Scrutineers.

SCRUTINEERS .

To the Editor of the F REEMASON s CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I should be wanting in moral courage and totally regardless of thafc confidence which arises from the possession of a clear conscience if , having noticed the letter of Bro . Biggs under the above heading in your impression of the 7 th inst ., I did nofc afc once reply to it . Blanks are an abomination to me , and I always did , and hope always shall , object to the shield of

anonymity . Being absent from home , seeking a brief respite from " worry and care , " I have not my papers to refer to . I can therefore only , at this moment , rely on my memory for such particulars as I think necessary in repudiation of Bro . Biggs' statement , which , not denied , stigmatises "Bro . , one of the Scrutineers , " as having " committed

a great breach of trust . ' I am the Scrutineer referred to , and I distinctly state that the oircnmstances are not as Bro . Biggs represents . I cannot recollect the name of the candidate in whom I was interested on that occasion , seven years ago , nor of the " Bro . who waa representing" the case . Of course , these particulars I can ascertain on my return home , but the delay would

probably weaken my reply . I do , however , remember that what I really did was , to urge on the representative of the candidate in perhaps somewhat too forcible terms , and using a quotation very liable to misconstruction , but before I could possibly know how the voting was proceeding , and influenced only by the general opinions of other brethren before the Scrutineers were appointed , that he

should nofc relax his efforts to obtain proxies . My note " from the Scrutineers' room" was in answer to one sent to me there by " the representative of C , " and was written either jasfc before , or at the immediate commencement of tho proceedings of the scrutiny . Bro . Biggs has no rig ht to assume that the facts are otherwise than I then represented , and now repeat , and , because he blundered , to

endeavour to throw the onus of his mismanagement on another person . Having , as he states , 1 , 179 votes for his candidate , it was his duty to have polled them , and not to have listened to any solicitations which the " representative of C . " or any other person chose to make . His own acumen ought to have sufficed to tell him that with 1 , 179 votes in hand he must have had at least a

very good chance of success . For myself , I never knew him , or of him , until after this unfortunate occurrence , and never authorised any transaction with him . There were no " extraordinary means " adopted in respect of my presence at the General Committee Meeting of the Institution when Bro . Biggs subsequently petitioned . I was there in my own right ,

and probably had some inkling of Bro . Biggs intention to represent his cause of complaint . Of course such knowledge would naturally rather have ensured my attendance than have kept me absent ; but I don't remember that I was otherwise influenced in any way . There , iu answer to Bro . Biggs' petition , I fully and effectually justified what I had really done , and proved to the fullest

satisfaction of my brother Committeemen that in no way whatever had I violated my trust as a Scrutineer . Ifc is therefore most wanton and ungenerous in Bro . Biggs to suggest the reverse . From this untoward circumstance the following " morals" may be drawn : — 1 st . Don't act as a Scrutineer of votes should you be in any way

interested in a candidate for election . Having the purest intentions , any trifling anxiety on behalf of a case may be magnified into a " breach of confidence or trust . " 2 nd . Don't quote in haste , and don't use forcible expressions in quotation which might bear a different interpretation to thafc intended . 3 rd . Don't ; believe in the generosity of a brother Mason to bury an

unpleasant occurrence in oblivion , and don t be sure afc any time thafc the ghost of a long-forgotten incident may nob arise " after many days" to disturb the rest you may greatly require , and are earnestly seeking . Should the " Representative of C . " notice this correspondence , I hope he will add his testimony to the correctness of my version of the transaction so plausibly misrepresented by Bro . Biggs .

With fraternal regards , believe me , yours faithfully , JAMES STEVENS , P . M ., P . Z . Bournemouth , 9 th September 1878 .

To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —Ifc is impossible there could be a case showing more emphatically tho importance of having au independent body of Scrutineers than that meutioned b y Bro . Biggs in his letter of last week . For my own part , it strikes me that no one should be eligible as a Scrutineer who has the slightest interest in the return

of any candidate . Thus no brother serving on a committee for promoting the success of auy applicant , no one who has actively canvassed for any one , and no one who has auy votes yet unpolled , should be chosen member of the Board of Scrutineers . It would be better , indeed , if the Scrutineers were non-voters altogether , as well as non-canvassers and

nonmembers of Committees , for then it would be impossible they could exercise any influence in favour of this or that candidate . I do not imagine there would be any difficulty in finding the requisite number of brethren , so circumstanced , who would be quite willing to undertake the duty , but in the event of there being any , then , 1 say , let no one be elected who has not already recorded his

vote or votes for the candidate of his choice . Iu such case no element of doubt or suspicion can enter iuto the return of the Scrutineer , whereas , if he still retains his vote or votes , he retains afc the same time the means of turning the election at the last moment iu favour of a particular candidate . We know the polling U very close at times , and that a single rote often makes all the

Scrutineers.

difference between success and failure . By excluding the Committeemen and canvassers of the several candidates from election as Scrutineers , by forbidding Scrutineers from voting when once they have entered on their duties , and by cutting off all communication between the Scrutineers and the supporters of candidates , so thafc none bufc the

Secretary and his clerks can possibly have access to the former , the Scrutiny would be above the smallest iota of suspicion , and nothing of the kind which Bro . Biggs described last week , or whioh has brought so heavy a punishment on a Past Grand Pursuivant , could possibly take place . I am , Dear Sir and Brother , Fraternally yours , T . P . B .

Official Visits By Prov. G. Masters.

OFFICIAL VISITS BY PROV . G . MASTERS .

To the Editor of THE FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —The reports of proceedings at Lodge meetings which appear in your columns frequently contain comments on matters which , if they be received in a fraternal spirit , and attended to by those interested would doubtless lead to

improvements . Occasionally , however , I consider yon rather severe j as , for instance , when in your paper of 11 th May last you accused our Deputy Prov . G . Master of neglecting his duty in not visiting the Lodges " under his care and guidance . " A letter whioh appeared in a subsequent number I think put thafc matter in a better light , and

I trust convinced you that Bro . Hughes is desirous for the welfare of his Proviuoe . I now ask , —Why have you passed without comment the passage in your report of the Royal York Lodge , inserted last week , referring to the visit thereto of the Provincial Grand Master of Sussex ? The matter I here refer to is doubtless

apparent , considering the tenor of my opening remarks , but the passage I specially direct your attention to is the following : — " the W . M . rose . He had great pleasure in giving what all must admit was the toast of the evening . Ho referred to the progress Masonry had made in the Province of Sussex since it had been under the rule

of its present governor , and expressed his pleasure at being Master of the Royal York Lodge at the time the Provincial M . vster had honoured it with a visit . He thought that few of the Past Masters could boast ; of such an exceptional distinction , as ifc was twenty-five years since any Provincial Grand Master had been within its walls . "

Now , Bro . Editor , I should like to know the state of Freemasonry in the Province of Sussex ; if it is flourishing , it is very certain thafc its success has not arisen from the attention given to it by its Provincial Grand Master . At the present time , I believe , there are less than twenty Lodges in the Province , and if twenty-fire years are allowed

to elapse between the Prov . G . M . ' s visits to a Lodge , one visit a year would suffice , and leave a few years " rest , " even with the present number of Lodges ; fifteen years ago there were about a dozen only .

What is the opinion of the W . M . of Royal York Lodge as to the duty of a Provincial Grand Master ? Does he consider he should occupy thafc important post merely in name , or did he politely condemn the action of his ruler when he gave the toasb P

Yours fraternally , NORTH WALES . [ We would remind our correspondent that the present Prov . Grand Master of Sussex has only held his appointment since March 1877 » and that he cannot be expected to be responsible for the short * comings of his predecessor . —ED . F . C . I

Masonic Mysteries.

MASONIC MYSTERIES .

To the Editor of tlie FREEMASON ' CHRONICLE . 4 th September 18 ? 8 , DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I see no reason for rejecting either of the signs given by Bro . Norton in his paper which appeared last week in your journal . No . 1 answers the origin assigned to the shjn by the Tatler , which I alluded to in a former letter , and whioh is

given as follows in Old and New London ; " The ' Mitre' was a cele « brated music house in London House Yard , at the north-west eud of St . Paul ' s . When it ceased to be a music house , the succeeding landlord , to ridicule its former destiny , chose for his sign a goose striking the bars of a gridiron with his foot —( the italics are mine)—in ridicule of the ' Swan and Harp , ' a common sign for the early music

houses . " No 2 corresponds with the suggested " vernacular reading of the coat of arms of the Company of Musicians , " which may have been suspended at the door of" The Mitre " when it was a music house , and is described in the same work as follows : " These arms are a swan with his wings expanded with a double tressure , counter , flory , argenb . This double tressure may have suggested a gridiron to

unsophisticated passers-by . I find on reference to " Debretfc " on Heraldry , thafc " the Tressare " in the Chapter is one of the Subordinate Ordinaries ; that it is the diminutive of the " Orle "—another Subordinate Ordinary—which is described as " a border or frame within the shield , " and of whicb it " is supposed to be half its breadth ; " and that " ifc passes round the

shield in the same form and shape as the escutcheon , and is generally borne double and fieurie . " The " double Tressure , counter , flory , argent" might certainly be rendered by " unsophisticated" persons as a gridiron , and except thafc the goose in No . 2 has not gob its wings expanded like the swan in the Musician ' s Coat of Arms , there

seems no reason why the second sign should nofc be as genuine a goose and gridiron as the first . Bro . Norton ' s paper has at least the merit of being very amusingl y wii ten , even if the mystery he indicates is nofc of the most mysterious character .

Fraternally yours , Yous REVIEWER pf HUOHAM ' REPBJMT of PWE ' hm ros 173 ^