Free, denotes the rule or system of mysteries and secrets peculiar to the society of free and accepted masons.

One of the first objects of man, in a rude state of being, is to screen himself and his family from the heat of the tropical sun, from the inclemency of the polar regions, or from the sudden changes of more temperate climates. If he has arrived at such a degree of improvement as to live under the dominion of a superior, and under the influence Masonry, Free.

Architecture is accordingly entitled to a very high position amongst the other arts. It is itself the parent of many separate professions, and requires a combination of talent and an extent of knowledge for which few other professions have, for the most part, any occasion. There is some foundation in the very nature of architecture for those extraordinary privileges to which masons have always laid claim, and which they have almost always possessed; and there appears also to be some foundation for that ancient and respectable order of free masons whose history we are now to investigate, without, at the same time, revealing those ceremonial observances which are only known to the brethren of the order.

Free masonry is an ancient and respectable institution, embracing individuals of every nation, religion, and condition in life. In order to confirm this institution, and attain the ends for which it was originally formed, every candidate comes under a solemn engagement never to divulge the mysteries of the order, nor communicate to the uninitiated the secrets with which he may be intrusted, and the proceedings and plans with which the fraternity may be engaged. After the candidate has undergone the necessary ceremonies, and received the usual instructions, appropriate words and significant signs are imparted to him, that he may be enabled to distinguish his brethren of the order from the uninitiated vulgar, and convince others that he is entitled to the privileges of a brother, should he be visited by distress or by want in a distant land. If the newly-admitted member be found qualified for a higher degree, he is promoted, after due intervals of probation, till he has received that masonic knowledge which enables him to hold the highest offices of trust to which the fraternity can raise its members. At regular and appointed seasons convivial meetings of the fraternity are held, in lodges constructed for this purpose, when all distinctions of rank and differences in religion and politics are forgotten. Everyone strives to give happiness to his brother; and all seem to recollect, for once, that they are sprung from the same origin, possessed of the same nature, and destined for the same end. Respecting the origin and tendency of this institution, opinions differ. Whilst a certain class of men have represented it as coeval with the world, others have maintained that it was the invention of English Jesuits, to promote the views of that intriguing and dangerous association. Some have laboured to prove that free masonry arose during the crusades; that it was a secondary order of chivalry; that its forms originated from that warlike institution, and were adapted to the peaceful, orderly habits of scientific men. Mr Clinch (Anthologia Hibernica, 1794) has attempted, with considerable ingenuity and learning, to deduce its origin from the institutions of Pythagoras. M. Barret (Memoirs of Jacobinism, vol. ii.) supposes it to be a continuation of the society of knights templars; whilst others have imputed its origin to secret associations, averse to the interests of true government, and pursuing the chimerical project of levelling the distinctions of society, and freeing the human mind from the obligations of religion and morality. But without adopting any of these untenable opinions, we may at all events establish its claim to a comparatively early origin.

The desire for pomp and ceremony displayed at an early period by the Roman Catholic priests in the exercise of their religion, introduced a corresponding desire for splendid monasteries and magnificent cathedrals. In order to encourage the profession of architecture, the pontiffs of Rome, and the other potentates of Europe, conferred on the fraternity of free masons the most important privileges, and allowed them to be governed by laws, customs, and ceremonies peculiar to themselves. The association was composed of men of all nations, of Italian, Greek, French, German, and Flemish artists, who were denominated free masons, and who, travelling from one country to another, erected those elegant churches and cathedrals which men still admire. The government of this association was remarkably regular. Its members lived in a camp of huts, reared beside the building in which they were employed. A surveyor or master presided over and directed the whole. Every tenth man was called a warden, and overlooked those who were under his charge; and such artificers as were not members of this fraternity were prohibited from engaging in those buildings which free masons alone had a title to rear (Wren's Parentalia, p. 306, 307). Henry's Hist. of Great Brit., vol. viii., p. 273). In 1140 A.D., wherever the Roman Catholic religion was taught, the meetings of free masons were sanctioned and patronized. That free masonry was first introduced into Scotland by those architects who built the abbey of Kilwinning, is manifest, not only from authentic documents, by means of which the existence of the Kilwinning lodge has been traced back as far as the end of the fifteenth century, but also by other weighty collateral arguments. (Stat. Ac. of Scot., vol. xi.) When we consider that the association of free masons monopolized the building of religious structures in Christendom, we are warranted to conclude that those numerous and elegant ruins which still adorn various parts of Scotland were erected by foreign masons, who introduced into this island the customs of their order.

It was probably about this time, also, that free masonry was introduced into England; but whether the English received it from the Scottish masons at Kilwinning, or from other brethren who had arrived from the continent, there are now no means of determining. The masonic fraternity in England, however, maintain that St Alban, the martyr, who flourished about the end of the third century, was the first who brought masonry to Britain; that the brethren received a charter from King Athelstan, and that his brother Edwin summoned to meet at York all the lodges which formed the first grand lodge of England in A.D. 926. But these assertions are inconsistent with several historical events which rest upon indubitable evidence. (Plot's Nat. Hist. of Staffordshire, chap. viii.)

After the establishment of the Kilwinning and the York lodges, the principles of free masonry were rapidly diffused throughout both kingdoms, and several lodges were erected in different parts of the island. As all these derived their existence and authority from the two mother lodges, they were likewise under their jurisdiction and control; and when any differences arose connected with the art of building, they were referred to the general meetings of the fraternity held at Kilwinning and at York. In this manner did free masonry flourish for a while in Britain after it was completely abolished in every other part of the world. But even here it was doomed to suffer a long and serious decline, and to experience successive alternations of advancement and decay. And although, during several centuries after the importation of free masonry into Britain, the brethren of the order held their public assemblies, and were sometimes prohibited from meeting by the interference of the legislature, it can scarcely be said to have attracted general attention till the beginning of the seventeenth century. There being now no scarcity of architects, the very reason which prompted the church to protect the fraternity ceased to exist; they therefore withdrew from them that patronage which they had spontaneously proffered, and denied them even the liberty of holding their secret assemblies. But these were not the only causes which produced such a striking change in the conduct of the church towards the masonic order. As we have already stated, the spirit of free masonry was hostile to the principles of the church of Rome. The intention of the one was to enlighten the mind; the object and policy of the other were to retain it in ignorance. When free masonry flourished, the power of the church must have decayed. The jealousy of the latter was therefore aroused; and, as the civil power in England and Scotland was almost always in the hands of ecclesiastics, the church and the state were combined against the principles and the practice of free masonry. But besides the causes here specified, the domestic and bloody wars which convulsed the two kingdoms from the thirteenth to the seventeenth century conspired, in a great degree, to produce that decline of the fraternity for which we have been attempting to account. Yet notwithstanding these unfavourable circumstances, free masonry seems to have flourished, and attracted the attention of the public in the reign of Henry VI., who, when a minor, ascended the throne of England in 1422. In the third year of his reign, indeed, the parliament passed a severe act against the fraternity, at the instigation of Henry Beaufort, bishop of Winchester, who was then intrusted with the education of the young king. They enacted that the masons should no longer hold their chapters and annual assemblies; that those who summoned such chapters and assemblies should be considered as felons; and that those who resorted to them should be subjected to fine and imprisonment (3 Henry VI., cap. 2, a.d. 1425). But it would appear that this act was never put into execution; for, in the year 1429, about five years after it was framed, a most respectable lodge was held at Canterbury under the patronage of the archbishop himself. When King Henry assumed the government, he not only permitted the order to hold their meetings without molestation, but even honoured the lodges by his presence as a brother. Before he was initiated, however, into the mysteries of the order, he seems to have examined, with scrupulous care, the nature of the institution, and to have perused the charges and regulations of the fraternity, which had been collected from their ancient records.

Henry VII. became grand master of the order, and was succeeded in this office by the celebrated Cardinal Wolsey. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth an armed force was sent to break up the grand lodge at York, but some of the chiefs being induced to join the order, a report was made to the Queen, which led to the liberation of the masons from all future molestation. Several of the kings of England were subsequently grand masters of the order,—though during the reign of James II. it was much neglected; but on the accession of William III. it was revived under his majesty's auspices, who confirmed the choice of the brethren when Sir Christopher Wren was made grand master. It was not, however, until 1717 that the first regular grand lodge was formed in London, with power to grant charters for the holding of other lodges. This grand lodge having subsequently granted charters in the district which the grand lodge of York claimed as its own, all friendly communication ceased between them. Several attempts were made to heal the differences, and bring about a union of the two lodges, but they all failed until the year 1813, when H R. H. the Duke of Kent being grand master of the York or Athol masons, and H. R. H. the Duke of Sussex grand master of the London masons, that desirable end was effected. The Duke of Sussex became the grand master of the united body, which he continued to hold until his death in 1843, since which time the Earl of Zetland has presided over the order. The grand lodge of England has at this time upwards of 1000 lodges under its jurisdiction. It is possessed of very great wealth; and in addition to dispensing about £2000 a year for philanthropic purposes at a monthly board, has given, up to the close of last year, upwards of £21,000 to the four masonic charities, viz.—the Girls' School, established 1788; the Boys' School, established 1793; the Benevolent Fund for Aged Masons, established in 1842; and the Widows' Fund, established in 1850.

Whilst free masonry flourished in England under the auspices of Henry VI., it was making progress at the same time in the sister kingdom of Scotland. By the authority of James I. of Scotland, every grand master who was chosen by the brethren, either from the nobility or clergy, and approved of by the crown, was entitled to an annual revenue of four pounds Scots from each master mason, and likewise to a fee at the initiation of every new member. He was empowered to adjust any differences which might arise amongst the brethren, and to regulate those affairs connected with the fraternity which it was improper to bring under the cognisance of the courts of law. The grand master also appointed deputies or wardens, who resided in the chief towns of Scotland, and managed the concerns of the order when it was inconvenient to appeal to the grand master himself. In the reign of James II. of Scotland, the office of grand master was granted by the crown to William St Clair, earl of Orkney and Caithness, baron of Roslin, and founder of the chapel of Roslin. On account of the attention which this nobleman paid to the interests of the order, and the rapid propagation of the royal art under his administration, King James II. made the office of grand master hereditary to his heirs and successors in the barony of Roslin; in which family it continued till the institution of the grand lodge of Scotland. The barons of Roslin, in the capacity of hereditary grand masters, held their principal annual meetings at Kilwinning, the birthplace of Scottish masonry, whilst the lodge of that village granted constitutions and charters of erection to those brethren of the order who were anxious that regular lodges should be instituted in different parts of the kingdom. During the reigns of the succeeding Scottish monarchs, free masonry still flourished, though very little information can be procured respecting the state of the fraternity. In the records of the privy seal, however, there exists a letter, dated at Holyroodhouse, the 25th September 1590, and granted by King James VI. "to Patrick Copland of Udanght, for using and exercising the office of wardenric over the art and craft of masonry, over all the bounds of Aberdeen, Banff, and Kincardine, to had warden and justice courts within the said bounds, and there to minister justice." This letter proves beyond dispute that the kings of Scotland nominated the office-bearers of the order; that these provincial masters, or wardens as they were then called, administered justice in every dispute which concerned the "art and craft of masonry;" that lodges had been established in all parts of Scotland, even in those remote, and, at that time uncivilized, counties of Aberdeen, Banff, and Kincardine.

When James VI. ascended the throne of England he seems to have neglected his right of nominating the office-bearers of the craft. In Hay's manuscript in the Advocates Library, there are two charters granted by the Scottish masons, appointing the St Clairs of Roslin their hereditary grand masters. The former of these is without a date, but is signed by several masons who appoint William St Clair of Roslin, his heirs and successors, their "patrons and judges." The latter is in some measure a ratification of the former, and dated 1630, in which they appoint Sir William St Clair of Roslin, his heirs and successors, to be their "patrons, protectors, and overseers, in all time coming." In the year 1736, on the resignation of William St Clair as grand master, thirty-two lodges met and elected him grand master mason of all Scotland; and thus was instituted the grand lodge of Scotland.

The most remarkable event of recent times in free masonry has been the permission given by the grand master to the Free Masons' Magazine to publish the reports of proceedings in grand and private lodges.