THE ORIGINS OF THE MOST VENERABLE ORDER OF SAINT JOHN

The foundation of a new Order of Saint John by a handful of Anglican knights, whose appointment as such had been made by some members of the by then defunct French Capitular Commission, is a matter of considerable controversy. The loss of Malta and the destruction of all the institutions of the ancien régime that resulted from Napoleon's march across Europe, however, happened in exceptional times. The Order's government at Catania was functioning but had not been able to convoke a complete Chapter-General and it was headed by a Lieutenant with more limited powers than a Grand Master. The appointments of members of the Russian Orthodox faith by Paul I had never received Papal sanction and had been discontinued after 1811. The Johanniter knights who had recognized the authority of the Grand Magistery before the loss of Malta had been incorporated into a new Order by the Prussian King and no longer made any attempt to sustain their connection with the Grand Magistery. With the restoration of the Bourbons in 1815 the surviving French knights formed the French “Commission” to regulate the Order’s affairs in France. This body, under the Presidency of the Bailiff Prince de Rohan,[1] functioned without the explicit approval of the Lieutenant of the Grand Magistery and Sacred Council. At first the Lieutenant was disposed to confirm concessions of the Cross of Devotion made by the French Commission (since these appointments were inserted into the Gazette by the Crown). As the demands for the restoration of the Order’s property in France became more strident, however, the French government distanced itself further from the Commission. Rohan’s death in 1816 came at a sensitive moment and his successor as President, Grand Prior of Auvergne Bailiff de Lasteyrie did not have his influence or prestige. By 1817 the Sacred Council was refusing to confirm the conferrals of the Cross of Devotion made by the Commission, which therefore ceased to have any legality.  

The admission to membership into the Order of non-Roman Catholics was clearly in contravention of the statutes and juridically impossible under Canon Law. The Lieutenant, increasingly alarmed at the independent course taken by the French Commission determined to limit its powers The Holy See had acknowledged the authority of the Lieutenancy over the Order and, in 1824, recognition of this authority by the French Crown had led to the dissolution of the Commission. The precise legal status of the Capitular Commission has been expertly examined by Bailiff Geraud Count Michel de Pierredon.[2] He has established that the Commission continued to function de facto, if not de jure, after Lieutenant Busca's abrogation of its powers, and that although the Grand Chancellor of the Legion of Honor had refused to recognize its authority after 1824 and its suppression was ordered by the Lieutenant, it still claimed authority over the Order's affairs in France where the majority of surviving knights still lived. Indeed, it would appear that as many as two thousand de facto concessions of the Cross of Malta were made by the Commission between 1814 and 1830. As only a handful of these were recognized by the Lieutenant, most of their recipients were unable to wear the decoration in France - indeed, despite the award of the Grand Cross to the Empress Eugènie, the French government did not finally permit conferrals of the Order of Malta until the 1920s. 

The Chancellor of the Commission from 1821, whose appointment was revoked by the Lieutenant's decree of 1824, was the mysterious "Pierre-Hippolyte, Marquis de Sainte-Croix-Molay", sometimes styled Marquis de Santa Croce, whose title was certainly false and whose real name and origin remains unknown. It is not improbable that the name "Molay" was intended to make some reference to the last Grand Master of the Temple and that the "Marquis" had been connected with the Masonic Templars, recently revived in France. It is not known how such a person was admitted without presenting formal proofs. Following the failure of the French Commission's attempt to raise funds on the London bond market, to finance an attempt to help the Greeks achieve independence, Molay persuaded Lasteyrie’s successor as President, the aged Commander Jean-Louis de Dienne who had played an important part in the siege of Malta, to authorize two emissaries to go to London and negotiate the refoundation of the English Langue. Both Dienne and Molay apparently hoped that their disastrous English foray into the English financial markets to pay for their aborted Greek adventure might this time yield fruit. First contact was made with a Mr Donald Currie, who had persuaded an associate of Molay, "Count" Philippe de Chastelain, that he was a gentleman of means with a substantial Scottish estate - both were charlatans, however, who failed to recognize the other as such.  

The French hopes to raise funds for their projects in the eastern Mediterranean were disappointed, and Currie failed to produce any significant portion of the 240,000 he had been empowered to raise, although his recruits provided a nucleus for the formation of the English branch. De Molay's plan to revive the English Langue was explained in a letter of September 14, 1827 to Currie, in which he proposed that Anglican candidates for admission might be received according to the same form as had pertained in the separated (and abeyant) Bailiwick of Brandenburg, while Irish candidates must be Roman Catholics and would be admitted according to the statutory form. A committee was appointed to effect this in 1830 by the proponents of the British revival and, on January 29, 1831, in the presence of the "Delegate of the Capitular Commission", Chastelain, the Reverend (Sir) Robert Peat (a former Chaplain to George IV) was appointed Prior ad interim of the "Venerable Tongue of England".[3] 

Unfortunately, the new institution seems to have immediately attracted some unsavory characters, among whom was a self-styled "Count" Alexander Mortara, who addressed correspondence on the purported "hospital" of Saint John from the "Auberge of St John, St John's Gate, St John's Square, Clerkenwell", actually the public house which was then housed in the ancient Gatehouse.[4] Peat nonetheless successfully recruited a handful of knights, allegedly obtaining ratification of their diplomas by the French Capitular Commission. It did not take long for Peat and his associate, John Philippart, a War Office clerk, to recognize that they had better dispense with Mortara, who was accused of selling knighthoods. Mortara was dismissed but nonetheless continued his activities, even obtaining the support of Molay who was somehow persuaded of Mortara's good intentions, although Peat's group proved more successful in attracting persons of note. Peat's branch, which claimed legitimacy through the connection with the historic Order, albeit unconstitutional, now found itself cut off from its source and supplanted by a completely disreputable body headed by a crook. Molay seems to have realized this because by 1835, now settled in England, he had attached himself to Peat. The French commission itself had simply faded away to be succeeded by an informal association of knights whose members were nominated by the Lieutenant, but without the French governmental sanction necessary for the Order to be worn in France. 

On 24 February 1834 Peat took the oath de fideli administratione before the Lord Chief Justice, in the hope of reviving the 1557 Letters Patent of King Philip and Queen Mary.[5] Whether these were still valid was never questioned; Elizabeth I had only confiscated the Order's estates and had not repealed Mary's law. For the new knights of Saint John this was sufficient evidence of the legitimacy of Peat's group even though there was no justification for believing that such a procedure could effectively revive the Order in England. 

When Peat died in 1837 Sir Henry Dymoke, Bt, succeeded him as Prior while the administration of the new Langue was executed by Mr Richard Broun, who had been admitted as a knight in 1835. Broun continued to hold office until his death in 1858 and, although genuinely interested in the advancement of the romantic idea of establishing the Order in Great Britain, his public reputation proved to be fatal to achieving recognition from Rome.[6] It was no longer possible to obtain the approval of admissions by the Commission and, in the hope of being recognized in some kind of association with the knights of the Catholic and Protestant Orders, two delegates, William Crawford and Robert Lucas Pearsall, were sent to France and Germany to investigate.[7] Molay, back in France again, affirmed incorrectly that the Langue's foundation by the Commission had been legal, although the news that he had been indicted for fraud should have caused some suspicions; soon after the British were told that Molay had been relieved of his offices. Although none of the French knights had any authority to act on behalf of the Grand Magistery, somehow the British were persuaded that legitimacy rested in France. They were informed of a scale of fees for admission - which gave rise to the response that the British were too impoverished to pay the sums demanded - and that contact with the Lieutenant must be made through the French as only the Lieutenant could authorize the admission of Protestant members. Nonetheless, the possibility having been raised that the permission of the Lieutenant was necessary, doubts arose in the minds of the members of the newly established British Langue as to their legitimacy.[8] As Prof Riley-Smith has demonstrated, the expectations of the British knights were founded on so many misconceptions about the Order, its rules, government and state following the loss of Malta that it was impossible to accede to any of their requests.  

Arrogantly the British knights proceeded nonetheless, demanding that the Lieutenant recognize their revival, their admissions of knights and their governing body. They decided that the new Langue was to be "strictly Protestant", soon abandoned for ecumenicalism, and that they would erect a "Hospitallarium", for which funds were never found.[9] By 1840 it was already clear that the knights were not going to be recognized as part of the Order of Malta by the Lieutenant and, with the recognition of the latter's authority by the French, Italian and German Langues, they were not going to be accepted by any of these groups. An attempt was made to persuade a younger son of George III, the Duke of Sussex, a notorious freemason, to accept the position of Turcopilier - the ancient title of the head of the English Langue - but the Duke refused. Robert Pearsall, who seems to have been the most pragmatic of the members, was horrified at the suggestion made by some knights that they should approach Prince Albert who, in his view, came from such a disreputable family that he would only bring discredit to the organization! Pearsall realized that there was no possibility of achieving recognition from the Lieutenant as long as the Langue was exclusively Protestant and proposed recruiting three or four important and influential Catholics, but this sensible proposal seems not to have been pursued.[10] In 1841 another knight, Sir Warwick Tonkin, managed to obtain the signature of the new secretary of the French council of knights to the Instrument of Convention of 1827 which had established the Langue in the first place. Although this was not the recognition it was portrayed as and it did not in any way bind the Lieutenant, it was the first document affirming a connection with the French knights signed by a serving officer. Two years later, when a senior member of the Grand Magistery, the Grand Bailiff Fra' Cristoforo Ferretti, came to London, he met with Tonkin and Broun and promised to carry their proposals to the Lieutenant. The British demand that they be treated as equals with what they referred to as the "Italian Langue", when it was actually the legitimate Grand Magistery, was an extraordinary presumption, aggravated by their demand for total autonomy with the freedom to admit whom they pleased. Furthermore they were only prepared to adhere to those parts of the statutes which suited them and which did not conflict with the "habits and feelings" of British society![11] 

The Lieutenant's courteous but firm reply that he could not recognize the admission of Protestants to a Catholic Order was met with indignation by Broun. He believed that as Catholics had been emancipated in Great Britain and could now sit in Parliament, they should not in turn exclude Protestants from their organizations. Unfortunately, he failed to understand that the Sovereign Military Order was and still is a Religious Order of the Church, subject to Canon Law. Broun’s history of the new foundation, Hospitallaria, listed Colloredo as the Grand Master,[12] as if the Sovereign Order recognized the English Langue. Acting regardless of the Lieutenant’s disapproval, Broun also named Sir Henry Dymoke, Peat's successor as Grand Prior as the holder of the title of Turcopilier, a post Dymoke held until 1847, "the Honourable" Sir Charles Lamb, Baronet, Grand Prior of England as Lieutenant-Turcopolier, and Ewen Macpherson of Cluny, Chief of the Macphersons, as Lieutenant-Preceptor of Scotland. He identified the other principal officers as the Lieutenant-Bailiff of "l'Aigle" (Aquila or Egle), the Chancellor, the Seneschal and the Referendary. According to Broun there were between eighty and ninety British subjects, both Protestant and Catholic (their exclusion was apparently abandoned early on), enrolled as knights between 1831 and 1856. The English Priory may be regarded at this time as a private, autonomous organization, claiming obedience to the Lieutenant, which did not enjoy the support of either the Sovereign Order itself nor the British Crown. Nonetheless, its tenuous links with the French Langue and the moderate understanding on the part of the British members of the Order's history and status go some way to justify their belief that they were a revival of the ancient Langue.  

A final attempt was made to gain the recognition of the Lieutenant when a Catholic knight, John James Watts, who had been admitted to the Langue in 1832 but living in Malta, was appointed by Broun as "commissioner" to the Langues of Italy and Spain to inform these two groups of the Order's activities in Great Britain. They were perhaps unaware that the two Spanish Langues had actually been united under the Spanish King and were themselves separated from the Grand Magistery. Still dreaming of extravagant schemes such as the reoccupation of Rhodes, and the construction of a Hospital in the Holy Land (achieved some twenty five years later), Watts' commission was ambitious. On reaching Rome, where the Grand Magistery had been established since 1834, he soon learnt that they regarded the British as having no proper connection with the Sovereign Military Order and, as a Catholic, was received into the Order himself with the Cross of Devotion. The Sacred Council now proposed to Watts that the first step should be the establishment of a Catholic Grand Priory, with himself as Grand Prior, in association with two other knights of Malta, the wealthy convert George Bowyer,[13] and Edmund Waterton. The Catholic knights would then "inform" the Grand Magistery of the formation of a Protestant branch that would be dependent on the Grand Priory. In his written proposal, the secretary of the Grand Magistery, Count Gozze, stated that "the branch of the Order of St John which has been formed in England (is) a branch irregular in truth up to the present moment, but in which we recognize with pleasure the germs of the most noble and most legitimate aspirations".[14] 

Although the Catholic Grand Prior was to be considered the inheritor of the Letters Patent of 1557, the English Langue welcomed the possible regularization of their position and their connection with the Sovereign Order. The British knights affirmed their willingness to recognize the authority of the Grand Magistery, expecting that their members would have a similar status to the Johanniter knights before 1798. British anti-Catholicism was viewed as a major obstacle to the subjection of the Protestant knights to a Catholic Grand Priory, requiring great secrecy, but it was Bowyer and Waterton's objections that defeated the project. Bowyer, then heir to a Baronetcy, a lawyer and Member of Parliament, was evidently keen to distance himself from the members of the English Langue and so set out to portray them to the Grand Magistery as being unsuitable for admission to any kind of association, attacking them in harsh terms. While some of his criticisms may have been justified he was mistaken in attacking the legitimacy of Broun's Baronetcy and exceedingly unfair to some others of the principal members. [15] One must assume that Bowyer wanted the Grand Magistery to abandon the whole idea of any kind of association with the protestant Langue. The most salient point made by Bowyer was that as there was no continuity from 1557 the Langue could not claim to be the direct successor of the ancient Grand Priory; for the rest we must assume that Bowyer was forgetting his training as a lawyer, preferring to repeat unsubstantiated gossip to defeat a project to which he was opposed. Both he and Waterton, who styled himself "27th Lord of Walton", a wholly invented title as he was no more than Lord of a Manor of that name, evidently wished to insure that whatever organization would be established in England would have no connection with Protestants. They succeeded as they had hoped, the Grand Magistery broke off discussions after a cold and recriminatory exchange with Broun and relations were not re-established until after the Second World War. In 1875 Bowyer founded the British Association of the Sovereign Military Order, of which he became the first President. 

On April 16, 1862, the nascent Priory proclaimed new Statutes, declaring itself to be the Sovereign and Illustrious Order of Saint John of Jerusalem: Anglia under a "Master" - although no such officer was elected - and a "Capitular Commission" to administer its affairs. These statutes welcomed "the honourable families of the British Empire and their descendants", listing three Capitular bailiffs (the Grand Prior of England, the Grand Prior of Ireland and the Bailiff of Aquila) and fifteen bailiffs "ad honores".[16] Dymoke had been succeeded in 1847 by Lieutenant-Colonel Sir Charles Lamb, 2nd Baronet, who was in turn succeeded in 1860 by Rear-Admiral Sir Alexander Arbuthnott who only enjoyed the post for one year. Thanks to the generosity of the Order's then Secretary-General, Sir Edward Lechmere, the ancient Priory Church and gatehouse at Clerkenwell were acquired and established there in 1874. In 1875 Arbuthnott's successor as Grand Prior, the 7th Duke of Manchester, instituted a new Constitution as the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem in England and the Order attained a much higher profile. The badge (an eight-pointed white enameled cross with the lion and unicorn between the arms and ensigned by a Crown), was amended and the Crown removed. The Order's future role as a major humanitarian organization was established with the formation of an ambulance brigade in the coal mines of the midlands, the precursor of the Saint John Ambulance Brigade, now the principal hospitaller arm of the Order.

TO THE FOUNDATION OF THE MODERN ORDER

[1] The rights of the Commission were at first recognized by the French Crown and the awards of the Cross of Devotion were initially granted permission to be worn.  

[2] Histoire Politique de l'Ordre Souverain de Saint-Jean-de-Jerusalem (Ordre de Malte), 2nd edition Paris 1956 and 1963, vol.2. 

[3] It is unclear by whose authority Chastelain was appointed since Molay's nomination as Chancellor had certainly been revoked and there is no surviving documentary evidence to support the claim that he was nominated by the Commission, which does not seem to have met in formal session after 1828. Peat's title of "Sir" was used by him without license by virtue of his membership of the Polish Order of Saint Stanislas. Holders of foreign Orders ceased to be granted licenses to use the title "Sir" after 1815. 

[4] See Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Order of Saint John in England 1827-1858, in The Military Orders, edited by Malcolm Barber, 1994, pp.124-125. 

[5] King/Luke (Op.cit. p.142) states that Peat took this oath; however, this has been disputed. Nonetheless, Riley-Smith accepts this Op. cit., 1994, p.126.

[6]  Richard Broun was a young eccentric (born 1801) who, after successfully proving his father's right to the baronetcy of Broun [Scotland, 1686] in 1826, demanded unsuccessfully of the Lord Chancellor his inauguration as a knight, as a baronet's eldest son, and described himself as such in the Baronetage he published in 1844. Unfortunately, the ridiculous claims he made for the rights of Baronets and his involvement in numerous failed business projects earned him the disregard of respectable society. Despite the denunciation of him in 1858 by George Bowyer, he was indeed the heir male of the Baronetcy of Broun, of Coulston, created Feb 16, 1685/86, which had wrongly been believed to have been extinguished in 1776 on the death of the 5th holder of the title. When the Globe newspaper challenged his right, he sued unsuccessfully for defamation. Nonetheless, on his death in 1858 his brother succeeded him and the Baronetcy today is held by his eventual successor, Sir Lionel Broun, 11th baronet.  On his father's death in 1844 Richard Broun claimed the Baronetcy as 8th Baronet and died in 1858. He was an author of a history of the Langue, "Hospitallaria, or A Synopsis of the Rise, Exploits, Privileges, Insignia, etc, of the Venerable and Sovereign Order of Knights Hospitallers of Saint John of Jerusalem", published in London in 1837. He republished this work, describing himself as the Honourable Sir Richard Broun, Kt (sic) and Baronet, GCJJ, and (Feudal) Baron of Colstoun in 1856. 

[7] See Riley-Smith, Op. cit., 1994, p.126.

  [8] See Riley-Smith, Op. cit., 1994, p. 127.

 [9] See Broun, Op. cit., 1837.

 [10] See Riley-Smith, Op. cit. 1994, p.130.

  [11] Riley-Smith, Op. cit. 1994, p. 131.

[12] Although Bailiff Candida was Lieutenant at the time (1834-1845) and Bailiff Colloredo was not elected until 1845, dying in 1864.

[13] Sir George Bowyer, Bt (heir of two baronetcies created in 1660 and 1794), 1811-1883, who succeeded to his father's baronetcy in 1860 and the family estate of Radley House, near Abingdon, Berks. He converted to Roman Catholicism in 1850 and two years later was elected Liberal MP for Dundalk (until 1868) and Wexford in 1874 (until 1880). He financed the construction of the first Church of the Association, the Church of St John of Jerusalem in Great Ormond Street, was appointed an Extra-Numerary Chamberlain of the Cape and Sword by Pius IX, becoming a Professed Knight of Justice of the Order of Malta, Bailiff Grand Cross of Justice with Collar of the Constantinian Order (1862), and Grand Cross of the Papal Order of Saint Gregory the Great.

[14] Riley-Smith, Op. cit., 1994, p. 133-134. Count Gozze's letter began "A protestant branch of the English Langue would have to be considered as possessing a distinct interior organization, although bound to the Order by the same chivalric forms, the same exterior symbols, sharing the same illustrious history ... sympathizing in full reciprocity in respect to all the noble, chivalric, philanthropic and charitable tendencies .... This species of union already exists in the Order with the Protestant branch which represents the ancient Grand Bailiwick of Brandenburg in the German Langue".

[15] Bowyer immoderately denounced one of the English Knights, Henry Bliss, as being the "son of Aldridge the Omnibus manufacturer and horse-dealer" for changing his name and assuming the title of Baron de Bliss. But Mr Bliss had legally changed his name by royal license in 1845 on succeeding to the substantial estates of his uncle, the late Henry Bliss, after whom he had been named, Brandon Park, Suffolk, Sledale Park, Westmoreland, and Berkeley House, Hyde Park. He had received confirmation of the Portuguese title of Baron de Alreyo, being the heir of the title and estates of his cousin the previous Baron, with the title of Baron de Bliss, from King Ferdinand of Portugal on June 6, 1855. This change of the title's designation was permitted precisely because by the terms of his uncle's will he could not inherit unless he kept the name Bliss. On later succeeding to the estates of another uncle, Colonel Carlo Barreto, he was permitted to assume by a further royal license in 1867 the additional name of Barreto and, by a further Portuguese royal decree of July 3, 1873, was permitted to change the name of his title to Baron de Barreto. See Marquis de Ruvigny, The Nobilities of Europe, London 1909, pp. 21 and 52. His father, likewise stigmatized by Bowyer, was both a JP and Deputy Lieutenant in Hampshire.  Another victim of Bowyer's venom, the Rev John Bellew, had changed his name by royal license from Higgins on succession to a part of the estate of an uncle, a Major-General Bellew  and, far from having been expelled from Cambridge for an unpaid bill as claimed by Bowyer, had graduated from Oxford and was a well-known London cleric. Indeed, in 1868, he converted to Catholicism. See Riley-Smith, Op. cit. 1994, pp. 136-137.  Bowyer’s denunciations of these men, which substantially influenced the Lieutenant and the attitude of his successors to the Venerable Order, can thus be shown to be based on false rumor and misrepresentation.

  [16]Bailiffs were required to contribute a minimum of ₤10 (equivalent today of approximately ₤500) on promotion, along with an annual oblation; commanders (any knight of Justice who founded or held a commandery yielding "actual revenues" of an unspecified sum, or who was promoted to that rank), of whom there were nineteen, were required to contribute a minimum of ₤5 (₤250) on promotion plus an annual oblation; knights (and dames) of Justice, of whom there were twenty-two knights and six dames were selected from the Esquires by ballot, had to prove four armigerous grandparents, make a foundation for charitable purposes,  and were required to contribute ₤30 plus an annual oblation; knights of Grace, of whom there were twenty-one were elected from the Esquires but, lacking quarterings, must have served the Langue or be closely related to someone who had done so, shown high moral worth and social eminence,  were required to make a minimum donation of ₤20 plus an annual oblation; Honorary knights, for foreigners, of whom there were four grand crosses (including the President of Ecuador, Duke Luigi-Maria Sforza and Baron Ulrich de Salis-Soglio) and nine knights; Chaplains, elected by ballot and who were required to contribute or collect from others ₤20 and make an annual oblation; Esquires, namely any Christian Gentleman nominated by a knight, who were required to contribute ₤5; and, finally, donats, who were any ladies or gentlemen elected after contributing ₤10 and who became "associate" members of the Langue.

For a fuller history of this period in the Order's history, see Jonathan Riley-Smith, "The Order of Saint John in England 1827-1858", in The Military Orders, edited by Malcolm Barber, 1994, pp. 124-137.

Guy Stair Sainty