05.04.2013 Views

Mark Coleman Wallace PhD Thesis - University of St Andrews

Mark Coleman Wallace PhD Thesis - University of St Andrews

Mark Coleman Wallace PhD Thesis - University of St Andrews

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

admitted into the Act in consequence <strong>of</strong> my assurance to Mr. Pitt that nothing<br />

could be deemed a Lodge which did not sit by precise authority from the Grand<br />

Lodge and under its direct superintendence.” 122<br />

On 30 November 1808, the Grand Lodge <strong>of</strong> Scotland submitted an<br />

application for an interdict against the meetings <strong>of</strong> the Associated Lodges and a<br />

Bill <strong>of</strong> Suspension. 123 Additionally, the Bill <strong>of</strong> Suspension stated the intentions<br />

<strong>of</strong> the Grand Lodge to establish itself as the “only legal, in its fullest meaning,<br />

body in Freemasonry in Scotland.” 124<br />

In December 1808, the Courts granted the interdicts. However, the<br />

Associated Lodges appealed to the Second Division <strong>of</strong> the Court <strong>of</strong> Session on<br />

11 February 1809. During the appeal, Lord Justice Clerk Hope stated his<br />

disapproval over the admission as evidence <strong>of</strong> a letter written by Moira which<br />

implicated the Prince <strong>of</strong> Wales. According to the Lord Justice, “a most serious<br />

improper attempt had been made by the complainers to influence the decision <strong>of</strong><br />

the Court, by production <strong>of</strong>, and founding upon, the letter from the Earl <strong>of</strong><br />

267<br />

Moira, containing the opinion <strong>of</strong> the Prince <strong>of</strong> Wales.” 125 Subsequently, Moira’s<br />

122 Grand Lodge <strong>of</strong> Scotland Minutes, 11 August 1808.<br />

123 Wartski, “Secret Societies,” 54. The Grand Lodge submitted the application “on behalf <strong>of</strong><br />

certain interested individuals.” As Wartski writes, the Grand Lodge <strong>of</strong> Scotland “had no locus<br />

standi in judicio due to its status as a voluntary organization. Thus the Bill <strong>of</strong> Suspension had to<br />

be issued in the name <strong>of</strong> specific masons,” Ibid.<br />

124 Ibid, 55.<br />

125 From the Edinburgh <strong>St</strong>ar, quoted in Petition and Complaint, 6-7. The Lord Justice asserted<br />

that if the “letter alluded to had been authorized by the Prince, and written by the Noble Earl,<br />

with the view <strong>of</strong> inducing their Lordships to decide the cases before them in one way or another,<br />

he would certainly move…that the letter should be burnt by the hands <strong>of</strong> the common<br />

executioner,” Ibid. Lindsay notes that “as, however, it was a confidential letter to Mr. Inglis, the<br />

Agent responsible for its inclusion in the Process would appear at the Bar to give an explanation.<br />

Inglis…<strong>of</strong>fered to accept the whole responsibility, although he submitted that the letter formed<br />

part <strong>of</strong> the Record for the Grand Lodge party, and was, therefore, a proper production. On the<br />

top <strong>of</strong> this the three Whig Counselors for the minorities (John Clerk <strong>of</strong> Eldin, John Greenshields

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!