Objecting " On Principle."

OBJECTING " ON PRINCIPLE . "

WE knew a man once who admitted everything—with a qualification or proviso . " It ' s a sultry day ! " we have said to him—thermometer 90 dcg . in the shade . " Well—yes—but there ' s an occasional breath of air " —there had not been one for a good twenty-four hours" which makes it very pleasant . " Or , " Nice wine this ! "

over a glass of ' 34 port—genuine , not 34 s a dozen . " Yes , but—I should have liked it fruitier . " Or , again , Pretty girl , Miss— " nose perfectly straight , be it remarked . " Yes , but her nose is too retrousse . Sometimes , we fear , we outraged his sense of propriety not a little , as thus : — "This

would be a magnificent wine , were it just a little more fruity "— same ' 34 port— " Yes— -well—but it is almost too fruity , to my taste . " " But , my dear fellow , you said the

very reverse yesterday of the very same vintage . " "Ah but they are a little different . " "Not at all , both ' 34 . " " Ah ! but— " and we laughed , and he got angry , till he had taken another glass , and the subject was changed .

How absurd ! ' says the reader . " Just so , " say we . How very absurd that a man could never venture on a downright opinion about even the most trivial matter , but he must add some qualification , some petty reservation . And how absurd it is to find men objecting to even the

simplest and most reasonable proposition , as they say , " on principle . " I vote we have a new punchbowl , " says a member of the Jolly Tipplers , at one of their club meetings , " It did very well when we mustered some five and twent y members , but we are nearer fifty now . We have plenty of

funds , and it is a great nuisance having to order a fresh brew so often , so I vote we have a bigger one . " " I oppose the proposition , on principle , " says old Cantanker . Now , what on earth does old Cantanker mean by " on principle ? " He would not , perhaps , be able , —he is not , when closely

pressed , found able—to explain his meaning . It may be the idea of a bigger bowl emanated from old Hilarious , a glorious adept in punch making , who is careful in his brewing , nicely blending all the materials together , so as to extract from them that perfectly balanced

compound of lemon , sugar , spirit and the other etceteras , which the wise man calleth punch , while old Cantanker likes an extra slice of lemon . This , of course , explains " the principle " of the latter ' s opposition . Or , perchance it was Tim of the Open Hand , who thinks money should

be spent if people can afford it , while old Cantanker is a bit of a screw . Or , it was proposed early in the evening , when other business should have come before the Club ; or late in the evening , when the business had been disposed of . Or peradventure old Cantanker ' s punch was , even for

him , a little too acid , or his stomach a little out of order ; in short , any number of " peradventures " may be suggested in explanation of this opposition " on principle , " but in nine cases out of ten we never heard a valid reason given for it . We take it that when a man objects on principle ,

he means , "I object , because I object , " which is , to say the least , womanish . — " I don't like that Mr . Jones , my dear , " says Mrs . Tomkins to her inferior half . " Why not , my love ? " asks Tomkins , "Because I don't , " says Mrs . Tomkins , and her inferior half subsides into

nothing . —We understand a man objecting , on principle , to profusion , to cruelty , to scurrility , or , in fact , to anything worthy of objection . This is not the kind of principle we are questioning , but the petty opposition which even the worthiest , the most modest , or the most reasonable

proposal invariably encounters from men of whom old Cantanker is a type . These are the very men who would originate what they object to , had it occurred to them in time . They support , on principle , what emanates from A ; they oppose , on principle , the very same suggestion if it

emanates from B . In their petty narrow minds they can always find some princi ple of objection . Now it is a case of personal pique ; or , if that were likely to be too apparent to others , there is a time , place , or circumstance ever ready for them to fall back on as a justification for

their opposition ; to explain this principle they generally escape by the means of some poor prevarication or equivocation . Give a reason—not old Cantanker forsooth , any more than Falstaff did , not even on compulsion . "No :

were I at the strappado , or all the racks in the world , I would not tell you on compulsion . Give you a reason ! if reasons were as plentiful as blackberries I would give no man a reason on compulsion , I . " " On Principle" is added , therefore , in such cases to give an air of respect-

Objecting " On Principle."

ability to an objection that is worthless , that is absolutely meaningless when any attempt at analysing it is made . These are not imaginary people , these Cantnnkers . In every society they are to be met with , urging their frivolous opposition to whatever is found reasonable . Wo find fewer

of such men , perhaps , among Masons , for Masons are , generally speaking , liberal-minded , ready always to adopt a good broad view of things , and contemning what is frivolous and petty . But , even in the Lodge , they are to be met with occasionally . They have not had the courage to cast out

the old leaven of pettiness with which their otherwise liberal souls are animated . They have gained but little , or , indeed , almost nothing , by intercourse with the open-handed , sensible Brother . All through life they have opposed everything they did not originate , or which originated with whom

they think the wrong person , till even the lig ht of Masonry ispowerless tocure them . They have objected " on principle " so long , that objection has at last become the guiding principle of their lives . We never hear a man rise to object " on princi ple , " but we are reminded of the inimitably-drawn

picture , described by a certain Mr . Samuel Weller , of the miserable-minded man " as killed his-self on principle . " He " saved his money on principle , and wore a clean shirt every day on principle , never spoke to none of his relations on principle "; " had his hair cut on principle vunce a

fortnight" ; and ate " four crumpets every night for fifteen years on principle . " At last , falling ill , he calls in the doctor , who tells him to forego crumpets . Not he . He is told , in answer to his inquiries , that three shillings' worth

will kill him . Acordingly , " next morning he gets up , has a fire lit , orders in three shillins' worth o' crumpets , toasts ' em all , eats ' em all , and blows his brains out "—as Sam explains to the astonished Pickwick , " in support of his great principle , that crumpets was wholesome , and to show that he wouldn't be put out of his way for nobody . "

Secrecy.

SECRECY .

"DERHAPS the strongest objection urged by the enemies of the - * - Masonic Order against its existence , arises from the fact that it is essentially a secret institution . Secrecy is , indeed , a most important keystone of the great edifice ; but surely no rational mind can over bo brought to hold that secrecy is in itself criminal . The broad Catholic principles which bind and govern the

brotherhood are all well-known , all public property , and any man may know them if he will but read . True , tho working of the Craft is the great enigma of which the world is ignorant , as indeed it ought to be , for no man has a right to a prying interference in tho affairs

of bis fellow-men . It may seem ridiculous to a thinking mind , to dispute seriously a proposition in itself absurd , but unhappily there are people who often yield to the influence of a subtle train of reasoning without a moment ' s consideration of the false and decep . tivo basis whereon it rests .

To begin then , at the beginning—is secrecy a crime ? Is not the mind of every man a secret volume , concealed from the eye of his fellow-man ? "Where is the human breast that is not , to some extent , the repository of secrets ? Has not the tongue of man been condemned a thousand times for its imprudent and nnnecessary

utterances , where it has once for its silence ? How often have we not heard men commended for their wisdom and discretion , when the secret of that wisdom aud discretion was simply a closed mouth and a silent tongue ? Why , in the name of reason , should the secrets of an orderly and

benevolent community dishonour it , when every well-regulated family raantains its secrets and its hononr unimpaired ? Every government under tho sun , no matter what its nature , has its secrets —secrets which it is bound to keep from tho people , at least for a time , or it would fail in its purposes , perhaps in its very being .

Surely , then , secrecy in itself can bo no crime , for as long as a secret is honourably kept peace reigns , virtue is protected , truth lives , character is preserved , and the whole public welfare is safely guarded . "But , " our enemies will say , " your secrets are foolish , injurious , subversive of order , mutual confidence and good government ; " and

by a process of argument , as false and illusive as tho proposition whereon it is founded , they go on heaping up vilification and slander against an institution , the very nature of which precludes th .- possibility of investigation . Groping on , in their ignorance and darkness failing to comprehend and control , they labour to subvert

aud destroy . As well might they strive with tongue and pen to uproot the timeworn landmarks of that ancient Ivisterti cli . r . e , v . once the cradle of tlie human race , the birthplace of Ulu-wny , HIM ! I lie theatre of on immortal tragedy . How liuan in spirit an . I contemptible ill nature must that man be , who traduces , who slanders