IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I ■" IM IIM ■ iU ^ ^ m 11 2.0 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 ^ 6" - ► V] <^ /}. 'el e. e}. *;. '/ /A Photographic Sciences Corporation # V 4^ o % V €'■ ^ C^ rv "^'■ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY 14580 (716) 872-4503 %^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiquos Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. n Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D Couverture endommagee Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pellicul6e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ D Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que hleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ D D Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int6rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte. mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires; L'institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6tA possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mAthode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/oi Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piqu6es I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ □ Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6es I l/Showthrough/ L^ Tran;?parence I I Quality of print varies/ D Quality in^gale de {'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure. etc., ont 6t^ filmdes d nouveau de fa^on d obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 18X 22X 10X 14X 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grAce h la gAnirositt de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All oi:her original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetA de l'exemplaire filmi, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couvertura en papier est imprimAe sont filmte en commencant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniire page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou O'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la derniire image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — »> signifie "A SUIVRE". le symbols V signifie "FIN ". IVIaps. plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre film6s A des taux de reduction diff brents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cMchA, il est film6 A partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 LT-COL. WM. JAS. BURY MACLEOD MOORE. G. C. T., SOVEREIGN GREAT PRIORY OF KNIGHTS TEMPLARS OF CANADA. HISTOHY I! OT THE KNIGHTS TEMPLARS FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE ORDF.K IS A.D 1800 TO THE PRESENT TIME. WITH an Ibistorical IRctroepcct of ^eniplariam, CULLED FROM THE WRITINGS OF THE HISTORIANS OF THE ORDER. WITH A FAO-SIMILE OF THE EAKIilRST CANADIAN TEMPIjAH WARRANT; (X)PIE8 OF ORIGINAL MSB. OF THE BARLY DAYS OF THE ORDER IN CANADA, A RESUME IN DETAIL OF THE PRINCIPAL ACTS OF THE PROVINOIAL ORAND CONCLAVES OF CANADA, 1855-67, THE OREAT PRIORY OF THE DOMINION, 18(58 75 ; THE NATIONAL GREAT PRIORY OF (CANADA, 1876-83 ; AND THE HISTORY OF THE SOVEREIGN GREAT PRIORY OF CANADA, 1884 89 ; FROM OFFICIAL RECORDS IN THE ARCHIVES. BY J. EOSS ROBERTSOI^, Pad Grand Vice-ChanccUor, Past Promncial Prior, Member of the Grand Council, and Chairman of the Committee on the Condition of the Order nf the Temple in the is'overeign Great Priory of Canada. TORONTO: PRINTED BY HUNTER, ROSE & CO. 1890. Entered according to the Act of the Parliament uf Canada, in the year one thou- Hand eight hundred and ninety, by J. Roh8 Robertson, at the Department of Agriculture. I TO ORAND CDAMCELLOR 01 THE SOVEREION GREAT PRIORY OP CANADA, A FilATER WHO HAS ENDEARED HTMSELP TO MF THROt-ti LONG YEARS OF PERSONAL FRIENDSHU- WHOSE MANT EXCELLENT QUALITIES OP HEART AND HEAD HAVE RAISED HIM TO A HIGH PLACE IN THE ESTEEM OP ALL CRAFTSMEN ; THIS WORK IS FRATERNALLY AND SINCERELY DEDICATED BY THE FRIEND OF A LIFE-TIME, THE AUTHOR. TonoNTO, 1890. •■J TO THE HEADER. ,HIS work would surely commond itself to the Cana- dian Fratres without even a line of preface. Yet I am tempted to write a few words introductory — not for the purpose of justifying my mission — but rather to express my thanks to the Fratres who have'generously aided me in this compilation. It was with some diffidence that I formed a resolve to undertake a work that abounds with difficulties. The early history of Templarism in Canada was, and some of it may still be, hidden in the records of the old Craft lodges, which, in those primitive days, had a fatherly welcome for all organizations that claimed to be within the Craft fold. Many of the facts which I have linked together were gleaned by research in other fields of Masonic endeavour. My mission, however, has been a pleasant one. With such Fratres as M. E. Sir Knight Col. J. B. MacLeod Moore, the Supreme ^Grand Master of the Order, K. E. Sir Knight Dr. James A. Henderson, (^.C, of Kingston, the Deputy Grand Master of the Ord^r in Canada, and R. E. Sir Knight Daniel Spry, the Grand Chancellor of Canada, my quivei- of Templar knowledge^ has been filled and refilled, and as the arrows have been shot into cold type, these distinguished Fratres, blessed above ordinary men with zeal and good-nature, have readily answered my appeals for more facts and addi- tional records. Their kindness can never be requited by thanks. I'll 'M VI TO TUK HEAltEH. To Col. Mooro 1 am indebted for historical memoranda ; Dr. Henderson I have to thank for early MSS., from 1800 until 1830, and I am debtor for many of the official records to Frater Spry. I have made the most of the MSS., n,nd for the revisal of the proofs of the entire work my thanks are due to Frater Spry and my fellow-worker in newHpaper life, H, K. Frater Cfcorge J. Bennett of Toronto. The work speaks for itself. The records are as complete as fallible man can make them. As for the literar}' ability displayed in welding the facts together, that is for the reader to decide. At least one end has been accomplished. The history of the Order in Canada has not been lost to the Fratres. The work may not be perfect, and yet, to make it acceptable and complete, the archives of every Preceptory from the Atlantic to the Pacific have been searched, and their records read and carefully examined. Templarism may not have seen its sunburst in this Dominion, but the work of the past speaks well for those who give hours of ease to the upbuilding of an edifice that in other lands is towering from high to higher. The Author. CONTENTS. i CHAPTEIV I. fAOK Origin of the Templars — The OoiKiuest of JeruBalem and the First Crusade— Tbe Orders of Knighthood— The Hospitallers and Tem- plars — Their Organization in European Countries and in America. 1 CHAPTER II. The Templar System of the British Empire— Extracts from an Article Published by Col. MacLeod Moore, O.C.T., (Jrand Master of the Templar Order in Canada, intended as an Explanation of the Origin and History of Modem Templary 7 CHAPTER III. The Templar Order — Its Introduction into British North America— A Discussion as to the Priory of the Knights of St. John at Que- bec — The First Warrant for a Templar Encampment in Canada. 10 CHAPTER IV. Templary in the Province of Nova Scotia — An Encampment in 1782 — The Order under the Chapter General of Scotland — Provincial Conclave of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick 20 CHAPTER V. Templary in the Province of New Brunswick — An Encampment in 1840 under Scottish Authority — Rival Organizations and a Ter- ritorial Difficulty — Action of the Great Priory of Canada. 24 CHAPTER VI. The Knights Templars of Western Canada in 1800, 1823, 1824— Old Warrants at Kingston — Interesting Reminiscences of Early Tem- plars — Fac Simile of a Venerable and Honored Document HO CHAPTER VII. The Modem System of Templarism in Canada — The Search for an Old Warrant — Its Resurrection and Establishment under a New Name — The Parent Encampments of the Provincial Conclave. . 48 'I t! I I,! ili ▼itt CONTENT!^. CHAPTER VII f. paoii The Provincial Grand Conclave for Canada — Its Organization and First Asaembly in Kingston — Investiture of the First Ofticers — The Hugh de Payens Encampment— Warrant Ante Dated to 1824. 52 CHAPTER IX. Effect of the Revival of Templarism in Canada — The I'rovincial Grand Conclave — Its Second Annual Assembly — Three Encampments under the Jurisdiction of the Grand Commandery 55 CH.APTER X. Consecration of the Hall of the Geoffrey de St. Aldemar in Toronto — An Address from the Provincial Grand Commander — A Special Convocation and a large muster (if Fratres <)l CHAPTER XI. Third Annual Convocation — A Successful Period — A Visit from the Masonic Poet Laureate — Interesting Address of the Provincial Grand Commander — Merits and Objects of the " Red Cross " Degree analyzed (54 CHAPTER XII. The Fourth and Fifth Annual Assemblies of the Provincial Conclave —Birth of the "Godfrey de IJouillon " of Hamilton— The " M'ilta " Degree Authorized — Discussion on the " Red Cross." 70 CHAPTER XIII. The Sixth Annual Assembly of the Provincial Conclave — Death of a Templar Pioneer — Fees of Honour — Alterations to the Statutes — The Grand Commander's Address — Interesting and Important Features 74 CHAPTER XIV. The Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Annual Assemblies — Certificates of Appointment — The Expenses of Grand Conclave — Recognition of Templar Jewels by the Grand Royal Arch Chapter 78 CHAPTER XV. The Ninth and Tenth Annual Assemblies of the Provincial Conclave — A Visitor from England — Another New Encampment — The Outlook for the Order in the Early Days of the Dominion 81 CHAPTER XVI. The First Meeting of the Grand Priory of the Dominion of Canada — A New Era in Canadian Templarism — Growing Importance of the Body— Notable Assembly in Montreal — The Grand Priory's Warrant 85 of tion CONTENTS. ix CHAPTER XVII. I'AOK The Second Annunl Aaienibly of the Hrand Priory of the Dominion —Steady Advance of the Order — Additions to the Holl— Collins- wood and Oriilia Represented — The Jewels of "Hugh de Payens." «.•(► CHAPTER XVIII. The Third Annual Assembly of Great Priory — A large attendance of Fratres — A Distinguished Visitor from Michigan — An Exhaustive Address From The Grand Prior Replete with Information ^2 CHAPTER XIX. Another uap in the Ranks — Death of an Active Frater — The Two " Richards"— Grand Priory Meets in Hamilton — The Fourth Annual Assembly— Address of the Grand Prior !IH CHAPTER XX. Steady Advance of the Order — Four New Encampments Added — Toronto Receives the Grand Priory — Fifth Annual Assembly — The Grand Prior's Address — Templar Mattors at Home and Abroad lo:{ CHAPTER XXI. Seventeenth Encampment on the Roll — Collapse of a Quebec War- rant — Retrospect of the Grand Prior — A Glance at the Days gone by— The "Gordon Order of Merit" — Establishment of " Convent General." 108 CHAPTER XXII. Canada's Nationality still in Abeyance — Convent General Makes Haste Slowly — A New Preceptory at Dunville — Jurisdiction of the Grand Priory — Annual Assembly in Ottawa — Death of Thomas Bird Harris 122 CHAPTER XXIII. Budding Discontent — England's Indiflference Bears Fruit- A Cham- pion at Convent General — Condition of the Preceptories— The Eighth Annual Assembly — Templarism, Ancient and Modern. . . 13:^ CHAPTER XXIV. The National Great Priory of Canada — Proceedings in Convent General — Patents Creating the Great Priory and Appointin<{ the Great Prior — Col. Moore's Address to the Fratres — Re- marks on Templar History 144 CHAPTER XXV. " Convent General " divided against itself — Stormy Meeting in Lon- don — Ireland's Dignified Conduct — Sad death of England's Great Prior— Canada and her position in the Federation U^i ;S :1i lit; m CONTENTS. CHAPTER XXVI. PAtiE IlHcognitiun of Equality Denied to Canada by the United States Grand Encampment — The Situation Discussed by the Great Prior — Wherein Two Systems Differed — Infringement of Juris- diction 187 CHAPTER XXVII, In a Sea of Trouble — Canada's Independence Questioned — Convent General Continues in a Somnolent State — The Scottish Encamp- ment in New Brunswick — Beginning of a new Difficulty 201 CHAPTER XXVIII. Templarism Undjr Great Priory Thrives — Scottish Fratres in New Brunswick Decline to Come in — Canada and the Sister Nation- ahties— More Glimpses into History— One Supreme Grand Master. 217 CHAPTER XXIX. Canada's Sovereignty still Unacknowledged — Con»pletu Independence Desired — Outdoor Costume — The 'Triennial Conclave at Chicago — Assassination of President Garfield 225 CHAPTER XXX. Death of Thomas Douglas Harington — Condition of Great Priory — Growth of the Independence Movement — The Trouble in New Brunswick — The English Grand Chancellor in Canada 237 CHAPTER XXXI. The Great Prior and Independence of Great Prior — Conflict of Opinion — The New Brunswick Difficulty and the Chapter Gen- eral of Scotland — Decorations from the Prince of Wales . . 250 CHAPTER XXXII. Independence Secured — The Sovereign Great Priory of the Domin- ion Inaugurated — Col. Moore Installed Supreme Grand Master — His Address to the Assembled Fratres — Matters of Importance Discussed 263 CHAPTER XXXIII. Exist-nco of the Scottish Encampment in New Brunswick — The Renu'dy to be Applied — The Grand Master's Allocution Read to the Second Annual Assembly of the Sovereign Great Priory — Historical Review of the System 282 CHAPTER XXXIV. Edict of Non-Intercourse with Foreiijn Templar Bodies Working on Canadian Territory — The Scottish Fratres in New Brunswick Circulate a Statement of Their Side of the Question 301 CONTENTS. xi CHAPTER XXXV. PAOR Why the Edict was Issued — Conciliatory Efforts of no Avail — How the Order Progressed — A Warrant for a Preceptory in Australia — Third Annual Assembly of the Sovereign Great Priory 313 CHAPTER XXXVI. Another Edict of Xon- Intercourse — England Indignant at Canada's Issuance of a Warrant to Australia — Alleged Invasion of Ter- ritory — Two Further Warrants Authorized 323 CHAPTER XXXVII. Canada's Position with Regard to Australia — England's Ground Un- tenable — Fifth Annual Assembly of the Sovereign Great Priory — Withdrawal of the Edict Against the Scottish Templars 339 CHAPTER XXXVIII. Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Assembly of the Sovereign Great Priory — Encouraging outlook for the Order — The Grand Master's Allocution — Templarism and Masonry 354 CHAPTER XXX IX. The History of Hugh de Payens Preceptory — The Premier Precep- tory of the Dominion— The Gordon Order of Merit — Address of the Eminent Commander to the Recipients 363 CHAPTER XL. The Past of Canadian Templarism — The American and Canadian Systems Compared — Who can justly claim the Templar Title ? — The Order and its Future 372 :^i| fli -A-IDIDBIsTDA.. 1. Preceptories on the roll of the Sovereign Grand Priory, with date of Warrants, names of Petitioning Fratres and Original Officers. 383 2. Members on the Register of the Sovereign Great Priory of Knights Templars for the Dominion of Canada ;}89 1 =. 3. Presiding Preceptors in order of succession in each Preceptory from date of formation and establishment 395 ■ '?( !' ■ KNIGHTS TEMPLAES. CHAPTER I. Origin of the Templars— The Conquest of Jercsalem and the First Crusade — The Orders of Kxiohthood— The Hospitallers AND Templars Their Organization in European Countries AND IN America. Y way of introduction to the history of the Templar Order in Canada, it is fitting that reference should be made to Orders of Knighthood in history gene- rally. The glory and value of the Templar Order will be enhanced by such reference, in that it will show a logical connection with ancient religious and military Knighthood. Within the limits of a work of this kind the reference can be only of a most general character, but yet, it is hoped, of sufficient value to justify the statement. Rome had been the proud empress of the world for many centuries, and even so late as the seventh century was giving promise of continued dominion, when the sudden appearance of Mohammed and his devastating tribes directly undermined her greatness and hastened her fall. To this oriental religious enthusiast is to be ascribed — indirectly, at least — the origin of military Orders of Knighthood. The conquest of Jerusalem, upon the walls of which the cross of Christ had been planted nearly three centuries, brought dismay to nearly all Christen- dom, and directly led to the First Crusade for its recovery. The Greek and Latin Christians had annually n^ade pilgrim- ages to the Holy City to obtain remission of their sins at the Holy Sepulchre. After the disunion of the Greek and Latin churches, these pilgrims suffered great hardships amid the con- flicts of Mohammed's followers for supremacy. In 1048 some II mm KNIGHTS TEMPI A hS. Italian merchants obtained permission to build asylums or " hospitals " near the Holy Sepulchre, for the protection and maintenance of Latin pilgrims who were sick or destitute. One hospital, for men, was dedicated to St. John the Almoner, and another, for women, to St. Mary Magdalene. The poor and sick were cared for by a company of associates called the Hospitallers of Jenisalem. After serving the beneficent pur- pose of its institution for sixteen years, the Hospital of St. John was despoiled when Jerusalem was taken by the Turks. This devastation of the Holy City led directly to the subse- quent Crusades, and during their continuance, when the city was retaken by the Saracens, the Hospitallers called them- selves Knights Hospitallers, because they defended their hospital against the Saracens. The Hospitallers then became a religious institution, instead of a secular organization, and adopted a uniform habit of a plain black robe with a white, eight-pointed linen cross on the left breast, and at this point are the foundation and influence and power of the Orders of Knighthood. When Eaymond du Puis became Chief he com- bined the military with the religious. He organized the Hospitallers into three classes, the first being composed of men of noble ancestry and of military renown, the second of priests, and the third of serving men. From this time every Knight was a monk-soldier — obligating himself to obedience, poverty and chastity, and swearing to defend the Christian banner with the sword. The enthusiasm for military glory was so great that the Knightly Order rapidly extended itself, and soon outgrew its Latin composition. Co-ordinate to some extent, and cotemporaneous with the Hospitallers, was the Order of the Temple or Knights Templars. This Order was instituted in 1119 by Hugh de Payens and Geoffrey de St. Aldemar, who had connected with them seven other French Knights. The design of the Order was to protect pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem. But it rapidly exceeded this mission, and soon became the most bril- liant body of the crusading army, and was the noble body- guard of the King of Jerusalem. He gave the corps a resi- dence on the site of the Temple of Solomon, on which stood a Christian church, built in the 7th century. From this church or temple, dedicated to them, they took the name Order of the Temple, or Templars. The Templars were thus organized in imitation of the Hospitallers, with the difference that the martial spirit of Christianity took the place of its eleemosy- nary spirit, although both were combined. In turn, then, the THE HOSPITALLERS AND TEMPLARS. I in Hospitallers copied the Templars, and became a military body through the Crusades. These two Orders were the support of the crusading army, and each became extensive, influential and wealthy. The history of Knighthood in the world is now carried along these two streams of Hospitallers and Templars. The streams flow side by side, sometimes intermingle, but yet the divergence is sufficiently marked to be traced historically. The Order of Knights Hospitallers of St. John was established in 1118, and Raymond du Puis was the first Grand Master. For one hundred years they maintained their distinctively military character by fighting the enemies of the Christian faith. They finally captured the city of Rhodes, and resided there until the beginning of the 16th centui^ , whence they were called Knights of Rhodes. During the residence of the Order at Rhodes important changes took place in its organiza- tion. These changes arose from the fact that, no more Knights being needed for crusades, they turned their attention to the enrichment of their establishments and the extension of their numbers. The Turks finally conquered Rhodes, and the Knights left the island in 1522. In 1530 they were given the island of Malta by the Emperor of Germany, and occupied it 268 years. From this time forward they were called Knights of Malta. In 1798 their Grand Master surrendered their island to the French, and from that date the decline of the Order was rapid, and this date ends its real history. In its palmy days it had 21 Grand Priories in Europe, and 596 Commanderies. It was then divided into eight langues, but now only the langues of Italy and Germany remain. The Order may be said to be virtually disintegrated, although the functions of Grand Master are exercised by an officer who re- sides at Rome. The magnificence and chivalric splendour of the Order have passed away, and there is nothing in any body of the present day organically connected with the heroic Knights of Malta of the days of Moslem rule in the Holy City. The ancient feuds and rivalries of the Hospitallers and Templars render any supposed subsequent union of the two a historical anomaly not to be entertained. This historical and illogical absurdity is maintained wherever the degree of a Knight of Malta in Masonry is conferred in a United States Commandery of Knights Templars. In the United States this degree is conferred as an " Appendant Order." It was revoked in 1856, but restored in 1862, and is now fuU}'^ established as a distinct degree of Chivalric Masonry. In the British Empire the Orders of the Temple and Malta are " united," but con- IH' I KNI0HT8 TEMPLARS. ferred as separate ceremonies, closely following the practices of the old Orders. The rivalry between the Templars and the Order of St John had lonpr ceased before the latter Order be- came Knights of Malta. The ancient Order of Hospitallers was never a secret Order, while that of the Templars had a secret formulary of initia- tion, and what decayed remnant of the Knights of Malta now exists emphatically disclaims any connection whatever with Masonry. These two facts in connection with the historic reason already given, show that the Knights of Malta as an institution is not Masonic, and has no historic or legitimate relation to the Knights Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem. Taking up the history of the Knights Templars, we find that Hugh de Payens secured from the authorities of the Latin church a code of regulations that gave permanence to the Order. Then they were called "Poor Fellow Soldiers of Christ," and were celebrated for their ascetic habits and purity of life as well, subsequently, as for their military prowess. The distinctive dress was a white mantle with a red cross on the breast, the mantle signifying purity, and the cross, which was not eight-pointed, like that of the Hospitallers, meant martyrdom. At first the organization was of a very simple character. In the 12th century it was divided into three classes of knights, chaplains and serving brethren, with two minor grades. It was required of a Knight that he be lawfully bom, of noble ancestry, a free man, a member of no other Order, and of sound mind and body. The chaplain took the three vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, and executed :he religious duties of the Order, and the serving-men were the soldiers and artizans. The Grand Master, elected for life, originally resided at Jeru- salem, but finally at Cyprus. The next in order was the Seneschal, and then a number of minor officers followed. As the Order increased in numbers and wealth, it gradually extended its establishment into every part of Europe, except Denmark, Sweden and Norway, the most impoverished king- doms. It was then divided into provinces, each of which was governed by a Grand Preceptor or Grand Prior. These officers, with other distinguished knights, constituted the general chap- ter or great legislative body of the Order. The initiation of a Knight was a 'solemn, secret ceremony. Although the Order received its sanction and original bode of regulations from the Latin chui-ch, not even the Pope's legate could be admitted to the meetings of the general chapter. No authentic accurate knowledge of the secrets of the Templar THEIB ORG AN JZ A TION IN EUROPE AND AMERICA. organization can be obtained, although it is possible that some of their features have descended to us. The history of the Templars is so closely interwoven with that of the Crusades that a transcript of one is that of the other. They inhabited the Holy Land from 1119 to 1300, and about the time the Hospitallers were driven out and obtained possession of Rhodes, the Templars were expelled, and went to Cyprus. After a brief stay there they retired to their different Preceptories in Europe. When Philip IV. became King of France, and had his celebrated contest with Pope Boniface, the Templars sided with the latter, thus incurring the hatred of the king. Their enormous wealth and extensive possessions excited his avarice, and he made an infamous conspiracy with Pope Clement V. to annihilate the Order and confiscate its property. James de Molay, the Grand Master, was imprisoned, and on the 13th of October, 1307, every Knight in France was arrested on the pretended charge of idolatry. De Molay and the three principal dignitaries were publicly burnt, and the Order was suppressed throughout Europe by the King of France and the Pope of Rome. Its vast possessions were appropriated by the sovereigns of the various countries and given to the Order of the Knights of Malta. After an exist- ence of 294 years thus perished a chivalric Order that, despite its disreputable contests with its rival, St. John, has covered the pages of Palestine's history with imperishable glory. The cruel martyrdom and rank injustice attending its dissolution glorify it in proportion as posterity contemns the infamy of the King and Pope that laid impious hands upon the noble Knights of the Temple. Having thus very generally sketched the rise and fall of the two principal Knightly Orders of the world's history, from which the modern Templars logically proceed, a glance at the history of the latter is necessary. The logical descent of modern Templarism from these two Orders may be asserted, because the spirit of chivalry is as active in these more civil- ized times as it was when learning was confined only to the noble and priestly classes. But the organic, vital and direct succession of modern Knights Templars from these Orders may safely be denied. And the position that Knight Templarism, whether of 1889 or of 1310, is Masonic in character, may also be successfully assailed. That of 1889 is imitative but not historical, and it lacks the proof to make it authentic as deriva- tive from the ancient Templarism. It is sufficient to state here that the reason for the existence of the latter passed away with the passage of the middle ages, while modern Templarism 'i; f m w^ (ll 6 KMOHTS TEMPLARS. is totally different in design and practice. Ancient Templar- ism was the prot^g^ and the loyal support of the Papacy, and the assertion that modern Templarism is the foster- child of the Papal power is a travesty upon the relation of Romanism and Protestantism, and a flat contradiction of his- toric truth. The Templars of France claim direct descent from the orinnal Order by means of a charter given Larmenius by Molay, but the genuineness of this charter has not yet been shown. The Swedish Templar Masons claim their descent from a nephew of Molay, who was a member of the Templar Order in Portugal. But he really came from a new Order not having any relation whatever with the Templars, but which had secured the possessions of the latter in Portugalafter the disestablishment. There is a tradition — and only a tradition — that Peter Aumont, a supposed successor of Molay, fled to Scotland after the dissolution of the Order, and there estab- lished Templarism as a Masonic Order. The Templars of Ger- many are also descendants of Aumont. Templarism in England claims, through the Baldwin En- campment, an establishment as far back as at the close of the 12th century. The grounds for this claim are more valid than those urged in favour of a direct descent from Molay, and it is from this Encampment that Templarism in Sweden, Scotland, Ireland, Canada and the United States is derived. It repu- diates origin from any individual, but owes its rise to the action of independent Knights who fled for security and per- petuity into tne body of Masonry. The first encampments of Knights Templars in the United States were established in New York State prior to 1797. A Grand Encampment was formed in 1802, and a General Grand Encampment in 1816. The latter now meets trienni- ally. The Templars there number about 100,000 members, but the organization resembles that of a volunteer corps, the members being uniformed and subject to strict military discipline. The Canadian Templarism dates from 1782, when an encampment existed in Halifax, Nova Scotia. This organi- zation worked under the warrant of Craft Lodge No. 211. KR. In 1800 a Templar warrant was issued under the authority of Craft Lodge No. 6 at Kingston, Ont. This body is really the parent of the Templar organizations of the Dominion. CHAPTER II. Thk Templar System of the British Empire— Extracth from ak Article Published by Col. MacLeod Moore, G.C.T., Granb Master of the Templar Order in Canada intended as an BXPHNATION of the OrIGIN AND HlSTORY OF MoDERN TeMPLARY. :i! HE venerable Grand Master of the Templar Order in Canada, Col. MacLeod Moore, some time ago replied, in an able article, to the oit-submitted question, " If Teraplary is not Masonry, what is it ? " the body of which, as showing the origin and reason for the perpetuation of Modern Teinplary, gathered from the researches of a devoted Templar student, is here given, and to the reader will provt interesting and instructive. The Grand Master says : " It is only within the last thirty years that any attempt has been made to clear up the contradictory opinions existing, and myths, which surround Modem Templary respecting its true object, meaning and origin, with its assumed connection, as an integral portion of Free and Accepted Masonry. Previously every idle tale and legend relating to ' Freemasonry ' were firmly believed, no trouble being taken to investigate the truth or false- hood of the assertions, and various theories have been from time to time advanced in attempting to prove that it is a component part of the Masonic system ; but aU have failed to convince, before historic facts and modem criticism, howerer carefully perversion of truth may be arranged. The inception of a correct and true understanding of the modern ' Tem- plar Order ' must be looked for from tjie commencement of the Grand Mastership of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, and formation of a Convent .General of the Order in A.D. 1873, when a most searching investigation was instituted as to its alleged derivation and connection with ' Free and Accepted Masonry,' as well as direct descent from the old orders of Chris- tian chivalry. By a committee of the best informed members of the Order in England and Ireland, it was then ascertained and declared that ' Modem Templary ' was in no way a part of or derived from speculative Masonry, but merely allied to it to preserve the intimate connection sup- posed to have existed between the old Christian builders of the cloisters and the * religious and military orders of the middle ages, and thus repre- sent and continue them as a Christian society, following the doctrine and usages of chivalry, by preserving their traditions and trinitarian Christian belief in the symbolic teaching of the sacred mysteries.' "It has been distinctly shown that Masonic Templary first appeared in the Craft Lodges, under the Grand Mastership of the Duke of Athol, towards the end of the last century, known as the ' Athol Masons,' or the 'Ancients.' 'Ml t 8 KNIGHTS TEMPLARS. " At this period an idea prevailed that the old Militai^ Templan were in ■ome way intimately aaaooiated with Maaonry, but the builders from the oloisters and the ohivalrio orders were quite separate and distinct Christian bodies, with whom the Masonic Templars who attempt to imi- tate the Knights of old have nothing in common save the name. ''The Templar degrees were introduced into the North American Pro- vinces a few years before the Declaration of Independence from British rule, and were afterwards reconstructed there, to form a part of the new rite of American Freemasonry, which follows the universal creed of the last century Masonic revival, rejecting its Christian origin and character- istics, adopting in the Templar degrees the democratic principles of equality, etc., at that time existing in Europe, totally changing the object and meaning of the Order to make and call it a Masonic degree. There is no affinity between ' Free and Accepted Masons ' and the orders of Christian chivalry, excepting in the imagination of Masonic enthusi- asts, many of whom, in this sceptical age, under the cover of science or criticism, eagerly seize upon any new theory to use it, if possible, against Christianity, and insist that in the course of evolution the old Templars' doctrines were merged into speculative Maaonry. At the same time they profess not to doubt the substantial correctness of its origin and principles, yet will not admit the advisableness of perpetuating the exclusive trinitarian Christian character, considering that Knight Templary and Freemasonry must eventually yield to the laws of evolutionary progress, believing that man's conception uf the Deity corresponds with his knowledge of nature, and with advanced intellectual studies. Of Revelation they profess to know but little, and that only one thing is dear, viz. : ' No set of men in one generation can form laws, make constitutions, promulgate dogmas, etc., for those of all coming ages.' Such is the language of the free- thinking and advanced opinions of the present day, with reference to Templi^, as opposed to those who desire to promulgate and perpetuate in the true Templar system the doctrines of the Catholic faith to the honor and glory of God. " The direct descent or perpetuation of the old military Templar prin- ciples and usages to the present time may be partly accounted for, after the suppression of the Ancienj; Order in the fourteenth century, from many of the members retirins into secular life and being dispersed over . Europe, whilst others joined the ' Religious and Military Order of St. John of Jerusalem,' which in Scotland became known as the combined orders of the Temple and St. Jvhn, when the individuality of the Tem- plars was forgotten, but that of St. John continued — called ' Knights of Malta.' " On the dissolution of this Sovereign Body, and evacuation by them of the Island of Malta in 1798, the different languages of the Order were formed into independent branches in the chief cities of Europe. That of England was revived about 60 years ago, from the dormant sixth langue, authorized by a legal and just representation of the whole of the existing branches, and now holds its chancery in the old Oate-house of St. John, at Clerkenwell, London, all that remains of the ancient Priory of that name, and strictly carries out the original charitable Hospitaller duties of aid to the sick and wounded. " Within the last year the Order of St. John in England has been reconstructed under Royal Charter of incorporation, with Her Majesty the Queen as the Sovereign head and patron ; and under said charter H. R. H. the Prince of Wales has become Grand Prior. It is totally distinct, and ignores any connection with 'Free and Accepted Masonry.' ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF MODERN TEMPI ARY. Individual memben of the Order in the ]ut century, joining the Mtsonio fraternity, may have tended in tome meaaure to the formation of the Maionio imitation degrees of Knight Templars and Knight of Malta, and also to the perpetuation of the traditional belief of a connection having existed between the Templars of the Crusaders and the early Ecclesiasti* cal builders— who were said to be conversant with, and practised the occult sciences of the East, in the retirement of their cloisters. " Scch, then, appears to be the true and correct history of Modem Templary from the most careful research and reliable authorities, who reject this mistaken belief, false theory, and fables of its being, either directly or indirectly, a portion of the system of ' Free and Accepted Masonry.' "The Orders of Knighthood are quite distinct from Masonry, and there is no such thing as Masonic Knighthood, and any such claim is a childish fable. The honors of Knighthood can only be conferred by the Sovereign, or the representative of the Sovereign ; but our system does not pretend to be a Knightly Order ; it only promulgates the reading and teachings of the Ancient Knightly fraternity. " The ceremonies of the United Orders of the Temple and Malta in the Empire are intended to inculcate the cardinal doctrines of the Catholic faith, with a firm belief in the holy and undivided Trinity, the chief and indissoluble character of the Templar Order, without which, in spite of all sophistry and special pleadings, no true Templary can exist. To speak of Templary as an Order of ' Free and Accepted Masonry ' is simply ridiculous. "The Order of the Temple existed for centuries apart from Masonry, without any known connection further than that the Knights of old em- ployed the ancient Craft as workmen, and our modem Craft Grand Lodges consider the Templar degreesas glaring innovations on 'Symbolic' Masonry. Although the United Orders cannot claim a direct descent from the old Religious Military fraternities of the Middle Ages, their teaching and practices distinctly prove their chivalrio origin, and are a revival of the principles and usages of the old Religious and Military Orders, which they correctly represent. "Modem Templary, then, is only recognized as quasi Masonic, nothing more, from being allied to it as one of the additional degrees for about a century past, and it never obtained official recognition in Eng- land, save as an adopted degree by the York ' Grand Lodge of All England,' which became extinct about 1790, when York Masonry died out, and -never united with the regular Grand Lodge of England. "Close investigation has clearly proved that the alleged origins of Masonic Templary in the different countries where it exists are mere fictions. The fabrications of the last century, principally derived from the idle legends of the obsolete ' Rite of Strict Observance,' which built up a iifiass of childish fables, used to support the theories of the high grade Masonic system, that the test of history totally rejects. " The assumption that Freemasonry is the offspring of the old Mili- tary Templars u equally untenable.'' ■ft "'I" CHAPTER III. The Tbmplar Ordkk — Its Introduction into British North Amrrm'a— A DisrcssioN as to thk Priory or the Knioht-s of St. John at QuuBrx-— The First Warrant for a Templar Encamp- ment IN Cavada. I:l.ii rT is only within the past few years that any efTort has been made to trace the history of the Templar Order, from the date of the introduction of the system into Canada. Masonic writers have, as a general rule, been inclined to content themselves with the statement that Canadian Templarism could only be traced with certainty to the second decade of the nine- teenth century, and when doubts were expressed as to the reliability of this assertion, the querist was met by a request to furnish some proof, however slight, that the information given was not strictly and in every sense true. Critics were therefore silenced, and no one seemed courageous enough to delve into the records hidden in the chests of Masonic Lodges, and so the origin of Templarism was, without objection, allotted to the second decade of the nineteenth century. In lb85 the writer, while on a voyage of discovery in connection with his History of the Craft Lodges of Ontario, came across, in the collection of MSS. of the Rev. Dr. Scadding, a sheet of ordinary writing paper, dated 31st October, 1800, and in- scribed thereon a Templar warrant for Canada, under the sanction of Lodge No. 6, Kingston, which is evidence that the Templar brethren there exercised the authority of a governing body. Shortly after the production of this document — a copy of which is given in fac simile in this work — a further dis- covery was made by Bro. W. F. Bunting, of St. John, New Brunswick, in effect that a Knights Templars encampment existed at Halifax, Nova Scotia, in 1782, held under the Craft wan-ant of Lodge No. 211, on the registry of the Grand Lodge of York Masons of England, now numbered 2 on the Registry of the Grand Lodge of Nova Scotia. While all this was so happily turning up in connection with the history of Templar- ism, a still more interesting announcement was made through ITS INTRODUCTION INTO BRITISH NORTH AMERICA. II the columns of the Quebec Morning Chronicle on 12th Decem- ber, 1885, which gave Teinplarism an antiquity in Canada that can hurdly be claimed for even the oldest of the Craft organizations. In 1885 an English officer, Col. R. £. Carr, visited Quebec, and, after his return to England, wrote a letter from Morton Barracks, Worcester, England, on 25th Novem- ber, 1885, to Major Dennis Murray, Clerk of the Peace, of Quebec, referring to conversations he had had with that gentleman during his visit to Canada, which is better, per- haps, given in his own words. The letter addressed to Major Murray was referred by that gentleman to Mr. J. M. Le Moine, F.R.S.C., the well-known Canadian historian. Col. Carr's letter reads as follows : — "MoBTON Barrackh, " Worcester, England, "Noveteber 26th, 1885. " Dear Major Murray, — On my return to England from the Canadian Northwest, I referred to the point in the antiquities of Quebec, regardinjr which I could not quite trust my memory when enjoying the benefit of your company in seeing the town, viz., the existence under the French regime of a Priory of the Knights of St. John, and of which we could find no trace. " Knowing your interest in the history of the religious orders of the city, I send you an ettraot from a fine Italian three vol. quarto work in my possession, which proves that the Order of Malta had extensive en- dowments in the Province. There is no doubt that two of the early Qoverpors-Qeneral, whose names are probably familiar to you, were members of the Order. This may account for their establishing a branch in New France. If you should ever find a record of the fate ofthe house or property, I should be very glad to hear of it. *^* ****** *• Very truly yours, '< (Signed) K. E. Carr, " Colonel. " Major Murray, Quebec, Canada." Subjoined is the extract relating to Quebec previously alluded to : — " Extract from the American Gazetteer, translated from English and published in Italian, at Leghorn, 1763 : — "The city is well built, and full of superb edifices, such as churches and palaces ; but there are especially the palace of the Bishop, the Tribunals of Justice, the House of Knights of Jerusalem, which is a superb building of square stones, and which is said to have cost £40,000 sterling; with convents of friars, monks, chapels, etc., which it would occupy too much time to describe. But the most notable edifice of all is the Palace (of St. Louis), where the Governor resides, in which was the Grand Council of Carolina, when Quebec was in the hands of the French, and where were kept all the Royal archives. " Mr. Le Moine, in his letter to the Chronicle, which included that of Col. Carr, says :— '!i ; II; 'I- ':fpi'"*f"** 13 KNIGHTS TEMPLARS. " Before dealing with the enquiry set forth by Col. Garr — ' the existence of a Priory of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem ' — it may not be amiss to identify some of the old buildings alluded to in the Italian- American Gazetteer of 1763. " The Bishop's Palace (subsequently public ofhoes and vaults), erected by Bishop St. Vallier, the second Bishop of Quebec, about 1692, stood on the south side of the area, on which a wing was added in 1869-60 tu the adjoining Parliament Building. Our first House of Parliament, erected in 1834, was destroyed by fire in 1864 ; rebuilt, and again destroyed by fire. The Bishop's Palace had been ceded to the Imperial Government by one of his successors, Bishop Panet, in 1830, for the perpetual ground rent of £1,000 sterlint;, still attached to the ground lot. "The 'Tribunal of Justice' may mean the Seneohaussee building, which terminated at the East of St. Louis Street. The dwelling of James Dunbar, Q.C., covers at present a portion of the ground. Possibly the Jntendant's Palace, in the rear of Boswell's Brewery, may have been con- sidered as one of the ' Tribunals of Justice.' Though no vestige now re- mains, it is not hard to locate the site of the ' Convent of Friars.' The old Monastery of Franciscan Friars, on Garden Street, is clearly alluded to, a vast quadrangular building, with fruit gardens ; it fell a prey to fire on the 26th of September, 1796 ; on a portion of its grounds the Anglican Cathedriil was built in 1^04. One is at a loss to locate ' the House of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem,' a superb building of square stones, and which is said to have cost £40,000 sterling. If it was not the Chateau Saint Louis, the first structure of which was of wood, could it be any por- tion of the Fort Saint Lotiia, built facing the Chateau Saint Louis, and on the ground now partly comprised by the Ring, or Place d'Armest It was demolished shortly after the conquest. " Could the old gilt stone in the wall, with its Maltese Cross and its date, ' 1647,' have formed any portion of the house of the Knights 1 The figures ' 1647 ' unquestionably bring us back, as the Rev. Abb6 clearly showed, to the administration of Governor de Montmagny, a Knight of Malta," etc. The letter of Mr. Le Moine drew forth from " E. T. D. C." (E. T. D. Chambers), a correspondent of the Chronicle, the fol- lowing on December 17, 1885. He writes stating : — " I have read with no little interest the queries of Mr. J. M. Le Moine, published in the Chronicle of Saturday last, concerning the existence at Quebec, under French regime, of a Priory of Knights of St. John of Jerusalem ; and have anxiously looked for replies thereto from students of early Canadian history. " In my own limited researches, I have been unable to find a trace of . such a body within the period designated by Mr. Le Moine and Colonel Carr, though in view of the number of eminent Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, Rhodes and Malta resident at Quebec in the first half of the seventeenth century, the absence of a Priory of the Order in this city would have been not only a very remarkable fact, but one at variance with the general principles and practices of the Order. Charles Hualt de Montmagny, Champlain's successor at Quebec, was not only a Knight of Malta himself, but De Lisle, his lieutenant, belonged to the same chival- rous Order. So also did the illustrious Noel Brulart de Sillery, who, after becoming a priest, placed an ample fund in the hands of the Jesuits for the formation of a settlement of Christian Indians, at the spot which KNIGHTS OF ST. JOHN AT QUEBEC. 13 ■till bean hu name. The name of another dUtinguiahed Knight of Malta is intimately connected with early Canadian hiatory. When her North American poMessions were restored to France by the treaty of 1632, Sieur Isaac de Bazilly, Commander of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, was commissioned by his Sovereign, at the instance of Riche- lieu, to proceed to Port Royal and receive its submission to King Louis. Commander de Razilly was a noted officer in the French navy, and one of the most foremost members of the company of the Hundred Associates. A concession was made him on the 29th of May, 1632, of the river and Bay St. Croix. The esteem in which Sieur de Kazillv was held by distin- guished members of his own Order, is shown by the letters addressed him from Malta on the 20th of February, 1636, by the Oradd Master of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, and which those interested may read for themselves at page 114, Vol. 1, of the ' Documents Historiques relatifs a la Nouvelle France,' recently published (1883) by the Provincial Government, under the personal supervision of Hon. Jean Blanohet, Pro- vincial Secretary." We learn from the History of the Knights of Malta, by Abb^ de Berlot, Vol. V., page 141, that in 1652 the Order of Malta purchased the Island of St. Christopher, now one of the British West India islands, for which they were obliged to Chevalier de Poincy, who commanded in that island. Some trouble having arisen, the Grand Master sent Brother Charles Hualt de Mont- magny, then Receiver of the Priory of France, to America, as Procureur-General of the Order. " While everything points to the probability of the existence at Quebec in 1647, of a Priory of Knights of St. John, it is diifioult, if not impossible, to find any other trace of ' a house of Knights of St. John ' than that quoted by Colonel Carr as an Italian translation from the American Gazetteer. Not one of the many descriptions still preserved, of Quebec's public buildings in the 17th century, contains the slightest mention of Bucb a hoiise. It is scarcely probable that a chapter house at Quebec for the Knights of St. John was furnished by the Government of France, and it is therefore more reasonable to suppose that the Quebec Priory of 1647 assembled for their chapter meetings, in an apartment fitted up for their reception either in the Chateau, or in the Fort St. Louis. That neither the members of the Order in New France nor its head in Europe, could afford the necessary sum for the erection of a house in Quebec, is evident from the letter to de Razilly, already referred to, and from which it appears that on account of the costly fortifications then being made at Malta, tl"^ Grand Master, though fully appreciating the foreign labors of his correspondent, was regretfully compelled to express his inability to send him any financial aid. " How then are we to account for the allusion to a chapter-house in the extract translated from the American Gazetteer^ The old gilt stone nith the Maltese cross, and the date 1647, now in the wall facing Mr. Dunbar's residence, if visible at that time, might readily have conveyed the impression to the writer of the Gazetteer, that the building of wUob it formed a part was a house of the Knights of St John and Malta. But we have it on the authority of the late Jamea Thompson, that this stone r T m 14 KNIOHTS TEMPLARS. Tvas dug up on the 17th of September, 1784, by the miners at the Chateau, who were engaged in levelUng the jard during the erection of the Chateau Haldimand. It would thus appear that this was the foundation stone of the Chateau St. Louis, erected by Montmagny in 1647 to re- place or enlarge the original fortress built by Champlain in 1620. It would not be remarkable, however, if a casual observer like the Qazetteer writer, should have taken for granted that the building partially occupied by the Priory at Quebec was the actual property of the Sir Knights. " It may not generally be known that since the decline of the Order as a military body, and the issue of the ecclesiastical edicts launched against the Sir Knights, their teachings, profession and ceremonial have con- tinued and been handed down, practically unimpaired, to their descendants. " E. T. D. C." then refers to the establishment of a Preceptory of Knights Templars and Priory of the Knights of Jerusalem, Palestine, Rhodes and Malta, in Quebec, nearly half a century ago. He states that : "The majority of the Knights were French Canadians and many of theu leading merchants of St. Boch's. Some of the latter survive to this day, but all left the Order when Freemasonry, which is, and for long has been, a necessary stepping stone to its mysteries, w^ denounced by the Catho- lic Church. The withdrawal of the seat of Government to Ottawa caus- ed the removal of the warrant to Ottawa and a final disruption of the Priory of Quebec, which had been dedicated to ' William de la More, the Martyr.' On the 1st of May, 1880, a new Preceptory and Priory, under its old title, obtained a charter from the National Qreat Priory of Cana- da," and closes by stating, " I know that these latter details are not specially called for by Mr. Le Moine's letter, but I cannot believe that they will prove altogether devoid of interest to those who may have wondered what extent of connection exists between the Knights of St. John and Malta of to-day and their predecessors of 1647, — ' whose bones are dust, whose swords are rust, whose souls are with the saints, we trust.' " On the 26th of Jan., 1880, Mr. Le Moine again wrote to the Chronick, a lengthy but interesting communication, referring to the correspondence of the 12th Dec, enclosing Colonel Carr's letter and also alluding to the valuable information furnished by " E. T. D. C." in the same paper on the 17th Dec, 1885, Mr. Le Moine in his second letter says : " In a communication to the Morning Chronicle, bearing date 12th December last, I drew attention to aa extract from an American Gazetteer, published at Leghorn, in 1763, furnished by a distinguished British officer. Colonel B. E. Carr, now stationed with his regiment at Worcester, England, as set forth in a letter recently addressed bv him, asking for information, to our fellow-townsman, Dennis Murray, !^sq. "The American Qazetteer, of 1763, purported to describe among other notable edifices of Quebec, at that date, the 'House of Knights of Jeru- salem, a superb building of square stones, said to have cost j£40,000 sterling.' The origin, existence, and whereabouts of such a costly struc- KMGHTS OF ST. JOHN AT QUEBEC. 16 tare, at this period, rather astonished, nay, ranch perplexed, the numerous delvers in the arena of our ' old ouriositj shop.' Here, indeed, was a nut to orack, for our indefatigable Montieths, our Champollions, our Oldbucks of every degree. '^ A formal invitation through the press was addressed, calling on the Craft to prepare for the scientific tournament and illumine with their choicest lore this arcanum magnum. One of the first to respond was an iudustrions student of Canadian History, Dr. N. E. Dionne, author also of an elaborate disquisition on Champlain's last resting-place : another unsolved mystery for inquiring students. The doctor contributed two columns in a city journal, dwelling on the important part played in the early days of the ancient capital, by several Knights of Malta, and stating that he could find no satisfactory evidence of a Priory of Knights of St. John, etc., having existed at Quebec. " A correepondent, signing E. T. D. C, in the Morning Chroniele of the 17th of December last, contributed his valued quota of information on several points, alleging that notwithstanding the names of several eminent Knights of Jerus^em, Bhodes and Malta, such as Governor de Montmagny, his Lieutenant De Lisle, the Commander Noel Brulart de Sillery, Bazilly in Aoadia, all inscribed on the roll of early Canadian worthies, there was nothing to show that a regular Priory or Chapter House had been founded at Quebec in 1647, that it was more reasonable to suppose that the Knights assembled for their Chapter meetings ' in an apartment fitted up for their reception, either in the Chateau or in the Fort St. Louis,' that on account of the costly fortifications then being made in Malta, the Grand Master, though fully appreciating the labours 'of some of the foreign members, was unable to send any financial aid.' " The perplexing ' old gilt stone,' with the Maltese cross and the date, ' 1617,' in the Chateau wall facing Mr. J. Dimbar's residence, naturally came in for its share of notice. On rather slender historical grounds it is indicated by the correspondent as the foundation stone of the Chateau St. Louis, erected in 1647 by De Montmagny to replace or enlarge Cham- plain's original fortress. E. T. D. C. then adds interesting data, especi- ally for the knights of the square, compass and circle, touching Masonic matters, such as the handing down, practically, as he says, unimpaired to their descendants of the ' teachings, profession and ceremonial of the Sir Knights.' " The * Priory ' controversy has brought more than one Richmond into the field. A most industrious and able youn» writer, hailing from the ambitious town of Levis, Mr. Joseph Edmund Roy, advan- tageously known by his historical sketch of the " First Inhabi- tant of Levis " has written about twenty columns in the Quotidien to solve the question propounded by Colonel Carr. That the Knights of St. John in the palmy days of the Order did fix upon the colony of Quebec as a likely spot on which to plant their standard, more than one writer is agreed. They were powerful and wealthy, and that they should seek out so fair and promising a land was but characteristic of their am- ■m 1! 16 KNI6UT8 TEMPLARS. bition. In Capt. John Knox's Journal of the Siege of Quebec, the following entry, under date of Ist October, 1759, descrip- tive of the chief edifices of the city, he makes mention of the still unfinished but imposing house of the Knights Hospitallers : " Their principal buildings were the Cathedral, of which only the walls remain; the bishop's palace, the colleges of the Jesuits and BecoUets, the convent of the Ursulines and Hotel DeDieu, with their churches, a semi- nary for the education of youth, almost beat to pieces, with a neat chapel adjoining ; a stately and unfinished house for the Knights Hospitallers, the Intendant's magnificent palace in the suburbs of St. Boque, and the church of Madame la Victoire, in the low town, of wJiich the walls only are standing. In the comer houses of the street are niches in the wall, with statues as large as life of St. Joseph, St. Ursula, St. Augustine, St. Denis, and many others, with the like figures in the front of the;.' churches and other religious houses, which have an agreeable effect to the eyes of passengers. The castle, or citadel, and residence of the late Governor-General, fronting the BecoUet's college and church, and situ- ated on the grand parade, which is a spacious place surrounded with fair buildings, is curiously erected on the top of a precipice, south of the Ejiiscopal house, and overlooks the low town. The palace, called Fort St. Louis, was the rendezvous of the Grand Council of the colony. There is, besides, another citadel on the summit of the eminence of Cape Diamond." The first of the Knights to reach Quebec was Champlain, who came in 1603. He returned to France and was sent to Canada a second time in 1608. It is claimed by some writers that Champlain was not a Knight of Malta at this time, as his name does not appear on a list of persons present at a Chapter of the Order held on 11th May, 1631, nor was he represented by a proxy. According to historians he was followed by Charles de Bourbon, Comte de Soissons, who became Viceroy of New France, as it was then named. De Chattes, Governor of Dieppe, being one of those financially interested in the colony, interested himself in the movement, and he it was who prevailed upon Champlain to take the initiatory step. The Knights were not long in making their influence felt. De Montmagny especially proved an active factor in public aflTairs. and in conjunction with other Knights, notably de Sillery, de Razilly, all members of the Company of the Hundred Partners, advanced the colony with rapid strides. Montmagny, who was Governor of Quebec from 1636 to 1648, was recalled to France in the latter year, and was subsequently sent by the Grand Master of the Knights of Malta to St. Christopher, in the West Indies, to enquire into the conduct of the Chevalier de Poincy, who, as Governor of the islands, had built a castle there, which he had fortified like a citadel, and so managed afifairs that complaints were made to the Grand Master, who KNIGHTS OF ST. JOHN AT QDBBEC. 17 made enquiries, when de Poincy offered to surrender it to Jacques Bouxel de Graucy, the Grand Master of the Order, conditionally that the latter would pay his debts. The king, liowever, did not take long to dispossess him, and the Gittnd Master appointed the Chevalier de Sales to assist de Poincy with his Council. De Poincy died on the island shortly after- wards. During his time the island were held by the Order. The investment proving the reverse of profitable, they were re- sold to a French company, who finally passed them into the hands of England. The Order in Canada, however, progressed, and the Knights during Montmagny's regime acquired strength and influence. As Governor of Quebec from 163t) to 1648, he was untiring in his efforts to advance their interests and ele- vate himself at the same time. The massive Chateau St. Louis, rebuilt by him and converted into a fortress, was for many years a monument to his desire for greatness. His conduct, together with the fact that the increasing possessions and in- fluence of the Knights was creating comment and jealousy, occasioned his withdrawal by the king. Nor was suspicion created by Montmagny's conduct alone. The wealth, an acqui- sition of his subordinates, gave rise to no little speculation as to where the aims and objects of the Knights would carry them. De Sillery, we are told, received a stipend of 4,000 livres as commander of the Fratres, and further, that he founded at the place called after his name a chapel, fort and convent, together with dwellings for the converted natives. Montmagny's eager- ness for personal aggrandizement was especially distasteful to the king, hence the recall of the governor, the discouragement of the Knights under the displeasure of the sovereign, and the de- cline of the Order as a settlement in Quebec. In 1784 James Thompson, overseer of the works in Quebec, found in the yard in the Chateau de St. Louis a stone in which was cut a gilt Maltese cross, with the date 1647. Conceiving it to be part of the original Chateau, he replaced it in the wall, where it is still. Surmises have been multifarious with regard to this stone, some writers being of the opinion that it was the foundation stone of the old castle. This theory is scouted by others, however, who think that the arms of France, rather than the Cross of Malta, would be chosen as the mark to distinguish the foundation stone. To support this idea the foundation stone in Champlain's house, which bore the royal arms, is cited, The date on the stone with the gilt cross, it is, moreover, argu- ed, is also evidence against the former theory, of the Chateau having been enlarged in 1636. It is admitted, however, that it bears the symbol of the Knights who once occupied the buihl- B ii '!'!:;[ m w ii ''''■m i 'in ! 'i i fl ^ ' ^' M • , ■I ■ i i;;! 18 KNIGHTS TEMPLARS. ing, and that it was a part of it thei-e is little doubt. Knox's reference to a " bouse " of the Knights Hospitallers is used as an argument that an actual Priory of the Order did not exist but their wealth and possessions, as well as their number during Montmagny's time, would indicate that there did exist a Priory, and an influential one at that. Mr. J. M. Le Moine says: — "I am in possession of a short note from the learned Abbfe Bois, F. R. S. C , which corrobor- ates the position taken by the Levis antiquarian," from which I quote the following : " The Knights of St. John, of Jernsalem, established at Quebec, Bras- ■de-fer, Montmagny, Sillery, etc., had erected a bureau in the yard of Castle St. Louis; it had cost 40,000 livres (not pounds) of French money. The gable contained a large stone, set in the wall, on which was engrav- ed the arms of the Order. This stone having dropped to the ground 'when the edifice was destroyed by fire in July, 1759 (pending the siege), remained amongst the ruins until 1784, when the military force detailed to level the lot found it and placed it in the wall of the Chateau yard. The shield was carried to England, and after knocking about in the public stores, it was plac«d at . I have the whole of the particu- lars among my papers, but am too ill to look them up. (Signed) L. E. Bois." The Order of the Temple, which is admittedly distinct from the Order of Malta, was evidently in a state of vitality in Canada in the early part of the present century, for we have a tabulated list of the rreceptories that formed a Great Priory of Canada under what was apparentl}*^ the Grand Preceptory or or Encampment of ^{forth America. An extract is given in another part of this work from a French Templar work, pub- lished in Paris, France, in 1813, now in the possession of the Deputy Grand Master, Dr. J. A. Henderson, Q.C., of Kings- ton, Ont. No trace, however, of a Priory under French iurisdiction can be found, so that the one referred to evidently existed on paper only. The result of careful reading seems to afford conviction that the organization of the Knights of Malta did exist in some form in Quebec in the earlier part of the seventeenth century, and there seems to be no reasonable doubt that their autho- rity was derived from a parent organization on the Continent of Europe. A persistent and continued search has failed to give any further than the meagre details furnished in connection with Canadian Knight Templarism in the old city of Quebec. Every known source of supply has been exhausted, and the archives of the Craft have oeen carefuUv examined, so that l!M[ il-:^ :; FIRST WARRANT FOR A TEMPLAR ENCAMPMEST. 19 any information concerning the dawn of Templarism might be brought to light. Knight Templarism comes to the fore again in Quebec on 28th July, 1855, when, by a warrant from the Grand Conclave of England, under the recommendation of the Provincial Grand Conclave of Canada, the Encampment of William de la More, the Martyr, was constituted, under the Eminent Frater T. D. Harington. At a later date this Encampment is reported as having made no returns, and the Provincial Grand Chancellor requested instructions as to action in the cfxse. In 1871 Col. Moore, as Provincial Grand Commander, in his annual address, stated that the warrant of William de la More was in the hands of the Deputy Grand Commander Frater Harington. and as the seat of the Canadian Government was removed, and all tin- members of the Preceptory were civil servants, he had cie cided not to leave the warrant in Quebec, but to transfer it tc Ottawa. 'illH i'l :i "iim mam CHAPTER IV. Templaky in the Province of Nova Scotia — An Encampment in 1782. The Order under the Chapter General of Scotland — Provincial Conclave or Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. HE Province of Nova Scotia has perhaps the earliest record of a regular constituted Templar Encamp- ment. The first records, so far as known of the Templar degrees in that Province, are dated Sep- tember 20th, 1782, thirteen years prior to the earliest records known on this continent, which are those of St. Andrew's R. A. Chapter, Boston, Mass. Frater Stephen R. Sircom, of Halifax, and an esteemed member of the Nova Scotia Preceptory, has kindly furnished the writer with copies of the ancient records of that and subsequent meet- ings down to 1784, when they appear to have lapsed. The following are the extracts : Haufax, 20th September, 1782. " At a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons held under Warrant No. 211 on the Andent Grand Registry of England at the *■ Golden Ball. ' " Present : — "The Rt Worshipful Bk. Kikkham, H.P. ; R, W. Br. John Woodin, Ist K, ; R. W. Br. Ephm. Whiston, 2nd K. ; R. W. Br. John Cody, S. ; R. W. Br. John Willis. " Applications having been made by Brothers John George Pyke, John Clark, and Joseph Peters, Past Masters of Regular Lodges of Free and Accepted Ancient York Masons, for further Light and Knowledge in the secret and hidden Mysteries of Free Masonry : and they on strict trial and due examination being found worthy, were by us installed and Insti- tuted into the Sublime Secrets of Royal Arch Masonry. After which " An Assembly or Encampment of Sir Knight Templars being formed, the said Brothers J. G. Pyke, John Clark, and Joseph Peters, were Insti- tuted and Dubbed Knights of the Most Noble and Right Worshipful Order of Sir Knight Templars. " And the Lodge was closed in Peace and Harmony." There are similar records of ten other meetings, in each case held "under the Sanction of Warrant No. 211," the R. A. Chapter degrees being conferred on applicants, "Past Masters im AN ENCAMPMENT IN 1783. ai of Regular Lodges," and the recipients being "dubbed Knights" in the " Assembly or Encampment " which was opened sub- sequently on the same evening. On the 9th Oct., 1782, it is recorded that "Bros. Joseph Oabome, Timothy W. Hierlihy and John Hardy," were so elevated. On the 12th Nov. following, " Bros. Jonathan Snelling and Daniel Wood " received the degrees of Knighthood, and on the 18th of the next month '* Bros. Col. S. Hierlihy and John O'Brien " were similarly honored. On this occasion the oflicers were "^ elected to serve for the ensuing year, viz. : The Right W. Bro. Pvke, H. P., T. C. Genl. ; the Right W. Bro. Cody, Ist K. and Ist G. W.' ; the Right W. Bro. Whiston, 2nd K. and 2nd G. W., etc." " The installation of Officers (for want of time) was deferred to a future opportunity." The next meeting was on the 12th March, 1783, when the officers chosen in the previous December were installed, and " Bros. Phelon and Kelley were raised to the dignity of Templars. A Chapter and Encampment "on Emergency" was called for a week later, and met " at the Golden Ball " on the 20th March. Here, it is stated, that '^Dues paid fur 12th March and 2nd Wednesday in June, amounting to £3.10, of which £3 was given into the hands of Bro. O'Brien to pay Lawlor & Wyer, and the remaining lOs. into the hands of Bro. Kirkham, the Treasurer." The assessment plan was not unknown to our old-time brethren, for it is recorded that at this meeting it was " Resolved that all back accounts be made out and given to Bro. Peters ; which are to be inspected by the said Bro. Peters, Bro. Snelling and Bro. Wood, who are appointed a Com- mittee for that purpose, and to make a dividend of the sum to be paid by each Brother, which shall be refunded as soon as the box can afford it." The next meeting was on the 11th June, when, we are told, that "an application from Bro. Wm. Kennedy, of the Union (Lodge), was balloted for and rejected." It is also stated that on this occasion " a motion was made 'for a Procession of Royal Arch and Knight Templars on St. John's Day, which was unanimously rejected for good and sufficient reasons. " It was likewise " Resolved that all Brother Sir Knight Templars distinguish themselves on St. John's Day next, by a piece of Black Ribband round the left arm, and that Bro. R. H. Pyke provide the Ribband for that purpose on the morning of that day." Three months later, viz., on the 10th September, 1783, the Chapter and Encampment convened again, eight members being present, each of whom paid in 5s. as dues. Bro. Cody asked for an Emergency meeting in order that a complaint preferred by him against Bro. Phelon be heard, which was granted, and on the 17th Sept. , the same brethren met to con- sider Bro. Cody's charge of "great abuse" and Bro. Phelon's defence. " The two Brothers were desired to withdraw. The Lodge and En- campment then took the case between them into their most serious con- sideration, and considering every circumstance between them in the most favourable light which it was possible to do, declared it as their opinion that both the said Brothers Cody and Phelon (altho' the case was somewhat intricate,) bad been greatly to blame, and thereupon ordered that- the said Brothers should this night make up the differences between, by tak- ing each other by the hand as Brothers and pay the expense of the meet- ing. And the said Brothers Cody and Phelon being called in, and having the sense of the Body declared to them, did aoquieaoe therein, and gave ]| ittl! it I i r I ^ i It ! I 22 KNIGHTS TEMALARS. •nuranoe to each other aa well as to the Body, that they would have no more remembrance of this difference, and henceforth live aa brethren." The two last recorded meetings, viz., that of 10th December, 1783, and 9th March, 1784, do not appear to have had any Templar business to transact. The above, together with " a bill of items," furnished the same Encampment in the year 1 782, and found by Bro. W. F. Bunting, of St. John, N. B., while making an examination of old documents in Grand Secretary's office in Halifax in 1886, are the only records of this early Encampment which was at- tached to St. John's Lodge No. 211, chartered June 30th, 1780, and now No. 2 on the Nova Scotia register. Although in no way bearing upon our history, the following extract from a letter written by H.R.H. Prince Edward while stationed with his command in Quebec, addressed to Thomas Dunckerley, Esq., Grand Master of the Knight Templars, of which Order H.R H. was Grand Patron, and reproduced from an old London magazine, will possess perhaps some interest for the reader : "Quebec, November 23, 1793. " Dear Sir, — Accept our thanks for jour communication of the proceed- " ings of the Grand Chapter * * * l shall think myself particularly " fortunate when circumstances will permit my meeting the Knights in " Grand Chapter in London ; of this I request you will assure them the " first time that you assemble. * * * " Your most devoted and obedient servant, " EDWARD, " Thomas Dunckerley, Esq., " Colonel of the Royal Fusiliers. " Hampton Court Palace." That an Encampment of Templars under the Chapter General of Scot- land did exist at a very early period is proved by the fact that " Nova Scotia" Preceptory No. 58, E. R., whose warrant from the Convent Gen- eral of England is dated 11th October, 1858, was formed by " members of St. John's Encampment, Reg. Scotland. Halifax, N. S., 1840- 1 850." The Fratres given as charter members are : — Alexander Keith, March 1841. James Foreman, '' 1841. Henry C. D. Twining, March 1841. John D. Nash, April 1850. John Richardson, April 1843. Fred Traunwiesser, Feb 1850. John M. Taylor, March 1841. William Johns, Dec. 1840. Robert D. Clarke, Jan. 1841. George Anderson, March 1841. Rev. J. T. Twining, D. D. March 1841-. In consequence of the political changes and reorganization of the British Provinces of North America into the Dominion of Canada, the Supreme Grand Master of the Grand Conclave in England and Wales changed the Provincial Conclave in Canada into that of a Grand Priory of the Dominion, and the title of Provincial Grand Commander into TTfO I I NCI A L CONCLA VK. 23 Grand Prior, by patent dated Ist May, 1868, with authority over the whole Dominion, reserving that of New Brunswicic and Nova Scotia aa a separate Provincial Conclave. This Preceptory and the Union de Molay at St. John, N. B., formed the Provincial Conclave uf Nova Scotia and Now Brunswick, and botJi worked under its authority till the year 1870, wh»>n tliey came under the juri8'li< tiun of the Grand Priory of Canada. The Hon. Alt'xander Keith, (if Halifax, held a warrant from the Grand Conclave of England as Pro> vincial Grand Commander for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and dur- ing hia lifetime it was not considered advisable to meri{e those Provinces into that of Great Priory. The death, in 1873, of that distinguished Frater at last removed the difliculty, and Col. Moore, the Great Prior, wrote to England clainiini; those territories. The Council of the Great Priory of Englnnd at once decided that from the date of Provincial Prior Keith's death, the territory over which he presided came under the juris- diction, and should bn amalgamated with the Great Priory of Canada. A meeting of the Provincial Grand Conclave was summoned to take place at Halifax on the llOlh .lune, 1873, to discuss and take action on the proposed severance with Eni;land and affiliation with the Great Priory of Canada. A proposal to form a Great Priory for the Dominion was also debated, and agreed to. The Preceptories at Halifax and S'. John were duly represented. The Preceptory of Union de Molay held a special meeting at St. .John to consider the question, and cordially approved of the establishment of such a Great Priory, and resolved to ratify and con- firm whatever might be done to the end in view by the Provincial Grand Conclave of Novia Scotia and New Brunswick. Similar action was taken at the uieetint; of the Provincial Grand Conclave, and both «)f the Mari- time Province Preceptories on the English registry were added to tlie roll of Can da. In August, 1873, a Grand Conclave for the formation of a Grand Priory for the Dominion was called to meet at Kingston, Ont., and all the Pre- C'ptories in the Dominion were notififid and requested to send dele-.'ates. No action was, however, taken till 1876-77, at the annual assembly at Montreal, when the National Great Priory was forrand by consent c»f the Supreme authorities in England. On Ist December. 1885. a warrant was granted Fratres L. B. Archibald, T. Cooke, and others, then members of the Nova Scotia Preceptory, Halifax, by the Great Priory of Canada, to " Malta " Preceptory, Truro, Nova Scotia, thus making two Preceptories in that Province under the allegiance to the Great Priory. i ■!.! CHAPTER V. Temi't.aut in the T'iiovince of Nkw Brunhwick— An ENCAMrMiNT IN 1840 I'NDKU St.'OTllhll AuTIKtMTY — HlVAL OkOANiZATIONS AND A TkHUITOHIAL DlKPICUlTy— AcTiON OF THE GUEAT PhIOUV OF UaNAI'A. li HE next date in the progress of Knights Templar- ism in the eastern provinces is 1840, when "Hibernian Encampment, No. 318 of Knights Templars," was constituted on the Sth of A|)ril, 1S4(), at St. Andrew's, Charlotte County, New Brunswick, being the first body of Knights Templars organized in that Province. The warrant was granted by the " Supreme Grnnd Encampment of Ireland, Knights Templars and Knights of Malta," to the following petitioners: — Fratres James Kyle, John McCoubry, Jnlm Commac, James Tufts, James Clark, James Brown, Aiexjuider Cochran, John Kerr, James McFarlane, anil William Gray. The legular assemblies were held on the second Monday in March, June, September, and December. The Encampment held its hist meeting and went out of existence in May of IbGO, when its Lodge, Cliapter and Encampment warrants were returned to Ireland. Its records are scant, and but little can be gathered of its operations, in consequence of the death and dispersion of nearly all its members. In 1888, out of all the orticers of this Encampment, Frater A. W. Smith, of St. Andrew's, N.B., wjis the only one alive. Knight Templarism in New Brunswick was for many years in a comparatively dormant condition, when a few of the adherents of the Order, who he'd fealty to the Grand Priory and Chapter General of Scotland, bethought themselves of the formation of an Encampment acting under the authority of that body, and accordin