Mark Coleman Wallace PhD Thesis - University of St Andrews

of Edinburgh.” 69 Mitchell’s allegations, however, were quickly dismissed,
largely due to their inflammatory nature. In the opinion of the Grand Lodge, his
answers were “scurrilous and malicious towards a Brother, and disrespectful to
the Grand Lodge.” 70 It is highly significant that although only Gibson is named
as a member of a political party in Edinburgh, the Grand Lodge was visibly
insulted by Mitchell’s comments. Mitchell condescendingly insinuated that
Gibson was not only a pawn of the Whig party, but also of the Grand Lodge.
Suggestions of political manipulation, however, were not enough to
justify Mitchell’s suspension. As such, the Grand Lodge of Scotland required
tangible evidence of Mitchell’s supposed campaign to undermine Scottish
freemasonry, which ultimately appeared in the form of invented lodge minutes
and a stolen libellous pamphlet.
Gibson claimed that the respondent “did, at one or another of the
meetings of the Caledonian Lodge, propose that the lodge should make a
secession from the Grand Lodge.” 71 Mitchell argued that the charge was a
“fishing accusation, made with the view of giving Brother Gibson the power of
fishing for a charge out of every thing which the respondent ever said or did at
any of the meetings of the Caledonian Lodge.” 72
Interestingly, the accusation of secession was made at the Grand Lodge
of Scotland on 5 January 1808; however, the minutes of Caledonian Lodge
69 Ibid, 11.
70 Grand Lodge of Scotland Minutes 13 June 1808. Grand Lodge also stated that the pamphlet
contained matter “highly injurious to the character and dignity of the Grand Lodge; and, upon
the whole, that the conduct of Brother Mitchell had been in an eminent degree derogatory to the
honour, and prejudicial to the interests of Masonry.”
71 Stewart, Exposition, 17.
72 Ibid.
250