in the lectures of Dr. Hemming which were adopted by the United Grand Lodge, and which are much more intellectual than any that preceded them. *

(* It is to Hemming that we are indebted for that sentence which defines Freemasonry as "a system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols.)

The old and comparatively meager ritual of Desaguliers, and Anderson, with the slight additions of Martin Clare, of Dunckerley and Preston, presenting only an imperfect system, would, but for the Union, have been continued to the present day, if Speculative Freemasonry had not long before died of inanition.

"It must be confessed, however, that he made some omissions and alterations in the old lectures, which had better been spared. But "nihil est ab omni parte beatum." The rivalry of the two bodies gave an active expansion of that spirit of charity which is incidental to every Brotherhood. Neither could afford to be less kindly disposed to the distressed of their fold than the other. And this spirit of charity, thus developed during the struggle, was vastly strengthened and made of more practical utility by the consolidation of the Fraternity. But the most important advantage derived from the long antagonism was the development of the science of symbolism, which has given to the Institution a just claim to the title of Speculative Masonry, which it had long before assumed, and elevated it to the rank of a system of moral philosophy. Now, for the first time since the disseverance, in the beginning of the 18th century, of the Speculative from the Operative element was it announced as the accepted definition of Freemasonry that it was "a system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols."

It was Hemming who proclaimed this sublime definition in the Union lectures which he framed and which has awakened the thoughts and directed the Speculations of all Masonic scholars who have written since his day. There are, it is true, some few defects in the lectures of Dr. Hemming, but they are on the whole superior to those of Preston - superior because more philosophic and more symbolical. Preston's system was the germ, Hemming's the fruit, and the fruit always is better than the germ.

In conclusion it may be said that the rivalry of the two factions was productive of this good, that it stimulated each to seek for a higher plane of action and of character; and the union which finally took place, no matter what was the actuating motive, was the most fortunate event that had ever occurred in the Masonic Society, since it developed a higher plane for its action, and secured it a long and prosperous continuance of life which one or both of the antagonizing parties must have long since forfeited had there been no Union effected. Peace, harmony, and concord firmly established a consolidation of interests - a more enlarged practice of charity and brotherly relief, and a more elevated character of Speculative Freemasonry - these were the results of the Union in 1813 in England, which was speedily imitated in all other countries where the rivalry had previously existed.

Back to The History of Freemasonry [ Next ] [ Previous ]