and collar edged with blue. (See chapter on "Clothing
and Regalia," in _Things a Freemason Ought to Know_, by J.W. Crowe.) In
1727 the officers of all private--or as we would say,
subordinate--Lodges were ordered to wear "the jewels of Masonry hanging
to a white apron." In 1731 we find the Grand Master wearing gold or
gilt jewels pendant to blue ribbons about the neck, and a white leather
apron _lined_ with blue silk.
[119] This is clear from the book of _Constitutions_ of 1723, which is
said to be "for the use of Lodges in London." Then follow the names of
the Masters and Wardens of twenty Lodges, all in London. There was no
thought at the time of imposing the authority of the Grand Lodge upon
the country in general, much less upon the world. Its growth we shall
sketch later. For an excellent article on "The Foundation of Modern
Masonry," by G.W. Speth, giving details of the organization of the
Grand Lodge and its changes, see _A. Q. C._, ii, 86. If an elaborate
account is wanted, it may be found in Gould's _History of Masonry_,
vol. iii.
[120] _History of the Four Lodges_, by R.F. Gould. Apparently the Goose
and Gridiron Lodge--No. 1--is the only one of the four now in
existence. After various changes of name it is now the Lodge of
Antiquity, No. 2.
[121] _Royal Masons_, by G.W. Speth.
[122] From a meager sketch of Dr. Anderson in the _Gentlemen's
Magazine_, 1783, we learn that he was a native of Scotland--the place
of his birth is not given--and that for many years he was minister of
the Scots Presbyterian Church in Swallow Street, Piccadilly, and well
known to the folk of that faith in London--called "Bishop" Anderson by
his friends. He married the widow of an army officer, who bore him a
son and a daughter. Although a learned man--compiler of a book of
_Royal Genealogies_, which seems to have been his hobby--he was
somewhat imprudent in business, having lost most of his property in
1720. Whether he was a Mason before coming to London is unknown, but he
took a great part in the work of the Grand Lodge, entering it,
apparently, in 1721. Toward the close of his life he suffered many
misfortunes, but of what description we are not told. He died in 1739.
Perhaps his learning was exaggerated by his Masonic eulogists, but he
was a noble man and manifestly a useful one (Gould's _History of
Masonry_, vol. iii).
[123] Having emphasized this point so repeatedly, the writer feels it
just to himself to state his own
|