A Few Notes On Masonic Journalism.

We have more than once expressed our thanks for the support thus far accorded us . We make no secret of our wish that the circle of our readers may become more and more extended , while we strive by every means in our powerto make ourselves a worthier and more influential organ

of Masonic opinion . More than this we cannot say . Time and the growing kindness of Craftsmen seem favourable to our wishes , and we face the future , as we have faced it from the very beginning , with a confidence perfectly justifiable . But among our American Masonic

contemporaries , the custom of pressing for support prevails very generally . Oftentimes , indeed , we see the brethren in this or that State taken roundly to task for the indifference they exhibit to the cause of Masonic literature . Tolerably plain language is used towards Masons who do

not support the local Masonic journal , but those who promise to subscribe , yet subscribe not , are the recipients of the severest possible condemnation . We cannot say they are unjustly treated . It is manlier , more straightforward , to refuse point-blank to subscribe than to mislead

proprietors and publishers into the belief you are a subscriber . We all have the right to say " No , " when invited to buy goods , be they " unmentionables " of anew pattern , or a magazine or journal of light Masonic literature . We have no right to say " Yes , " and then withhold payment

of our subscription . These , however , are matters of detail which it would never occur to us to discuss in these pages . This kind of grievance in our opinion , mnst be written down as essentially private . They afford no sort of entertainment or instruction to our readers . In America , a

different opinion prevails . There it is considered wise—or at all events not unwise—to mention publicly , not merely the difficulties that occur in the way of obtaining new subscribers , but likewise the unreadiness so many subscribers exhibit in paying up their subscriptions . Indeed

one periodical we interchange courtesies with , recently went so far as to let pass the usual period for publication , and issued its next number at an interval of two or three months instead of one , the reason assigned being that it had failed to gather in the subscriptions that were due and

promised . We cannot conceive the case of any English journal which did not make its appearance regularly after the lapse of the usual interval of time . The chance of its receiving any further support would be very small . But they manage these things differently in the United States ,

or at all events in the State of Ohio . The Masonic Beview , published monthly at Cincinnati , Ohio , and having almost completed its forty-eighth volume , contains , in its July number , a short editorial note , the first paragraph of which reads thus : —

" OMITTED . —Yes , we have omitted to issue the REVIEW for a month or two occasionally ; but the loss is ours , not our subscribers . Does the reader know the reason ? It was because we could not collect from onr subscribers . They have neglected to pay us as they had promised , and we were compelled to wait until we could collect . "

We cannot for the life of us restrain a smile at the idea of our contemporary in not issuing the REVIEW regularly , becausethepayments of his customers were made irregularly . There is in it a sense of retributive justice , Avhich strikes us pleasantly enough , but we should not , nor , indeed , would

any other English journal we are acquainted with , dare follow such an example . Ancl who , think our readers , are the delinquent customers ? Why , " Grand Masters , Past Grand Masters , and Past Deputy Grand Masters , and private members by the hundred , " who , we are told , " pay

no more respect to their promises to us than though they had never made any—no more than a Chinese , an atheist , or even an anti-Mason . " We do not fully recognise the force of the comparison between , on the one hand , Masons who do not pay , and on the other , Chinese , atheists , and

anti-Masons . Doubtless the latter are intended figuratively to represent the most obnoxious kinds of people , and we admit that people who promise , but do not pay , are—very undesirable acquaintances . The REVIEW , however , is in earnest . It means sending out its bills for collection , aud

fervently hopes it will have no such subscribers in future , for , says our contemporary , " Since we commenced publishing this work , now more than thirty years , we have been cheated , wronged , defrauded , and swindled out of more

than thirty thousand dollars by this class of pretended Masons . It will be our fault if we are swindled out of any more . " This is stronger language than any we are accustomed to see ia English periodicals , The use of such , in

A Few Notes On Masonic Journalism.

our opinion , is a mistake . The REVIEW has a serioua grievance to comp l ain of . The omission of its Grand , Past Grand , and other customers , is utterly indefensible . More like a true philosopher would it have been , if the REVIEW had left its private sorrows to take their usual course ;

better still , if it had " chaffed " these defaulting dignitaries till , for very shame , they had felt compelled to pay up their dues . Morally , and perhaps also materially , this would have been a more profitable way of procedure . Our American contemporaries , however , are too genial to be

severe for any length of time . We shall not be all surprised if , in its next issue , the REVIEW resumes its natural flow of spirits , and is only gently , instead of terribly , indignant at the shabby treatment it has experienced . It has our

heartiest good wishes for its prosperity , and we hope to see the day when its fiftieth volume is complete . Meanwhile we commend this amusing phase of journalism to the notice of our readers .

Coloured Masonry.

COLOURED MASONRY .

WE have hitherto refrained from offering any remarks on this question . We note , however , in the numerous American Masonic journals which reach ua periodically a strong conflict of opinion thereon . This , of course , is to be expected , for the question is a vital one , and there is hardly a Masonic jurisdiction in the United

States in which it has not been already or may not be hereafter brought prominently under notice . We , however , in the United Kingdom are not likely to be affected by the controversy , or at all events only in a very remote degree , or indirectly . If , for instance , a member of one of these

Masonic communities should visit this country , and armed with the usual certificate of his status in the Craft , seek admission into one of our Lodges , in such case it occurs to us it would be the duty of the W . M . or officer presiding at the time to determine the validity of the applicant's

certificate . Before such officer could decide upon the applicant ' s eligibility to beadmitted , or rather be it said , in order to form a just opinion as to such eligibility , he must first of all decide whether the body by whom the certificate was granted was or was not legally empowered to grant such

instruments . It is not enough that a visitor exhibits the reqnisiteknowledgeof Freemasonry , and that he affords satisfactory evidence of his identity with the person described in the certificate he submits for examination ; it must further be determined whether or not the certificate in question has

due validity . Thus there follows immediately this important query , By whom was the document issued ? If it be answered , By Lodge So-and-So , or by the Grand Lodge of So-and-So , we must then discover if Lodge So-and-So is

duly warranted , and under what Masonic authority , and likewise if the Grand Lodge of So-and-So be legally constituted . We say it is quite possible for this to happen , that a member of one of these coloured communities shonld seek

admission into a Lodge in this country : in which case the presiding officer must take upon himself to decide off-hand whether or no the applicant is a duly certificated member of some legally constituted Masonic body . It seems to us hardly fair that so important a matter should be left to

the discretion of the first chance official who may have to settle it . In the hope , that our opinion , which has been arrived at without prejudice , may be of service to our readers , as a guide to them should any such contingency as we have sketched arise , we offer the following observations .

If , moreover , they are of any service to our American brethren , we shall be still better pleased . We dismiss at once the question of colour . Our Constitutions require that every candidate for admission into

Freemasonry must fulfil certain conditions precedent . These are that he shall be twenty-one years of age , a free man , his own master , and in reputable circumstances . According to the " Antient Charges , " " the persons made Masons or admitted members of a Lodge must be erood and

true men , free born and of mature and discreet age and sound judgment , no bond-men , no women , no immoral or scandalous men , but of good report . " According to Ahiman Bezon—Seventh Edition , 1 K 07— "The men made Masons must be free-born , no bond-men , of mature and

discreet" [ N . B . —These two words do not occur in the second edition of 1704 ] age , of good report ; hale and sound , not deformed or dismembered , at the time of their making ; no woman , no eunuch . " Thus it ia a matter of no