The 46th (South Devonshire) Regiment
Freemasonry in Australia,
1814 to 1817

By R. J. Linford

Originally as presented to the Australian Masonic Research Council as the Kellerman Lecture for New South Wales, 1996-98. Published here by kind permission of Neil Wynes Morse, the literary executor of Mr. Linford.

The matter of the contribution to the development of the Craft in Australia made by the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues No 227 IC, attached to the 46th (South Devonshire) Regiment stationed in Sydney between 1814 and 1817, has been the subject of discussion by Masonic historians over the years. It has been variously claimed that in 1816 the lodge assisted in the constitution of the first regular stationary lodge in Australia, the Australian Social Lodge No 260 IC, that the lodge paved the way for the establishment of stationary lodges in Australia; that the credit for the formation of the Australian Social Lodge must be given not to Lodge No 227 but to Lodge No 218 attached to the 48th Regiment, which replaced the 46th Regiment in Sydney, and in particular to one member, Samuel Clayton

The records of the activities of the lodge during its Sydney posting are scant but some additional details have come to light since the earlier Masonic historians were writing. It is the purpose of this paper to review the information at present available and to test out the several hypotheses. In the course of the review, an attempt will be made to place the work of the lodge in the political and social setting of the Sydney of the period.

The British 46th (South Devonshire) Regiment of Foot arrived in New South Wales in February 1814 to relieve the 1st Battalion of the 73rd Regiment, which had been responsible for protection and discipline in the colony during the preceding four years. It had been raised in 1741 as the 57th Regiment of Foot (Colonel James Price’s Regiment) and from 1751 was known by the names of successive commanding officers. From 1748 to 1782 it was listed as the 46th Regiment of Foot, and from 1782 as the 46th (South Devonshire) Regiment of Foot.

The regiment had had extensive service in North America. Between 1757 and 1760 it was stationed in Nova Scotia, Canada. From 1776 to 1778 it was involved in the American War of Independence and in 1805 was in Dominica. Its posting to New South Wales in 1814 following on from the 73rd Regiment marked the beginning of what was to be a routine procedure under which regiments in England were given service in Australia and then moved on to India.

The Regiment’s Commanding Officer was Colonel Molle. Baptised George James Molle, he was the son of John Mow (surname as shown in the parish register), of Maine in the Scottish parish of Chirnside, Berwickshire, a member of an old Scottish family. He joined the Scots Brigade (later 94th Regiment) in June 1793 as an ensign, served in Gibraltar, Cape of Good Hope, India, Egypt and Spain, and was regularly promoted until he attained the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel in September 1808. After a spell of garrison duty at Gibraltar, he transferred to the 46th Regiment when it was ordered to New South Wales in 1813, as its Commanding Officer. After his arrival in the colony on the Wyndham on 7 February 1814, accompanied by the officer corps and headquarters staff of his Regiment he was, by virtue of his regimental position, appointed as Lieutenant Governor to the Governor, Major General Lachlan Macquarie, with whom he had served in India, and, in July 1814, was gazetted brevet Colonel.1

Attached to the 46th Regiment were three, and perhaps four, Masonic bodies, all working under an ambulatory warrant, No 227, issued by the Grand Lodge of Ireland in 1752. They were: a Craft lodge, with the title of the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues; a Royal Arch Chapter, known as Mount Olive Chapter; a Knight Templar encampment; and possibly a further body conferring the degree of Red Cross Knight. As will be discussed later, there is primary evidence that the Craft lodge and the Royal Arch Chapter were operating in the regiment during its service in Sydney. There is secondary evidence that the Knight Templar encampment was then operational , and there is also evidence of a body conferring the degree of Red Cross Knight but there are problems of interpretation of this.

To modern eyes the use of a Craft warrant as authority for the working of the Royal Arch and other so-called higher degrees may appear unusual. However, it was not uncommon at the time. Gould, drawing on the records of Lodge No 441 IC, in the 38th Regiment of Foot, provides an illustration of Irish practice as late as 1822. He says2 that the working of the Royal Arch degree was resumed in the lodge in that year, when a letter was read from the Deputy Secretary of the Grand Lodge of Ireland of which the following passage is recorded in the Lodge minutes: There is not any warrant issued by the Grand Lodge of Ireland other than that you hold; it has therefore always been the practice of Irish lodges to confer the Higher degrees under that authority.

Bernard Jones, writing of the earlier mid-eighteenth-century English scene, in relation to the workings of the ‘Antients’ and the ‘Moderns’ Grand Lodges prior to their amalgamation to form the United Grand Lodge of England in 1813,says that the ‘Antients’ Grand Lodge, which drew heavily upon Irish practice for its ritual, took a very comprehensive view as to what constituted the ceremonies of the Order. The ‘Antients’, and later the ‘Moderns’ too, worked in addition to the Craft degrees a Past Master degree derived from the Installation Ceremony, an Excellent Mason or Master Degree, Super Excellent Master, Super Excellent or High Excellent Master, the Royal Arch, Mark and occasionally further degrees such as Knight Templar, Red Cross, and possibly others.3 The Freemasons of the 46th Regiment, therefore, in working a number of ‘higher’ degrees under the authority of a Craft warrant, were not departing in any substantial way from widely-accepted practice. Where they may have differed from custom in many Irish lodges was that the Royal Arch and other Masonic degrees were conferred in a chapter or other body separate from the Craft lodge, although there was a substantial common membership of the various bodies.

The Lodge of Social and Military Virtues had had some unusual experiences during the earlier years of its existence. Gould mentions two occasions prior to the regiment’s tour of duty in New South Wales when its Masonic chest had fallen into the hands of the enemy and had been returned. The first was during the American War of Independence when, by the chances of war, the chest was taken by the Americans. This circumstance was reported to General Washington, himself a Freemason, who directed that a guard of honour should take charge of the chest, with other articles of value belonging to the 46th, and return them to the regiment. The second occurred in Dominica in 1805 when the 46th was attacked by a French force which it repelled, but in the action again had the misfortune to lose its Masonic chest, which the enemy succeeded in securing on board their fleet without knowing its contents. Three years afterwards, the French Government, at the request of the officers who commanded the expedition, returned the chest with several complementary presents, in itself an act which was a reflection of the Government’s views on the moral and social value and the general usefulness of Freemasonry.

Whilst the 46th Regiment was in Australia, the chairs of the Craft lodge and the Royal Arch chapter were occupied by Captain Edward Sanderson, who arrived in Australia in 1815. The remaining office-holders, except for the Secretary of the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, Lieutenant D Leith Cox, perhaps the Scribe of the Mount Olive Chapter, Captain Thomas Miller, appear to have changed during the regiment’s stay in New South Wales. The historian of Grand Lodge of New South Wales, Karl R Cramp, states that the Commanding Officer, Molle, was the Prior of the Knight Templar encampment and Sanderson the Recorder. Molle, presumably a Mason before his arrival in New South Wales with his Regiment, joined the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues in late 1816.

The 46th was a Regiment in which the class-consciousness of Britain at that time was fully reflected. The officer group regarded itself as superior to the men of the regiment and superior also to the majority of the civilian population of the colony to which the regiment had been posted. They formed a small select clique in which loyalty to the group and to the individuals of the group was fundamental to their code of conduct. Even before the arrival of the Regiment in New South Wales, on the recommendation of the Commanding Officer, Molle, the officers of the 46th had bound themselves never to admit into their society nor to have intercourse with any of those persons who had arrived in the colony under sentence of transportation. Molle appears to have been influenced in his ideas by John Macarthur, a central figure in the insurrection which had unseated Governor Bligh and who was then in exile in England to escape a charge of sedition. This loyalty to the Regiment and to the group complicates interpretation of motives when Masonic influences may also be at work, for Freemasonry has similar principles of loyalty and brotherhood. This will become apparent when the criminal prosecutions lodged by the architect Francis Greenway are being discussed.

The regiment had arrived in New South Wales at a time when the colony was in the early stages of transformation from being a penal establishment to a settlement where there was a large free-settler element in the population. The community was divided broadly into four classes, namely; the more affluent settlers and traders; the officials, including the officers and men of the Regiments stationed in the colony; the poorer settlers and the emancipists; and the convicts. The more affluent settlers and traders regarded themselves as a sort of aristocracy content to fraternise with the higher officials and officers of the regiments. They tended to hold themselves aloof from the emancipists and the poorer settlers. The emancipists, the poorer settlers and the lesser officials formed a middle or lower class, while the convicts constituted a class of their own.

It was a time, too, when the colony was divided as to its future. Governor Macquarie, in accordance with what he conceived as ‘the benign Spirit of the original Settlement of the Colony, and of His Majesty’s Paternal Instructions as to the Mode of Government’, was in process of developing a plan under which the most meritorious of the convicts, or those who had been convicts, were being extended ‘generally the same consideration and qualification which they would have enjoyed from their merits and situation in life, had they never been under the sentence of the Law’. It was a policy which was by no means approved by the majority of the more affluent settlers. As Macquarie wrote to the Colonial Office shortly before the arrival of the 46th Regiment: No doubt many of the free settlers (if not all) would prefer (if it were left to their choice) never to admit persons who had been convicts to any situation of equality with themselves . . . I must, however, in justice to the original free settlers, observe that I believe that they are not all of one mind in this respect. Among them, some few liberal minded persons are to be found who do not wish those unfortunate persons for ever in a state of degradation.

In this situation, and given their social leanings, it was, perhaps, inevitable that a form of social alliance should be established between the officer group of the 46th Regiment and the free settler majority, an alliance based on opposition to Macquarie’s plans. The future of the colony thus became the central issue between the Regiment and Macquarie.

Relations between Molle, the officers of the 46th Regiment, and Governor Macquarie soon became cool. Although Molle had been Macquarie’s ‘old and much licked friend’ on the staff of General David Baird during Britain’s Egyptian expedition of 1801, and at first appeared to admire the Governor’s policy in the matter of the treatment of the emancipist element of the colony, Macquarie soon began to doubt Molle’s sincerity. There developed a difference between the two men regarding Regimental expectations as to living conditions and privileges. Officers of the Regiment complained about the cost of living, inadequacy of pay, lack of shipping space to allow them to import their own goods and the rate of profit of the local merchants. Oilmen’s stores were too dear. Scarlet cloth was never under five guineas per yard. Wine was unprocurable: ‘the purchase of European and other wines is attended with so enormous an expense as to deprive them of so beneficial an indulgence (even to a moderate degree) in a climate where such indulgence is Salutary and requisite.’ Molle supported an application for an increase in pay. Macquarie gave it endorsement but not with any enthusiasm.

Macquarie’s account of his subsequent relations with the officers of the 46th Regiment is contained in a series of papers submitted to the Colonial Secretary, Earl Bathurst, under cover of a dispatch dated 25 July 1817. Initially, Colonel Molle and his officers were pleased to accept invitations to dine at the Governor’s table when emancipist members of his administration were present. Molle even entertained some of the emancipists at his own table, although none was invited to the Regimental officers’ mess. The arrival of Captain Sanderson of the Regiment in 1815 was to lead to a change of situation.

Macquarie found Sanderson a difficult character. He was forced to admonish him privately for unbecoming and disrespectful language used to the Chief Magistrate and the Bench of Magistrates before whom he had been summonsed for a minor misdemeanour. This led Sanderson to form a political faction among his fellow officers, and more especially among the younger and more inexperienced of them, to oppose Macquarie and his administration and to draw ‘Contempt and Ridicule on all and every Measure of [his] Government’. Macquarie was especially annoyed by a caricature of himself drawn on the wall of the Regiment’s ward room by a junior officer and given ‘Indecent, Scurrilous’ labels by some of the senior officers, but felt unable to take action against them as any court martial would be constituted from the officers themselves. The officers, knowing of Macquarie’s practice of inviting some of the better-regarded emancipists to his table, ‘under the Seditious Banners of Capn. Sanderson’ refused invitations to dine at Government House, even though Macquarie was not only Governor of the colony but also their Commander in Chief.

However, the event that widened the breach between officers of the 46th Regiment and Macquarie, and produced deep rupture in the relations between Macquarie and Molle, was the circulation of two anonymous lampoons on Molle The first, which was widely circulated, reflected on Molle’s private and military character, and caused him disquiet and annoyance. Molle instituted enquiries concerning its authorship, including examination of the personal papers of his officers, but met with no success. The second, even ‘more Severe and Scurrilous’ than the first, raised Molle’s ire to the highest point. Macquarie intervened and ordered an investigation, which was brought to a halt by the discovery that the author was W C Wentworth, son of the Principal Surgeon of the Colony and Police Magistrate, D’Arcy Wentworth, but then on passage to England. The officers of the 46th Regiment, some of whom had been suspected of lampooning their Colonel, then prepared an ‘Address of Congratulation’ to their Commanding Officer, which included passages that ‘in the most Illiberal, Unjust and Malicious Manner … reflect[ed] in Sarcastic, tho’ Indirect Terms, on the Measures of … [Macquarie’s] Government’. The address was to be published in the local Gazette, but Macquarie refused publication unless the objectionable parts were removed. A hand-written copy was then widely circulated.

Correspondence on the matter passed between Macquarie and Molle, but the officers of the Regiment refused to change the substance of their address. The rift between Macquarie and the Regiment was complete.

In the meantime, the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues was active. It is not known whether the lodge was meeting before the arrival of its Right Worshipful Master, Captain Edward Sanderson, in 1815, nor is it known when the lodge began accepting, either by initiation or affiliation, civilian members. An undated list of members of the lodge held by the Grand Lodge of Ireland, which records the lodge membership late in the Regiment’s stay in New South Wales, states that one member was excluded from membership on 18 March 1816, so the lodge was certainly active by then. There is further public evidence that it was at work at the end of the year.

In November of 1816 the lodge participated in the laying of the corner stone of the residence of one of its brethren, Captain John Piper, at Elizabeth Point, Sydney, in what is regarded as the first public Masonic ceremony ever held in Australia. Prior to this, there were occasions when Freemasons were publicly involved in funerals, the laying of the foundation stone of an officers’ barracks, and the consecration of land for the erection of a church. Thus, the Sydney Gazette of 9 September 1804 reported the funeral of a young settler, Charles Wood, a Freemason, at which the cortege included ‘a numerous procession of the fraternity’.4

In Van Diemen’s Land diary entries of the Reverend Robert Knopwood5 record that on 19 August 1814 ‘the Governor laid the first stone for the officers Barrack on the hill; the Mason’s {sic} attended him’; in September 1815, after he had conducted the burial service for a Mr Lucas, from Browns River, he noted that Lucas ‘was a Mason and buried by the Brothers in Masonic form’; and on 19 February 1817, he referred to the ceremony of consecration of a piece of ground on which St David’s Anglican Church was to be erected, and at which ‘a neat and appropriate Masonic oration was delivered by a Member of the Society’. However, the November 1816 ceremony at Elizabeth Point appears to have been the first which was in wholly Masonic form.

A detailed report on the ceremony of laying the corner stone appeared in the Sydney Gazette of 9 November 1816, the text of which is reproduced in Appendix A. In substance, the proceedings were similar in many respects to those at present laid down for ceremonies of this kind by Grand Lodges working in accordance with the English tradition. They were conducted with the lodge at labour, and included prayers, the scattering of corn and the pouring of wine and oil, the deposit of coins beneath the foundation stone, and the collection of charitable contributions. A box placed on the stone, containing a roll commemorating the occasion, bore an inscription in Latin and in English translation, of which the translation reads: ‘By the Blessing of... (God) ... in the reign of George the 3rd and during the Government of L. Macquarie Esq., the Foundation Stone of this Mansion erected by John Piper was laid by Edward Sanderson, Mr. of the Lodge of S.M.V., No. 227, in 46th Regt of Foot & an Assembly of Brethren on 2nd Novr. A.D. 1816 of Masonry 5820.’

The Sydney Gazette report is an invaluable guide to the composition of the lodge of Social and Military Virtues circa 1816. Used in association with other available records, it provides the basic material for the development of a list of the lodge members at the time. These additional sources include the undated (possibly 1817) list held by the Grand Lodge of Ireland, to which reference has been made previously, and certificates of membership issued to Jeffrey Hart Bent by the lodge and its associated Royal Arch chapter, and to John Joseph William Molesworth Oxley by the lodge. An annotated list of lodge members, using as a basis the Sydney Gazette report of Masons attending the 1816 ceremony of laying the corner stone, is given in Appendix B.

Of particular interest is the list of personnel attending the stone-laying ceremony. In all, there were thirty-two Masons present. The eleven office-holders, including Captain Edward Sanderson as Right Worshipful Master, Captain Thomas Miller as Senior Warden, and Major John McKenzie as Junior Warden, were all officers of the Regiment. In addition, there were six other officers who were spectators or had only a minor role. There were two brethren from the 39th Regiment also in attendance. Civilian members of the lodge at the ceremony totalled eleven and there were two other Masonic civilian visitors. Among the Regimental members not occupying office, one, a supporter of the banner which formed part of the procession, was described ‘(as R.C. Knight)’, another, also a supporter of the banner, ‘(as Knight Templar)’, and a third, a supporter of the Right Worshipful Master, as ‘Kt. Templar, in full attire’.

The reference to the degrees of ‘R.C. Knight’ and Knight Templar gives cause for speculation. Bernard Jones6, citing as his authority the Irish Masonic historian, Phillip Crossle, says that in England as well as in Ireland, late in the eighteenth century and early in the nineteenth century, a ceremony known as the Red Cross Mason degree, previously known as the Super Excellent Mason degree, was worked in what was termed an ‘encampment’ of Royal Arch Masons. Jones is uncertain whether the Red Cross degree would have preceded or followed the Royal Arch, as there are instances of both in the records. Given the period of the 46th Regiment’s stay in Sydney, it does seem possible, perhaps even likely, that the designation of a Mason as ‘R.C. Knight’ referred to his having had that degree conferred upon him in the Mount Olive Chapter, or perhaps some other chapter. An alternative explanation is that ‘R.C. Knight’ is in reference to a Rose Croix degree. As to the designation of a brother as ‘Knight Templar’ or ‘Kt. Templar’, Jones says7 that while this most important of the chivalric Masonic orders is perhaps younger by twenty years or so than recorded Royal Arch Masonry, it is well proven that the two degrees were closely related in their early days, and that in the 1780s the Royal Arch was just as essential a preliminary to the Knight Templar as it is today. The spread of the Templar degrees in association with the Royal Arch was due, in large part, to the movement of military lodges, for in their lodges and chapters the ‘Antient’ working was predominant. The Rose Croix is believed to have been originally a Templar degree.

These considerations suggest that the Masons described as ‘R.C. Knight’ and ‘Knight Templar’ or ‘Kt. Templar’ may have had these degrees conferred upon them in the Mount Olive Chapter. However, the uncertainties remain. It is to be noted that, although they were not formally represented at the ceremony, the Royal Arch Masons present silently gave solemn benediction over the stone at the conclusion of the function, suggesting that these brethren were attending as Craft Masons or as members of one of the ‘higher’ degrees.

Also of interest are the size and composition of the group who constituted the civilian members of the lodge. In this connection, it is relevant to refer briefly to some comments by the historians of the United Grand Lodge of New South Wales, Cramp and Mackaness8. In their History, they state that WBro Crossle, of the Lodge of Research No CC, of Ireland, had informed them that Lodge No 227 refused to initiate Australian settlers. However, they had doubts about the accuracy of this advice. They thought that what Crossle intended was that the refusal referred only to those settlers who were emancipists, not men who had come to the colony free. It was, of course, possible, they said, that all non-military members of the lodge who had been named in the Sydney Gazette report may have been Masons before the arrival of the 46th Regiment in Sydney. They accepted, however, that there was the equal possibility that some of them had been initiated into the Craft in Sydney. There was no evidence available to prove either supposition correct. It was, however, of import to note that, although Lodge No 227 was the holder of a regular travelling warrant, it certainly did admit among its members civilians who were permanent residents of New South Wales.

Cramp and Mackaness were undoubtedly correct as regards the admission into the lodge of civilians who were not emancipists. Among the civilians listed in the Sydney Gazette report were two, at least, who had been initiated in Sydney in the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues. One was Judge Jeffrey Hart Bent; the other was the Surveyor-General, John Joseph William Molesworth Oxley. The evidence of Bent’s initiation is a letter, dated 12 May 1817, held in the National Library of Australia9 in which three members of the lodge wrote: ‘We shall ever consider your Initiation into the Mysteries of Masonry in our Lodge is a circumstance highly gratifying to us.’ Bent’s membership of the lodge is confirmed by a document issued to him, dated 1 June 1817, from the lodge, certifying to his being a well-regarded member.10 A certificate along similar lines, dated 6 March 1817, issued by the lodge to John Oxley, is held in the archives of the United Grand Lodge of New South Wales. There is evidence also of the admission into the lodge of other non-emancipist settlers, although the documentation is somewhat sketchy. Except for Sir John Jamison, of whom Chester Smith says that he was made a Mason in England11, modern research has failed to produce any evidence that any of the civilian members of the lodge had been members of the Craft before their admission into Lodge No 227, but the possibility cannot be ruled out.

The Sydney Gazette report of the ceremony of the laying of the corner stone of John Piper’s residence is therefore a very informative account of the manner in which the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues operated. It is clear that the regimental officers maintained strong control of its workings - evidenced by the fact that no civilian member took a leading role in the proceedings. It is relevant here to mention that among the officers who took part in the ceremony were several described by Macquarie in an enclosure with his 25 July 1817 dispatch to the Colonial Secretary as forming part of the political faction hostile to the interests of the Government and the Colony, namely, Sanderson, the Right Worshipful Master; Miller, the Senior Warden; McKenzie, the Junior Warden; Grant, the Master of Ceremonies; and Hernsworth, the Treasurer. All of these were among the officers who refused to accept invitations to Government House. The civilian element of the lodge at the ceremony was substantial, constituting about one-third of the lodge membership, but it was a carefully selected group, including a Judge, the Surveyor-General, the Deputy Commissary General, a solicitor and a surgeon. The majority of these held ‘exclusives’ political leanings and were opposed to the policies of the Governor. Several of these were subsequently referred to by Macquarie12 as having manifested opposition to the measures and administration of his Government, namely, John Horsley, settler; Sir John Jamison, settler; David Allan, Deputy Commissary General; John Oxley, Surveyor-General; and W H Moore, solicitor. All of these were described as having been discontented, intriguing and discontented, or seditious, intriguing and discontented and all men who had been in the habit of writing Home the most gross misrepresentations.

The absence locally of records of the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues during its Australian period prevents detailed analysis of its work over that time. The undated (possibly 1817) list of members of the lodge held by the Grand Lodge of Ireland includes the names of two Sydney residents who are not mentioned among those who attended the ceremony of the laying of the foundation stone of John Piper’s residence. Whether they were members of the lodge prior to the ceremony or had joined later is not clear, although the latter appears to have been the more likely. However, both were free settlers and both were known opponents of the Governor’s emancipist policies. One, Nicholas Bayly (or Bayley), was classified by Macquarie as being ‘discontented and in the habit of writing Home the most gross misrepresentations’.

The Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, throughout its stay in the colony, was consistent in its attitude towards the initiation and affiliation of men who had been brought to New South Wales as convicts. This is illustrated by its handling of the case of an Irish Mason, WBro Samuel Clayton. A printer and engraver by trade, he was transported to Australia in 1817 after having been found guilty of a seemingly minor transgression. Before being sentenced, he was a Past Master of Lodge No 6, Dublin, and had been employed by the Grand Lodge of Ireland in ‘repairing Grand Lodge Certificates and Printing Receipts’. Shortly before his departure from Ireland, the Grand Lodge, apparently sympathetically disposed towards him in his situation, entrusted him with correspondence for the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, among which was a letter of introduction for him to the lodge, recommending that he should be received as a brother Mason. The lodge’s response to the letter was: Consistently with our established Practice [we would] have given to the unfortunate Brother that Masonic reception which belongs to our Institution, but those circumstances which we have ever kept on view, since our arrival in this Colony, and which are indispensably necessary to be averted to, in support of our Respectability both Military and Masonic, have ever rendered it necessary we should act, in these respects with more than ordinary Caution and Circumspection.

It concluded that, while there were some extenuating circumstances associated with the case, because of the facts which led to his enforced residence in Australia, he could not be received as a Brother Mason. Nevertheless, there was some recognition of the sympathetic attitude of the Grand Lodge given in the reply, which added: In justice to Brother Clayton, he appears industriously bent on restoring himself to that consideration in Society from which he Fatally fell; his conduct on his passage hither was very creditable, and we have no reason to doubt but he will justify the favourable report made of him. The lodge has given him some little work, and will not withhold that Encouragement that may be Compatible with the Limits we have set.

Cramp and Mackaness, reviewing the correspondence, suggest that the work the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues gave Bro Clayton was probably the engraving of its Lodge Certificate and Seal and the printing of its by-laws, for, in a letter dated 14 February 1817, the Right Worshipful Master, Brother Sanderson, enclosed a copy of the ‘Bye-Laws as recently arranged and printed, together with a Copper Plate Impression of the Certificate lately adopted by us’.13

In denying Bro Clayton reception as a brother Mason, the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues was undoubtedly being excessively cautious, as subsequent history was to demonstrate. Clayton was to become importantly involved in the development of the Craft in New South Wales from 1820 onwards. While he was not a foundation member of the Australian Social Lodge, No 260 IC, the first regular stationary warranted lodge to be formed in the colony, he was a member of that lodge from its first meeting, on 30 August 1820. At that meeting, when the Chief Officers of the brigs Favorite and Lynx, then lying at anchor in Sydney Harbour, were initiated and crafted, he was Master of Ceremonies. On 8 November 1820 he was admitted to the Mark Degree at the first quarterly meeting of the Mark lodge attached to the Australian Social Lodge. By virtue of a warrant from the Grand Lodge of Ireland to the Australian Social Lodge, dated 4 July 1822, he was appointed to a committee of the lodge authorised to issue dispensations for the constituting of Masonic lodges in the Colony of New South Wales, the so-called Leinster Masonic Committee, which had substantially the powers of a Provincial Grand Lodge. On 3 October 1825, he was one of a deputation of brethren from the Australian Social Lodge who waited on the Governor, Sir Thomas Brisbane, to present an address to the Governor on the eve of his departure for England and his retirement from the Governorship. However, the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues could not have foreseen the future and no doubt felt justified in the action it took. What the lodge conceived as the good name of Freemasonry could not be set at risk.

The public Masonic ceremony of the laying of the foundation stone of Captain Piper’s residence was to have its aftermath, involving the Master of the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, Captain Edward Sanderson, and the convict architect, Francis Greenway.

The stone-laying ceremony being the first of its kind to involve a Masonic lodge, the lodge members were concerned to ensure that they appeared in public in their best light. In particular, they wanted their regalia to be at its finest, new or at least refurbished. Although they had decided not to have any social dealings with the convict population, in the absence of suitably skilled persons in the colony, they were forced to turn to convicts or ex-convicts with the necessary skills to make or to carry out repairs on the regalia. The most skilled worker in this area was Francis Greenway, a convict who had been sent to New South Wales after being found guilty of forgery at Bristol in 1812 and whose architectural accomplishments had found favour with Governor Macquarie.

Greenway found himself overwhelmed with requests to undertake work on aprons. At first he agreed to them but soon was forced to refuse. Some he finished but others he experienced difficulty in completing in the time available. Unfortunately for him, among the latter was the apron of Captain Sanderson. This he returned to Sanderson with a note saying that, because of the hot climate, he was unable to use watercolours but would do the work in varnish and gild it. Sanderson sent the apron back for completion but Greenway had difficulty in obtaining materials. He sent an accompanying note explaining the delay. The captain then threatened to send the work to another artist but eventually told Greenway not to hurry because he had another apron which he could wear. Greenway felt very hurt by the threat to take the apron away and send it to another artist for completion and sent another note to Sanderson expressing his feelings. Nevertheless, after obtaining varnish, he attempted to complete the work by spending all night on it, but was unable to finish it in time for the stone-laying ceremony.

Although the facts cannot be verified, it appears that Sanderson was upset by having to attend the ceremony in regalia less resplendent than that of some of the junior officers. He felt insulted and his dissatisfaction over the incident rankled. Further, he regarded the final note from Greenway, which Greenway afterwards admitted that ‘he might have wrote with too warm a sentiment’, as discourteous and disrespectful. Eventually his feelings got the better of him. On 20 December 1816, almost six weeks after the ceremony, he summoned Greenway to his quarters. There, in the midst of the soldiery and before several officers of the Regiment, he accused Greenway of being a rascal and gave him a severe beating. Greenway, because of his convict status, was unable to defend himself but he immediately lodged a complaint of assault with the Judge Advocate. The latter thereupon informed Sanderson that he would have to face trial in the Criminal Court. Sanderson felt offended at the recognition given to Greenway’s complaint and declared his intention of horsewhipping Greenway again whenever he met him. Greenway thereupon made another complaint to the Judge Advocate, requesting that Sanderson be held to bail to keep the peace towards him. The Judge Advocate immediately insisted upon Sanderson’s giving sureties of the peace, with two of the officers of the Regiment going bail for him.

The trial was an extraordinary affair. It was conducted at a time when the legal provisions relating to the composition of the Court required that members should consist of the Judge Advocate and six officers of His Majesty’s Land Forces appointed by the Governor. Therefore, when Sanderson appeared before it, his judges were the Judge Advocate and six officers of the 46th Regiment, several of whom were his fellow Masons.

When the case came to be heard, the attitude of the military members became immediately apparent. In the course of his opening address Greenway’s solicitor had occasion to make comments on the conduct of Sanderson in relation to the assault. The military members objected, but the Judge Advocate ruled that the solicitor was within his rights. The officers attempted to have the Court retire to discuss the matter but the Judge Advocate refused to retire and the officers were obliged to accept the situation.

The trial proceeded in the same spirit. The evidence given by the officers present at the assault was evasive. Lieutenant D Leith Cox, a member of the bench and Secretary of the Lodge Social and Military Virtues, but also one of the officers who had gone bail for Sanderson, descended from the bench to give evidence, in the course of which stated that he had never heard Sanderson confess that he had horsewhipped Greenway. However, after the whole case had closed, he expressed a wish to put a private question to the Judge Advocate. The Judge Advocate said that any question put to him must be public. Cox then asked whether, by the tenor of the oath administered to him, he was bound to reveal what he considered a friendly and confidential communication of a brother officer. The Judge Advocate explained the nature of the oath and Cox then admitted that the conversation he had denied previously had in fact taken place, but he had denied this in the first instance under the impression that he was honour bound not to reveal the communication of his brother officer under any circumstances.

The case was so clear that the Court was compelled to find Sanderson guilty and fined him five pounds. But the military members compelled the Judge Advocate, in pronouncing judgment, to state ‘that it was the opinion of the Court that the Judge Advocate had acted with unnecessary and ungentlemanly harshness in compelling Captain Sanderson to give sureties of the peace and in allowing the prosecutor’s solicitor to pursue the course he did. And, although they were in strictness of law compelled to find Captain Sanderson guilty, yet his conduct was that which, as an officer and a gentleman, he was perfectly justifiable in.’ Accordingly, the Judge Advocate delivered a censure of his own conduct and an eulogy on the prisoner.14>

The ex-convict Edgar Eager, writing to Earl Bathurst in 1823 concerning the trial, commented that ‘this display of military justice was exhibited to a crowded Court, and deeply impressed the public with a sense of what was expected of such a Tribunal, as well as the degradation a British Judge was obliged to undergo’15. The leniency of the sentence imposed upon Sanderson led Greenway to take further action in the Court, which resulted in an additional fine of twenty pounds for Sanderson. However, contemporary accounts contrast the treatment of Sanderson with the sentence imposed by a similarly constituted Court on the free-born 16-year-old son of George Reiby, who whipped the son of a member of the ‘exclusive’ class who called him a ‘convict bastard’ before his sweetheart. The Court fined him one hundred pounds and exacted severe peace sureties.

M H Ellis, author of Francis Greenway. His Life and Times,16 implies that the close Masonic relationship between members of the Court and the defendant was an important factor in the favourable treatment accorded Sanderson. However, this is a view that might be questioned. Greenway, on 3 June 1822, became a member of the Australian Social Lodge, consecrated in 1820. Had he considered his treatment by the Criminal Court in 1817 to have been due to Masonic influence, it would surely have been unlikely that he would have joined a lodge only five years later. It seems more likely that he recognised that his difficulties in obtaining justice had arisen as a result of the attitudes of the officer class in the 46th Regiment and the dilemma then facing particular officers concerned in passing judgment on their superior officer. The Masonic influence was probably minimal, although it cannot, of course, be ruled out entirely.

Macquarie’s experience with the officers of the 46th Regiment led him to propose to the British Government17 that the Regiment should be removed from the colony. This, he said, was ‘Indispensably Necessary to the Well-being, Good Order and peaceable Demeanour of the Community’. However, the Government had already set in train action to transfer the 46th to India and in September it embarked for Madras. Its departure marked the beginning of a decline in the fortunes of both the Regiment and the attached Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, a decline which was, in due course, to lead to the demise of both as separate institutions.

The regiment’s subsequent career involved service in India for the lengthy period of 15 years and engagement in the Crimean War, where it was active in battles fought at Alma (1854), Inkerman (1854), Balaclava (1854) and Sebastapol (1855). In 1881, it ceased to be a separate entity, being linked with the 32nd (Cornwall) Light Infantry to form the Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry. This, in turn, was amalgamated with the Somerset and Cornwall Light Infantry in 1959, which subsequently (1965) became part of the Light Infantry. 18

The Lodge of Social and Military Virtues was still at work a year after the Regiment’s departure from New South Wales, although with diminished numbers. A list of its members dated 17 December 1818 includes eleven officers of the Regiment, two of whom were Fellow Crafts who had been passed in the lodge in September and December of that year, and three East India Company or military personnel from outside the Regiment. Gould records19 that subsequently the lodge, retaining its old name, sought, and obtained, a local charter, No VII, which afterwards merged into an English warrant in 1836, No 634. At some time after 1822, when the Regiment marched from Cananore to Hyderabad, a number of members died, others were invalided out of the Army, and the lodge chest was forgotten until accidentally re-discovered by a member of the mess committee in 1829. The finder, a Captain Lacy, who was a Mason, brought the chest home when the Regiment returned to England in 1833. The Irish warrant was renewed in 1834, there being at the time only one member originally connected with the lodge. The torch had been re-lit but finally went out in the sense that the regimental or travelling warrant, which had again accompanied the 46th to North America, was returned to the Grand Lodge of Ireland in 1847, and two days afterwards a new one of a military character, with the same number, was issued for the purpose of forming a permanent Garrison lodge at Montreal.

In 1855 Lodge No 227 joined the Grand Lodge of Canada, receiving a civil warrant, and two years later it resolved: ‘That the “Lodge of Social and Military Virtues” shall henceforth be called the “Lodge of Antiquity”, shall wear gold instead of silver jewels and take precedence of all numbered Lodges.’ In 1869 a Grand Lodge was established in the Province of Quebec, and the First lodge on its roll is ‘Antiquity’, the successor to the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, originally established by the Grand Lodge of Ireland in 1752. The lodge, under its new name and new allegiance, continues to exist in the present day. It remains now to make some assessment of the importance of the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues in the development of Freemasonry in Australia. As was said at the beginning of this paper, there have been various views on this. The historian of Lodge Australian Social Mother, No 1 NSWC, William Henley, writing in 192020, claimed that the Australian Social Lodge, No 260 IC, was constituted in 1816 and that the petition for the formation of the lodge was passed by local brethren to the 46th Regiment for transmission to the Grand Lodge of Ireland. In a lecture to the Sydney Lodge of Research in July 1950, Bro Eric Dibbs said21 that it was apparent that a military lodge No 218, that of the 48th Regiment, under the Irish Constitution, was the founder of the Australian Social Lodge, No 260, was constituted in 1816, and that the preparation of the ground for this edifice was undertaken by the lodge of the 46th Regiment, No 227, probably in 1816. Recently Grahame Cumming wrote that Lodge No 227 IC, although it did not initiate many non-regimental members during its Sydney posting, nevertheless paved the way for the establishment of Freemasonry in Australia. However, he did not explain the manner in which it prepared the way. Cramp and Mackaness, on the other hand, say23 that Lodge No 227 took no part in the formation of regular Freemasonry in Australia. In the light of the evidence now available, it is useful to review the possibilities.

Cramp and Mackaness have effectively disposed of the Henley thesis that the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues was directly associated with the formation of the Australian Social Lodge in 1816. After considering the evidence that Henley had advanced, they concluded that the case he had made out was but another example of an author’s jumping to conclusions and endeavouring to make the facts fit a presupposition. One of the difficulties with Henley’s approach is that he was relying substantially upon secondary sources, none of which cited the original material on which it was based. His argument, therefore, tends to lack substance. Eric Dibbs appears to have used Henley’s work uncritically for his comment that Lodge No 227 prepared the ground for the formative work undertaken by Lodge No 218, and Grahame Cumming seems to have followed suit.

There are further problems with the argument that the Masons of the 46th Regiment undertook preparatory work for the formation of a regular stationary lodge in Sydney and that this was followed up by Lodge No 218. The 46th and 48th Regiments were in Sydney together for only 138 days (8 May 1817 to 23 September 1817) and it would have been difficult for the two lodges to have found the necessary time to consult and work out the steps to be taken to further a project such as the establishment of a new lodge in a colony where there had been none before. After all, the 46th Regiment would have been heavily engaged in making ready for its transfer to India and its officers would have been closely involved, while the 48th Regiment would have been concerned with the settling-in process. An even more telling fact which suggests that if the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues ever had any intention of fostering the establishment of a regular stationary lodge in Sydney, presumably through its civilian members, that intention was never realised, is to be found in the membership lists of the first two stationary lodges formed there.

When, in 1820, Lodge No 218, attached to the 48th Regiment, sponsored the formation of the Australian Social Lodge No 260, it facilitated its formation by initiating eight ‘young settlers’ who duly signed the petition to the Grand Lodge of Ireland seeking authority for the formation of the lodge. But not one of the civilian members of the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues was involved in the venture, nor does it appear that any of them subsequently joined the lodge. Similarly, when the second regular stationary lodge. Lodge Leinster Marine No 266 IC, was formed in 1824, no former member of Lodge No 227 was involved as a foundation member, although Thomas McVitie joined subsequently, in late 1825. It was only in 1829, when the Lodge of Australia No 820 under the English Constitution, was formed, that names of former members of Lodge No 227 appear on the membership list. These were: Sir John Jamison, who afterwards became Worshipful Master of the lodge but seems to have done little more for it than contribute his name; the solicitor, W H Moore; Captain John Piper; and the merchant banker Thomas McVitie. But by 1829 Freemasonry had a secure foothold in the colony and any influence of the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, through its former members, was negligible.

Although Cramp and Mackaness say: ‘Incontrovertible evidence is now available, based upon written records, that Lodge 227, and with it the 46th Regiment, took no part at all in the formation of regular Freemasonry in Australia. That credit . . . is due entirely to the 48th Regiment, to its Lodge, No 218, and to Brother Samuel Clayton,’ they are, in fact, somewhat ambivalent in the matter when they refer to the role of Captain Edward Sanderson. Here they say that Captain Sanderson played an important part in the history of Australian Freemasonry. This is a comment regarding which there may be cause for questioning.

With the recent reorganisation of the archives of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, some additional information has become available concerning the work of Lodge No 227 during its Australian sojourn, particularly in the matter of lodge membership. We are, therefore, in a more fortunate position than Cramp and Mackaness in making a judgment on the contribution of the lodge to the early development of the Craft in the colony. Nothing has emerged to suggest that Sanderson was in any way important in this regard. Indeed, Sanderson’s contribution seems to have-been more negative than positive. He was a prisoner of the attitudes and morals of his social class and considered those who did not measure up to the expectations of that class inferior beings, as his treatment of Greenway demonstrated. He failed to see the humane objectives of Macquarie’s policies and, in consequence, opposed them. The basic principles of Freemasonry, brotherly love, relief and truth, were to be observed in the word, not in the practice. In this, he was supported by his fellow officers in the lodge, illustrated by the unwillingness of the lodge to accept Samuel Clayton as a member, because of the minor offence of which Clayton had been found guilty.

Within the colony, the lodge would have been considered elitist, open only to the officers of the regiment and to a select group of privileged, non-emancipist, civilians. It practised some form of charity, although the beneficiaries are not known. It had participated in the public ceremony of the laying of the corner stone of Captain John Piper’s residence, but, beyond that, there would have been little public awareness of its activities. In any Masonic sense, the lodge added nothing to the well-being of the community.

Lodge No 227 therefore made a minimal contribution to the development of the Craft in Australia. It is difficult to disagree with Cramp and Mackaness in their contention that the lodge took no part in the formation of regular Freemasonry in Australia. It simply made a brief and unhappy appearance on the Australian scene and, after its departure in 1817, it was left to others to pick up the Masonic banner and to carry it forward.

Appendix A

Report of Ceremony of the Laying of the Foundation Stone
of the Residence of Captain John Piper on 2 November 1816
from the Sydney Gazette of 9 November 1816

‘ On Saturday last a large party of officers and other gentlemen, accompanied by a number of ladies, proceeded by water to Elizabeth Point, near to South Head, at the invitation of Captain Piper, who was giving an elegant fete champetre on the occasion of laying the foundation of his intended building on that beautiful and commanding point, to which the gentlemen proceeded in Masonic order. The company took water at the Governor’s wharf at 12 o’clock in barges and other boats handsomely decorated, the full band of 46th Regiment leading with agreeable and appropriate airs. At half-past-one they landed at Elizabeth Point.’
‘ Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, 227.—Proceedings of a Lodge held in the E of Elizabeth Point, Port Jackson, on 2nd November, 1816—5816 being the day appointed for laying the corner stone of Brother John Piper’s house.’
‘ At II a.m. the brethren embarked in boats prepared for the purpose from the Brother’s House, and were saluted by seven guns from the merchant vessel, Willerby, commanded by Brother Crosset, a Masonic Ensign having been displayed at the main top-mast-head.
‘ On arrival at Elizabeth Point the brethren withdrew from the assemblage and the Lodge was formed on a retired spot east of the foundation, and opened in solemn form and order.
‘The R.W.M., having given the necessary cautions, the procession was marshalled by
the master of ceremonies in the following order:—
‘Brother Hetherington, Jr. Tyler, with sword.
‘Band of 46th Regt.
‘Bros. Thompson and Campbell, with Deacons’ Wands.
‘Bros. Jamieson and Oxley.
‘Wylde and Herbert (visiting brethren) hand in hand.
‘Bro. Humfrey, with candlestick.
‘Bros. Cox and Madigan. Globes.
‘Bro. Hemworth. Box of Coins and Charity Box.
‘Bros. Bent and Moore.
‘Bro. Dawe. with Roll.
‘Banner borne by Bro. Hill. Supporter: Bro. Higgins (as R.C. Knight). Supporter: Bro. Mcintosh (as Knight Templar)
‘Bro. Kenny (Candlestick).
‘Bro. Molle (Lt.-Governor). Bro. Allan (Commg. Gen.).
‘Bro. Harris (Basket of Corn).
‘Bro. McVitie (Pitcher of Wine). Bro. Horsley (Pitcher of Oil).
‘Bro. Piper (Candlestick).
‘Bros. W’s. Miller and McKenzie. with Columns
‘Bro. McDonnell (Master’s Column).
‘Bro. P. Master MacDonald (with Bible, S. and C., and Charter, placed thereon, on Cushion).
‘Rt. W.M. Bro. Sanderson. Supporter: Bro. Grant, M.C., with emblem of his office. Supporter: Bro. O’Connor. Kt. Templar, in full attire.
‘To close procession: Bro Drummond. Sen. Tyler. with Sword.

‘ The procession issued along the slope of the ground towards the west and having reached that part of the foundation, halted and gave Grand Honours. It then moved thrice around to view the square of the work, and at the conclusion of the third passed under a triumphal arch, erected for the occasion, opening in succession to the right and left along the line of the north line of the square, the R.W.M. advancing to the east between the ranks of the brethren, and the banner being placed in the centre. The R.W.M., having taken his place in the E, directed the Charter of L.S.M.V. to be read, and announced the purport of the meeting. The foundation stone was ordered to be raised beneath the triangles, and an appropriate prayer given by the R.W.M., the Bible S. and Compass having been first placed on the stone.
‘ The coins collected in honour of the ceremony were then ordered to be inserted in the proper receptacle, and the stone being slowly let down, G. Honours were given, and the band played ‘Phyel’s German Hymn.’ The R.W.M. then descended towards the stone, scattering corn and pouring wine and oil, giving three strokes with his mallet, the brethren giving G. Honours, and the band playing ‘God Save the King.’
‘ The R.W.M. then delivered over in Form, and with an injunction to the Architect, the plan and implements required for the building, which was replied to appropriately by the Architect. An oration suitable to the occasion was delivered by Bro. Grant as M. of Ceremonies. At the conclusion thereof, the Charity Box was passed round by Bro. Hernsworth as Treasurer, when the sum of Six Pounds Fourteen Shillings was collected and placed on the stone for the relief of the poor and needy, evincing that admidst our enjoyment we are not forgetful of our necessitous.
‘ The Reverend Samuel Marsden, the Principal Chaplain of this Colony, and a spectator on this occasion, here requested of the R.W.M. that he might be permitted to make a few observations, which being accorded, he spoke to the following effect:—
“I am not a member of this Society, but having had recent opportunity of witnessing its charitable donations, amounting to Thirty Pounds, I cannot but hold it in high estimation and am fully convinced of its value.”
‘ The Reverend Chaplain proceeded to bestow every commendation on Masonry, which was respectfully received by the brethren. ‘The conclusive prayer was given by the R.W.M., the band playing after it, ‘Burn’s Masonic farewell.’ The solemn benediction was silently given by all the Royal Arch Masons present, over the stone, after which the R.W.M., standing thereon, and wine being served round, the following toasts were given, viz.:—
‘Our Good Old King.’
‘Our Illustrious Brother, the P. Regent.’
‘Our Respected Brothers, the Governor and Lt.-Governor of the Colony.’
‘ The procession was then re-formed and returned in like order to the spot from whence it set out. the band playing the ‘Hallelujah Hymn.’
‘ The Lodge was then closed, officers retaining their jewels—and the Banner being placed over the table, the whole company, consisting of brethren and the most respectable of the ladies and gentleman of the community sat down to a repast, enlivened by good humour.
‘ The health of our Sister Piper and the Foundation Stone of Eliza Point, together with the Sisterhood, and other appropriate toasts were drunk with Suitable music, and on retiring the Banner, held by the eldest sister present, Mrs. Allan, was greeted by all the ladies present, the brethren, hand in hand, moving three times round this female knot.
‘ The brethren and their friends passed this day in the strictest harmony; it concluded highly to the gratification of all and truly flattering to the Lodge of Social and Military Virtues.

M. D C COX, Secretary

Inscription on the box that contained the roll on this occasion:

Sub auspice
Regnante Georgio Tertio
Praefecto L. McQuarrie, Armigero
Hujus Domicilii
(Johannis Piper)
Sociorum Corona
Ex Fratibus
Sodalitii Architeconici
No. 227
Apud xlvi Cohortem Pied:
Die 2 do Nov. A.D., 1816
AE A 5816
Primum Lapidem
Edvardus Sanderson
L.S.M.V 227.

Appendix B

Lodge of Social and Military Virtues, No 227 IC
Membership of lodge, 1816-17

Regimental members


Civilian Members


  1. Pike, D (ed): Australian Dictionary of Biography. Melbourne. 1967. Vol. 2. p243.
  2. Gould, R F: Military Lodges. The Apron and the Sword. London. 1899. p155.
  3. Jones, B: Freemasons’ Book of the Royal Arch. London. 1970. pp201-2.
  4. Cumming, G H: The Foundations of Freemasonry in Australia. Sydney. 1992. p5.
  5. Nicholls, M: The Diary of the Reverend Robert Knopwood 1803-1808. Hobart. 1977.
  6. Jones: op cit, pp204-5.
  7. ibid, pp 203-4.
  8. Cramp, K R and Mackaness, G: A History of the United Grand Lodge of Ancient, Free and Accepted Masons of New South Wales. Sydney. 1938. Vol. I pp 22-23.
  9. National Library of Australia, Manuscript Collection, Item A195.
  10. The National Library of Australia holding also includes a certificate, dated 5 February 1817, issued by the Royal Arch Chapter, Mount Olive, No 227, to the effect that the Chapter held him in similar esteem.
  11. Smith, C: ‘Sir John Jamison, Pioneer Settler and Freemason’ in The NSW Freemason. (First series), vol. 66, no 6 (1 June 1954). Smith does not state the source of his information.
  12. Watson: op cit, series I, vol.5, pp 500-1.
  13. Cramp and Mackaness: op cit, pp 28-30.
  14. Watson: op cit, series I, vol.4 p 449.
  15. ibid.
  16. Ellis, M H: Francis Greenway. His Life and Times. Sydney. 1978 edn. Ch VIII.
  17. Watson: op cit, series I, vol.4 p 450.
  18. Swinson, A(ed): A Register of the Regiments and Corps of the British Army. London. 1972.
  19. Gould: op cit, pp 17 & 23.
  20. Henly, W: History of Lodge Australian Social Mother, No 1 United Grand Lodge of New South Wales 1820 to 1920. Sydney. 1920. Australian Social Mother was the title given to the UGL of NSW descendent of the Australian Social Lodge, No 260 IC. It is now Lodge Antiquity, No 1 NSWC.
  21. Dibbs, E: “Pioneers and Freemasons’ in Transactions of the Sydney Lodge of Research, No 290 UGL of NSW, vol. 34, Sydney. 1950.
  22. Cumming: op cit, p 6.
  23. Cramp and Mackaness: op cit, p 28.

Did you realise that there are Load images to see the counter people interested in the 46th Foot?

Last updated by the Adjutant on the 25th of January, 2010.

Text Copyright © 1996, R. J. Linford.
Layout and HTML Copyright © 1998-2010