Museum of Freemasonry - Masonic Library

Article Index

necessary to be adopted for the preservation of Order in the Craft, and for the Maintenance of that Subordination which is so essential to be observed in all regular communities which are governed by Laws, and by no one more particularly than by the great Body of Masons'. The Board found it proved that the Grand Master had taken no part in the original proceedings against Crucefix, which had been initiated by four brethren unknown to him. (Yet Laurence Thompson was one of them!) The letter was denounced as 'a false, scandalous and unwarrantable attack on the character and conduct of the MW Grand Master', and it was recommended to the Grand Lodge that Crucefix should be expelled from the Craft. At a subsequent Especial Grand Lodge the motion for his expulsion was put, but, an apology being tendered on his behalf, an amendment was made that this should be received. The amendment was carried by a small majority, one of its principal opponents being RW Bro C. T. D'Eyncourt, an equerry to and friend of the Duke of Sussex and PGM for Lincolnshire.1 The Asylum and the Annuity Fund both came into being and were amalgamated in 1850 to form the RMBI.

It was the publication of Crucefix's letter in the Freemason's Quarterly Review that brought the Asylum controversy to a head. The Review itself was another cause of the Duke's rancour against the Doctor. Founded by him in 1834, he was its editor for the next six years. The periodical supplied a much-felt want in masonic literature, but the Grand Master disapproved of it. In the course of the interview in the Grand Secretary's office, already alluded to, he said that Dr Crucefix 'had sown the seeds of discontent where all was peace and good order, and by his vile paper he had caused considerable mischief, the effects of which it would take all the care and consideration of the Grand Master, assisted by the Grand Lodge, to correct'. 2 A little later in this same year, when addressing the Grand Lodge on the death of the DGM, Lord Durham, the Duke noticed two brethren, one of whom was Lee Stevens, taking notes, doubtless for the use of the editor of the Review, and told them it was illegal. When they demurred he exclaimed: 'It is the law. I have so laid it down and I will enforce it.'3 Yet the Board of General Purposes shortly before this had rejected a memorial against RW Bro J. Easthope, PGW, who, as proprietor of The Morning Chronicle, had printed an account of a public speech by the Grand Master, in which he had associated the Fraternity with his denunciation of the connection between the Established Church and the State as disastrous to both and a grievous hindrance to the dissemination of the true religion. 4 In 1841 the Freemason's Quarterly Review was denounced as 'a traitorous violation of the obligation of secrecy '. 5

Two months after Dr Crucefix's narrow escape from expulsion, Lee Stevens opposed, in the Grand Lodge, the re-nomination of the Duke of Sussex as Grand Master, suggesting instead the Marquis of Salisbury, DGM. The Duke allowed him to make a long speech, which he described as 'able, candid and straightforward', and then 'expressed himself very warmly, not to say intemperately' ' on the subject. 'I'll let the Brother see,' he said, 'and I'll let the Grand Lodge see, too, that 1 do know all about him', going on to accuse Stevens of attacking him in the

  1. GL Quarterly Communications, Minutes, 2 September. 30 October 1840
  2. FQR, 1840. pp 192-3.
  3. Manchester Association for Masonic Research, Transactions, 1934, pp 95-6
  4. FQR, 1840. pp 209-10.
  5. FQR, 1841. pp 1-10.