Originally there were six manuscripts elf the Old Constitutions bearing this title, because they were deposited in the Archives of the Grand Lodge of All England, whose seat was at the City of York. But the manuscript No. 3 became missing, although it is mentioned in the inventory made at York in 1779. Nos. 2, 4, and 5 came into possession of the York Lodge. Brother Hughan discovered Nos. 2 and 6 in the Archives of the “Grand Lodge of England”, at London. The dates of these manuscripts, which do not correspond with the number of their titles, are as follows: No. l has the date of 1600; No. 2, 1704; No.3, 1630; No. 4,1693; No. 5, is undated, but is supposed to be about 1670, and No. 6 also is undated, but is considered to be about 1680.
Of these manuscripts all but No. 3 have been published by the late Brother W. J. Hughan in his Ancient York Masonic Rolls, 1894. Brother Hughan deems No. 4 of some importance because it contains the following sentence:
“The one of the elders taking the Booke, and that See or shee that is to be made mason shall lay their hands thereon, and the charge shall bee given.” This, he thought, affords some presumption that women were admitted as members of the old Masonic Gilds, although he admits that we possess no other evidence confirmatory or this theory.
The truth is, that the sentence was a translation of the same clause written in other Old constitutions in Latin. In the York Manuscript, No. 1, the sentence is thus: “Tunc unus ex senioribus teneat librum et ille vel illi,” etc., that is, “he or they.” The writer of No. 4 copied, most probably, from No. 1, and his translation of “hee or sheen from “ille vel illi,” instead of “he or they,” was either the result of ignorance in mistaking illi, they, for illa, she, or of carelessness in writing shee for they.
It is evident that the charges thus to be sworn to, and which immediately follow, were of such a nature as made most of them physically impossible for women to perform; nor are females alluded to in any other of the manuscripts. All Freemasons there are Fellows, and are so to be addressed. There are two other York Manuscripts of the Operative Masons, which have been published in the Fabric Rolls of York Minster, an invaluable work, edited by the Rev. James Raine, and issued under the patronage and at the expense of the Surtees Society.
Yorkshire is notably rich in the old Charges, as besides those which formerly belonged to the York Grand Lodge, and are in possession of a modern Lodge there, there are others in private hands, and in the “West Yorkshire, Masonic Library.” It is stated in a Manifesto of the Lodge of Antiquity (1778) that there was one old MS. in the hands of Mr. Wilson, of Broomhead, near Sheffield, written in the reign of Henry VIII., which is now missing, and there appears to have been one dated 1560. The Lodge of Hope, Bradford, has a copy of circa 1680. It forms no part of our plan to give an account of these old MSS., but students of them are greatly indebted to the late Brother Thomas W. Tew, P.G.M. of the West Riding, who had eight of these, in possession of his Provincial Library, printed and distributed at his sole cost. Amongst them are the “Thomes W. Tew MS.” circa 1680; the “Waistell MS.,” circa 1693; and the “Clapham MS.,” circa 1700. The Rolls in possession of the Lodge at York have also been printed by subscription; one of these, dated 1704, is headed with the same Anagram on “Masonrie” as that of 1600, but addressed by Robert Preston to Daniel Moult. It also appears in a Newcastle Roll, addressed by Richard Stead to his friend Joseph Claughton.
There are other documents at York, but none older than the reign of Anne, 1702-14. It seems that George Benson was President in 1705, and that he was followed by other gentlemen at each annual election. We learn also from an old copy of the Charges which has passed into the possession of the Grand Lodge of Canada, that a “Private Lodge” was held at Scarborough, Yorkshire, 10th July, 1705, with Wm. Thompson, Esq., as President, when six members were received whose names will be found in the facsimiles executed for the West Yorkshire Masons. Last century the Grand Lodge of All England at York had minutes from the year 1704, but they are not now to be found, they have, however, at the York Lodge some later parchment Rolls, which to some extent take the place of minutes. The probability is that such information as we have prior to 1726 belongs to the Operative Guild.
On the 19th March, 1712, we read that several members were “sworne and admitted into the honourable Society and fraternity of free Masons by George Bowes, Esq., Deputy President.” In 1713 the Ancient Lodge held a meeting at Bradford, “when 18 gentlemen of the first families were made Free-Masons.” Meetings were held each succeeding year at York, those on St. John the Baptist’s Day, in June, being termed a “General Lodge on St. John’s Day,” whilst the others are designated “Private Lodges.” This was four years before any movement was made in London, and the meetings at Scarborough and at Bradford are in agreement with the ancient Constitutions which state that the Masons were to hold an Assembly “in what place they would”; and it seems very apparent that where the term “General Lodge” is used, as distinct from a “Private Lodge,” it is the tradition of the ancient Assembly continued.
Again in 1716 it is minuted on this parchment roll as follows: “At St. John’s Lodge in Christmas, 1716. At the house of Mr. James Boreham, situate Stone-gate in York, being a general Lodge held then by the Honoble. Society and Company of Free-Masons in the City of York, John Turner, Esqre., was sworne and admitted into the Said Honoble. Society and Fraternity of Free-Masons.” “Charles Fairfax, Esqre., Dep. President.” Lists of the Grand Masters are found in any Modern Masonic Cyclopaedia, but Brother Whitehead recently discovered in an old Armorial MS. that the name of Sir Wm. Milner, Bart., 1728, has been omitted, “being the 798th Successor from Edwin the Great,” apparently claiming an annual election of Grand Masters from the year 930.
William Preston (1742-1818)
Bro. William Preston discovered a vast body of traditional and historical lore in the old documents of the Craft, and this is his account in the Illustrations of Masonry concerning the Premier Grand Assembly at York 1705.
A record of the society, written in the reign of Edward IV., said to have been in the possession of the famous Elias Ashmole, founder of the museum at Oxford, and which was unfortunately destroyed, with other papers on the subject of Masonry, at the Revolution, gives the following account of the state of Masonry at this period:
‘That though the ancient records of the Brotherhood in England were many of them destroyed, or lost, in the wars of the Saxons and Danes, yet King Athelstane (the grandson of King Alfrede the Great, a mighty architect), the first anointed King of England, and who translated the Holy Bible into the Saxon tongue (A.D. 930), when he had brought the land into rest and peace, built many great works, and encouraged many Masons from France, who were appointed overseers thereof, and brought with them the charges and regulations of the lodges, preserved since the Roman times; who also prevailed with the king to improve the Constitution of the English lodges according to the foreign model, and to increase the wages of working Masons.
That the said King’s brother, Prince Edwin, being taught Masonry, and taking upon him the charges of a Master Mason, for the love he had to the said Craft, and the honourable principles whereon it is grounded, purchased a free charter of King Athelstane for the Masons having a correction among themselves (as it was anciently expressed), or a freedom and power to regulate themselves, to amend what might happen amiss, and to hold a yearly communication and general assembly.
That, accordingly, prince Edwin summoned all the Masons in the realm to meet him in a congregation at York, who came and composed a general Lodge, of which he was Grand Master; and having brought with them all the writings and records extant, some in Greek, some in Latin, some in French, and other languages, from the contents thereof that assembly did frame the constitutions and charges of an English Lodge, made a law to preserve and observe the same in all time coming, and ordained good pay for working Masons,’ &c.
From this æra we date the re-establishment of Freemasonry in England. There is at present 1779 a Grand Lodge of Masons in the city of York, who trace their existence from this period. By virtue of Edwin’s charter, it is said, all the Masons in the realm were convened at a general assembly in that city, where they established a general or Grand Lodge for their future government. Under the patronage and jurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, it is alleged, the Fraternity considerably increased; and kings, princes, and other eminent persons, who had been initiated into Masonry, paid due allegiance to that Grand Assembly. But as the events of the times were various and fluctuating, that assembly was more or less respectable; and in proportion as Masonry obtained encouragement, its influence was more or less extensive. The appellation of Ancient York Masons is well known in Ireland and Scotland; and the universal tradition is, that the brethren is that the appellation originated at Auldby, near York. This carries with it some marks of confirmation; for Auldby was the seat of Edwin.
There is every reason to believe that York was deemed the original seat of Masonic government in this country; no other place has pretended to claim it; and the whole Fraternity have, at various times universally acknowledged allegiance to the authority established there: but whether the present association in that city be entitled to the allegiance, is a subject of inquiry which is not my province to investigate. To that Assembly recourse must be had for information. Thus much however, is certain, that if a General Assembly or Grand Lodge was held there (of which there is little doubt, if we can only rely on our records and constitutions, as it is said to have existed there in Queen Elizabeth’s time), there is no evidence of its regular removal to any other place in the kingdom; and upon that ground the brethren at York may probably claim the privilege of associating in that character. A number of respectable meetings of the Fraternity appear to have been convened at sundry times in different parts of England; but we cannot find an instance on record, till a very late period, of a general meeting (so called) being held in any other place beside York.
To understand this matter more clearly, it may be necessary to advert to the original institution of that assembly called a General or Grand Lodge. It was not then restricted, as it is now understood to be, to the Masters and Wardens of private lodges, with the Grand Master and Wardens at their head; it consisted of as many of the Fraternity at large as, being within a convenient distance, could attend, once or twice a year, under the auspices of one general head, who was elected and installed at one of these meetings; and who, for the time being, received homage as the sole governor of the whole body. The idea of confining the privileges of Masonry, by a warrant of constitution, to certain individuals convened on certain days at certain places, had then no existence. There was but one family among Masons, and every Mason was a branch of that family. It is true the privileges of the different degrees of the Order always centred in certain members of the Fraternity: who, according to their advancement in the Art, were authorised by the ancient charges to assemble in, hold, and rule lodges, at their will and discretion, in such places as best suited their convenience, and when so assembled, to receive pupils and deliver instructions in the Art; but all the tribute from these individuals, separately and collectively, rested ultimately in the General Assembly; to which all the Fraternity might repair, and to whose award all were bound to pay submission.
As the constitutions of the English lodges are derived from this General Assembly at York; as all Masons are bound to observe and preserve those in all time coming; and as there is no satisfactory proof that such assembly was ever regularly removed by the resolution of its members, but that, on the contrary, the Fraternity still continue to meet in that city under this appellation, it may remain a doubt, whether, while these constitutions exist as the standard of Masonic conduct, that assembly may not justly claim the allegiance to which their original authority entitled them; and whether any other convention of Masons, however great their consequence may be, can, consistent with those constitutions, withdraw their allegiance from that assembly, or set aside an authority, to which not only antiquity, but the concurrent approbation of Masons for ages under the most solemn engagements, have repeatedly given a sanction.
It is to be regretted, that the idea of superiority, and a wish to acquire absolute dominion, should occasion a contest among Masons. Were the principles of the Order better understood, and more generally practiced, the intention of the institution would be more fully answered. Every Mason would consider his brother as his fellow, and he who, by generous and virtuous actions, could best promote the happiness of society, would always be most likely to receive homage and respect.
