-
Articles/Ads
Article "UNDER THE BLACK FLAG." A STATEMENT OF FACTS. ← Page 2 of 3 Article "UNDER THE BLACK FLAG." A STATEMENT OF FACTS. Page 2 of 3 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
"Under The Black Flag." A Statement Of Facts.
man near , therefore you are at my mercy . Sell me youi book at MY price , or I shall take ifc by force . " Ancl he did so . To barefaced , though legalized robbery , mnst . we fear be also added the dishonourable stain of falsehood . The
title of the pirated work states that the author , Uro . Gould , was assisted by Hughan , Woodford , Lyon , Carson , Drummond and Parvin . To a certain extent this may be true , as Gould acknowledges the assistance rendered by the fir . st
three , and several others , in the concluding lines of his last chapter . But the impression conveyed , and publicly repudiated by Hughan and Woodford , is , that they were all joint authors . Now , as regards the additions of Carson
Drummond and Parvin , these are not only unasked for by the author , but aro almost certain to be in opposition to his own views , and to term au unauthorised supplement " assistance " is to display either a lamentable ignorance of
the English tongue , or a reckless disregard for truth . Gould protested in the Masonic journals of 20 fch August 1887 , which evoked a letter to him from Yorsfcon , 12 th September 1887—who there makes four statements in defence of his conduct vis-a-vis Mr . Jack .
1 st . That in accordance with his correspondence with Mr . Jack he expected to publish the work . No doubt of this whatever ; he not only expected , bufc had determined to do so ; but it will be difficult to discover what grounds for holding such expectations can be found in Jack ' s letters .
2 nd and 3 rd . He was prepared to purchase plates or sheets . No doubt ; at his own price , which he knew Mr . Jack would not accept .
4 th . He told Mr . Jack to name his own terms , and he would accept . This is deliberately untrue , he never said he would accept them ; he did ask the terms , but only after Jack had refused to have anything more to do with him .
Yorston ' s defence in other particulars is curious . He first pleads , as against Bro . Gould , thafc the copyi'ight had been parted with to Mr . Jack , nnd then asserts that no copyright existed in America . But . Bro . Gould has alread y
dealt with these arguments in our i .-sue of the 24 th December . We merely desire to put the whole series of transactions in a clear light , free from all sophistry , ancl leave the appreciation of the facts to our readers . That Yorston ' s
conduct throughout has been the reverse of credifcable to him , either as a man or as a Mason , no amount of special pleading can controvert , and in taking leave of this
part of the subject we will merely add thafc the correspondence quoted is before us as wo write , ancl that we are not judging on any ex parte statement .
It is now necessary to consider the conduct of E . T . Carson , J . H . Drummond and T . S . Parvin ; the co-partners ( in a literary sense ) with Yorston . As regards Bro . Parvin , he writes to Bro . Gould thafc his
MS . was sent in to Yorston before he heard there was any dispute . As the first step taken by Gould in the Masonic Press was a letter to us , of the 20 th August 1887 , Bro . Parvin ' s labours must have beqn brought to an end
before that date . No one will doubt Bro . Parvin ' s word , and we can therefore only sympathise wifch our Brother in having been thus enticed ancl entrapped into the piratical craffc . We think , however , his explanation should , under
the circumstances , have been sent to one of the Masonic papers ; the assistance ( however unwittingly rendered ) was publicl y notified , and so also should havo been the amende .
As regards Drummond , the correspondence between him and Gould speaks for itself . Drum mend ' s letter being marked " private " considerabl y hampered Gould ' s rejoinder but as a copy has now been forwarded to us by tho writer
thereof , we are at libert y to quote from it . On tbe 9 th July 1887 , Gould wrote to Drummond , making some general inquiries . This was received and answered b y Drummond on the 25 th July . He says : —
"Iu November of that year ( 1883 ) I received alerter from Bro . Carson telling me of the arrangement that had been made , aud pressing me very strongly to allow my portrait to bo inserter ! iu tho T ' ^ - . . . . I also had mado some suggestions to iiia . Caiaori m relation to the contents of the American poviiun- j of tire aoika "
_ ~ So far we have no fault ; to find . Drnmmond was arobabl y hoodwinked by Carson in November iSb ' o . lliu , he goes on to say that in August 1834 an application for hi . ; portrait , from John Beacbam , tho authorised publisher ol the
American Edition , surprised him . As in the meantime I had been applied to , and lual formally engaged to prepare the History of Symbolic Masonry eacl Hop Area Masonry for the American iYiifcinn , and vair : netnallr nf ; work on it . " !
"Under The Black Flag." A Statement Of Facts.
Drummond wrote to Yorston , who admitted thatBeacham was the authorised publisher , and that he himself was a pirate , but adduced Carson ' s certificate that the piracy was
forced upon bim by Jack ' s unjustifiable conduct . He then details correspondence between himself , Yorston , Carson and others , concluding . with tho statement thafc : —
"Tlio bulk of the Subscribers in this country have taken Yorstons ' Edition quite largely , it is generally supposed on the ground that it is to be supplemented by Chapters on the Early History of Freemasonry in this Country . "
He thus admits the value of his own assistance to Yorston . Even thus far Drummond ' s aution is capable of palliation , for though it is evident ho knew , in August 1884 , that the
Yorston Edition was a piracy , still he may have believed in the representations of Carson , and thought Yorston really an injured party . Bufc the letter from which we are quoting
is an answer to Gould's of 9 th July 1884 , placing him in a position to know thafc he was doing wrong ; and yet he finishes his letter with these words : —
' I have thought over this matter much , and in spite of ichat I learn from your letters , I do not see how I can release myself from the obligations which I havo entered into in good faith , und which I supposed were entered into in good faith by Yorston and Co . "
We have here practically an admission that the MS . was not yet in Yorston's hands , and that Gould ' s warnings were nofc too late , as in the case of Bro . Parvin . But as regards his reasoning , is Drummond such a phenomenally
poor lawyer , so destitute of all knowledge of legal maxims , nay , of the code of ethics by which the business of our every-day life is regulated , as not to be aware that a . contract is vitiated by fraud ? Whatever
opinion Drummond may have previously formed of Yorston ' s authority to re-print , the protest of the author ought at least to have ensured his not passing from the stage of dupe to thafc of accomplice . Gould wrote
Drummond again on the 16 th ancl 24 th August , in very tevere but perfectly justifiable terms ; the letters are given in our issue of 24 th December , but add nothing to our knowledge . He also , in our columns of the 20 fch
August , called attention to Yorston ' s misleading advertisement , aud published a long article in the Freemason , 8 fch October . To these latter Drummond replied by a letter to the Masonic Token , Portland , Maine , given in our
issue of 26 th November hist . In this he repeats the calumnies respecting Jack ' s conduct ; says he examined the correspondence himself , and came to fche conclusion that Yorston was right ; aud acids : —
" When Gould published his articles , ho KNEW that we were acting in good faith . " Gould , as the dates show , knew nothing of the sort . He knew , ou the contrary , thafc he had warned Drummond , and
that Drummond , with his eyes open , had stated his intention of continuing to sail under the black flag . The rest of this defence , a tissue of sophistry and misrepresentation , may be passed over , all the more as ifc was answered by Bro . Gould in our issue of 24 th December .
We should not have raked up the smouldering embers of a controversy , wherein all the merits appear to be on one side , had we not been favoured wifch a letter from Mr . Drummond for insertion in our columns , enclosing a copy of his of the 25 th Julv to Bro . Gould . The latter he had
insisted on being treated as confidential when he thought Gould might use ifc , bufc had no hesitation in publishing himself without Bro . Gould's consent . But we will nob comment on this peculiarity , and have already quoted
from the letter . We revert to the one addressed to ourselves . We have read it , as desired , bufc ifc is so scurrillous that we must decline to publish it . Mr . Drummond informs
us that he is nofc a subscriber to our paper . So w e should imagine . Ho certainly never learned to express himself in suoh terms in our columns . After indulging in mud licence of iun a-naare he observes : —
' •I v / i ! I only ? ny to yon that I made in good faith , with Yorston and Co ., an . 'arrrocaienf , which I know and Gould knows was legally binding on nio : ; No , I will take back the assertion that ' Gould kao . vs ' . Mir ! wub .-ti . ; ae ' and anv fairly good lawyer knows' was
ieu ' oHy ' a . i ! i- l .- ] g ' on rae" ! for , while I was not to receive any consrderation ,. Yura ' a . ii •jmd Co . was to incur , aud did incur expense , on the strength of lay promise . " Tiiis is ihe only argument in his lengthy epistle , and the follo' . vina' r : our deliberate opinion of ifc , No contract to
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
"Under The Black Flag." A Statement Of Facts.
man near , therefore you are at my mercy . Sell me youi book at MY price , or I shall take ifc by force . " Ancl he did so . To barefaced , though legalized robbery , mnst . we fear be also added the dishonourable stain of falsehood . The
title of the pirated work states that the author , Uro . Gould , was assisted by Hughan , Woodford , Lyon , Carson , Drummond and Parvin . To a certain extent this may be true , as Gould acknowledges the assistance rendered by the fir . st
three , and several others , in the concluding lines of his last chapter . But the impression conveyed , and publicly repudiated by Hughan and Woodford , is , that they were all joint authors . Now , as regards the additions of Carson
Drummond and Parvin , these are not only unasked for by the author , but aro almost certain to be in opposition to his own views , and to term au unauthorised supplement " assistance " is to display either a lamentable ignorance of
the English tongue , or a reckless disregard for truth . Gould protested in the Masonic journals of 20 fch August 1887 , which evoked a letter to him from Yorsfcon , 12 th September 1887—who there makes four statements in defence of his conduct vis-a-vis Mr . Jack .
1 st . That in accordance with his correspondence with Mr . Jack he expected to publish the work . No doubt of this whatever ; he not only expected , bufc had determined to do so ; but it will be difficult to discover what grounds for holding such expectations can be found in Jack ' s letters .
2 nd and 3 rd . He was prepared to purchase plates or sheets . No doubt ; at his own price , which he knew Mr . Jack would not accept .
4 th . He told Mr . Jack to name his own terms , and he would accept . This is deliberately untrue , he never said he would accept them ; he did ask the terms , but only after Jack had refused to have anything more to do with him .
Yorston ' s defence in other particulars is curious . He first pleads , as against Bro . Gould , thafc the copyi'ight had been parted with to Mr . Jack , nnd then asserts that no copyright existed in America . But . Bro . Gould has alread y
dealt with these arguments in our i .-sue of the 24 th December . We merely desire to put the whole series of transactions in a clear light , free from all sophistry , ancl leave the appreciation of the facts to our readers . That Yorston ' s
conduct throughout has been the reverse of credifcable to him , either as a man or as a Mason , no amount of special pleading can controvert , and in taking leave of this
part of the subject we will merely add thafc the correspondence quoted is before us as wo write , ancl that we are not judging on any ex parte statement .
It is now necessary to consider the conduct of E . T . Carson , J . H . Drummond and T . S . Parvin ; the co-partners ( in a literary sense ) with Yorston . As regards Bro . Parvin , he writes to Bro . Gould thafc his
MS . was sent in to Yorston before he heard there was any dispute . As the first step taken by Gould in the Masonic Press was a letter to us , of the 20 th August 1887 , Bro . Parvin ' s labours must have beqn brought to an end
before that date . No one will doubt Bro . Parvin ' s word , and we can therefore only sympathise wifch our Brother in having been thus enticed ancl entrapped into the piratical craffc . We think , however , his explanation should , under
the circumstances , have been sent to one of the Masonic papers ; the assistance ( however unwittingly rendered ) was publicl y notified , and so also should havo been the amende .
As regards Drummond , the correspondence between him and Gould speaks for itself . Drum mend ' s letter being marked " private " considerabl y hampered Gould ' s rejoinder but as a copy has now been forwarded to us by tho writer
thereof , we are at libert y to quote from it . On tbe 9 th July 1887 , Gould wrote to Drummond , making some general inquiries . This was received and answered b y Drummond on the 25 th July . He says : —
"Iu November of that year ( 1883 ) I received alerter from Bro . Carson telling me of the arrangement that had been made , aud pressing me very strongly to allow my portrait to bo inserter ! iu tho T ' ^ - . . . . I also had mado some suggestions to iiia . Caiaori m relation to the contents of the American poviiun- j of tire aoika "
_ ~ So far we have no fault ; to find . Drnmmond was arobabl y hoodwinked by Carson in November iSb ' o . lliu , he goes on to say that in August 1834 an application for hi . ; portrait , from John Beacbam , tho authorised publisher ol the
American Edition , surprised him . As in the meantime I had been applied to , and lual formally engaged to prepare the History of Symbolic Masonry eacl Hop Area Masonry for the American iYiifcinn , and vair : netnallr nf ; work on it . " !
"Under The Black Flag." A Statement Of Facts.
Drummond wrote to Yorston , who admitted thatBeacham was the authorised publisher , and that he himself was a pirate , but adduced Carson ' s certificate that the piracy was
forced upon bim by Jack ' s unjustifiable conduct . He then details correspondence between himself , Yorston , Carson and others , concluding . with tho statement thafc : —
"Tlio bulk of the Subscribers in this country have taken Yorstons ' Edition quite largely , it is generally supposed on the ground that it is to be supplemented by Chapters on the Early History of Freemasonry in this Country . "
He thus admits the value of his own assistance to Yorston . Even thus far Drummond ' s aution is capable of palliation , for though it is evident ho knew , in August 1884 , that the
Yorston Edition was a piracy , still he may have believed in the representations of Carson , and thought Yorston really an injured party . Bufc the letter from which we are quoting
is an answer to Gould's of 9 th July 1884 , placing him in a position to know thafc he was doing wrong ; and yet he finishes his letter with these words : —
' I have thought over this matter much , and in spite of ichat I learn from your letters , I do not see how I can release myself from the obligations which I havo entered into in good faith , und which I supposed were entered into in good faith by Yorston and Co . "
We have here practically an admission that the MS . was not yet in Yorston's hands , and that Gould ' s warnings were nofc too late , as in the case of Bro . Parvin . But as regards his reasoning , is Drummond such a phenomenally
poor lawyer , so destitute of all knowledge of legal maxims , nay , of the code of ethics by which the business of our every-day life is regulated , as not to be aware that a . contract is vitiated by fraud ? Whatever
opinion Drummond may have previously formed of Yorston ' s authority to re-print , the protest of the author ought at least to have ensured his not passing from the stage of dupe to thafc of accomplice . Gould wrote
Drummond again on the 16 th ancl 24 th August , in very tevere but perfectly justifiable terms ; the letters are given in our issue of 24 th December , but add nothing to our knowledge . He also , in our columns of the 20 fch
August , called attention to Yorston ' s misleading advertisement , aud published a long article in the Freemason , 8 fch October . To these latter Drummond replied by a letter to the Masonic Token , Portland , Maine , given in our
issue of 26 th November hist . In this he repeats the calumnies respecting Jack ' s conduct ; says he examined the correspondence himself , and came to fche conclusion that Yorston was right ; aud acids : —
" When Gould published his articles , ho KNEW that we were acting in good faith . " Gould , as the dates show , knew nothing of the sort . He knew , ou the contrary , thafc he had warned Drummond , and
that Drummond , with his eyes open , had stated his intention of continuing to sail under the black flag . The rest of this defence , a tissue of sophistry and misrepresentation , may be passed over , all the more as ifc was answered by Bro . Gould in our issue of 24 th December .
We should not have raked up the smouldering embers of a controversy , wherein all the merits appear to be on one side , had we not been favoured wifch a letter from Mr . Drummond for insertion in our columns , enclosing a copy of his of the 25 th Julv to Bro . Gould . The latter he had
insisted on being treated as confidential when he thought Gould might use ifc , bufc had no hesitation in publishing himself without Bro . Gould's consent . But we will nob comment on this peculiarity , and have already quoted
from the letter . We revert to the one addressed to ourselves . We have read it , as desired , bufc ifc is so scurrillous that we must decline to publish it . Mr . Drummond informs
us that he is nofc a subscriber to our paper . So w e should imagine . Ho certainly never learned to express himself in suoh terms in our columns . After indulging in mud licence of iun a-naare he observes : —
' •I v / i ! I only ? ny to yon that I made in good faith , with Yorston and Co ., an . 'arrrocaienf , which I know and Gould knows was legally binding on nio : ; No , I will take back the assertion that ' Gould kao . vs ' . Mir ! wub .-ti . ; ae ' and anv fairly good lawyer knows' was
ieu ' oHy ' a . i ! i- l .- ] g ' on rae" ! for , while I was not to receive any consrderation ,. Yura ' a . ii •jmd Co . was to incur , aud did incur expense , on the strength of lay promise . " Tiiis is ihe only argument in his lengthy epistle , and the follo' . vina' r : our deliberate opinion of ifc , No contract to