"A Very Pretty Quarrel, As It Stands."

MS . This we regard as a trifling breach of etiquette , but , with a desire to impartially discuss the whole question , wo readily admitted ifc into our pages . No one will accuse him o . an excessive outburst of indignation

Avhilst hurling back the charges brought against him . Indeed , his defence , if it is necessary so to designate it , is more moderate in tone than might have been expected nnder the circumstances ; ancl it afforded us great

satisfaction to have tho opportunity of publishing it . He strenuously contends that there is not a single word in the claim made by Bro . Brennan ( except his ipsi dixit ) that tho Bell letter was forged ; with pardonable pride he

asserts that he has never given anything to the Masonic world thafc he did nofc believe to be the truth ; and , particularly in the Henry Bell letter , ho tells us he was more than careful not to present any matter except that which , after the strictest examination and scrutiny , he Avas satisfied

was worthy of , and entitled to , belief . Again wo echo the

words of Bro . Hughan , and ask , " Could anything be fairer than that ? " Bro . Meyer regards it as strange that from 1873 , when the Henry Bell letter was first made public by E . W . Bro . Robert A . Lamberton , in his Oration delivered at

the Dedication of the new Masonic Temple in Philadelphia , up to the time of this offensive article of Brennan ' s , no one discovered this letter to be a forgery . Equally inexplicable is it that it was not until five months after the history of

the Bell letter appeared in the Keystone , Brennan was the first to cry " forgery , " and to brand the one who told its history as its maker . These are " stubborn facts , " which Bro . Brennan will have to face and reconcile with

his own views and action as best he can . Bro . Meyer does not recall what he has written about the Henry Bell letter , but most emphatically reiterates every word of it . He

believes now . as he did then , that Bro . Francis Blackburn copied the extract from the original letter . Bro . Blackburn was a gentleman whose word was ever to be relied upon . R . W . Bro . Robert A . Lamberton used the extract as made

by Bro . Blackburn in all confidence , and thus it was published to the world , after using every means to ascertain if the facts contained therein were true . Bro . Meyer

challenges contradiction of his statement by Bro . Brennan , to whom he administers a somewhat severe castigation , for which many of our readers will say , " Serve him right . "

Here the controversy , in our opinion , should rest , for the importation into it of personal abuse and vituperation can do no good in the way of elucidating facts . Brother Brennan , however , does not appear to take this view , and

has addressed to us a lengthy communication , which we do not propose to inflict upon our readers . It is a violent tirade against Bro . MacCalla , the editor of the Keystone , who , we are confident to believe , is fully able to protect

himself and the interests of his valuable publication . But , under any circumstances , this letter would have been inadmissible , seeing that there is personality in every line almost , whilst the true question at issue is blinked .

When a writer openly accuses the conductor of a respectable periodical of being deficient of tbe " attributes of a gentleman , " and asks , " Do you find it impossible to be honest and manly ? " our readers will agree with us that

such expressions are not calculated to enhance the dignity of the Fraternity . He argues thus , " If Bro . Lamberton knew as much of the Bell letter in 1873 as he does now

he would not have touched it with a pair of fire tongs , and for the purposes cf its production it would fchen have fallen stillborn . " That is a mere assertion , which must be taken for what it is worth . The inuendo that

Bro . Meyer repeated the story of the "Bell letter" so often , and worked it over for himself , " that he got to believe it—that kind of thing is not uncommon with storytellers—and that others would as easily do so , " is childish

in the extreme . Bro . Hughan was certainly not " moved beyond language polite to condemn " Bro . Brennan ; ifc is not in Bro . Hughan ' s composition to descend to anything so unmanly . We do not agree that it is the duty of the editor

of the Keystone to prove , " if he can , " that " C . E . Meyer was not , directly or indirectly , the perpetrator , & c , " for Bro . Brennan has failed to show that anything approaching a crime has been committed . Equally erratic and cowardly

is it to indicate that , " without doubt , the late Bro . Blackburn , the Grand Secretary ' s clerk , got up fche extractextracted it , so to say , out of his own head—and , with the

ink not yet dry , handed it to Bro . Meyer , who—alone properl y estimating its value , he being , as he says , on the hunt for something—put it into the hands of Grand Master Lamberton , who introduced it into his Oration !"

"A Very Pretty Quarrel, As It Stands."

Could anything be more offensively absurd or repulsively insulting to the dead ? Then , in maudlin tones , he asks Bro . MacCalla some half-dozen questions , which we do not

desire to publish . We have quoted more than we intended of this vapid nonsense , and there is matter in the letter before us still more absurd ; but we have shown sufficient to convince our readers how futile it is to continue a

newspaper discussion with such materials . If this is nofc " hitting below tho belt" wo do not know what is , and the time has arrived when we , as "judicious bottle-holders , " should throw up the sponge , and not permit such a shady contest to proceed .

The Yorston Case.

THE YORSTON CASE .

THIS very unsavoury matter deserves , from its intensely un-Masonic bearing , the severe animadversion not only of English Freemasons , but , when it is fully

understood , the condemnation and repudiation of the loyal and intelligent Cosmopolitan Craft . Bro . R . F . Gould is well known as the writer of that remarkable History of

Freemasonry which has been published so effectually by our late Bro . J . Chisholm Jack , which has shed such a lustre on this present Masonic literary epoch , has so facilitated

the labours of contemporary Masonic students , and has been warmly welcomed and appreciated by Bro . Gould ' s contemporaries of all jurisdictions and all fraternities . It was therefore not in itself unnatural to occur to an

American publisher and Brother to endeavour , on fair terms with the English , publisher , also a Brother , to procure a right . of sale and reproduction in the United States , where there are so many able Masonic writers , and so many keen Masonic students . Accordingly , Bro . Yorsfcon seems ,

in 1883 , to have entered into negociations with Bro . Jack on the subject . We confess at the outset , from the correspondence quoted

both by Bro . Yorsfcon and by Bro . R . F . Gould , thafc we entirely sympathise with the late Bro . Jack and Bro . Gould ; and take their view of its bearing and true meaning . We also feel , and feel strongly , that whereas Bro . Jack was

clear , precise , and straightforward , from first to last , Brother Yorston seems to have taken Talleyrand's view , that " language was given to conceal your thoughts , " that , in

fact , his whole correspondence is tainted by au " arriere pensee , " and that his offers are so peculiarly made and worded as to be " ipso facto " " en dolo . "

Bro . Gould in a printed statement traverses most of Bro . Yorston's allegations as unreal and unreliable , and to one in particular he gives the epithet of " untrue . " Bro . Yorston seems to have been anxious to appear to be

" sailing fair " before tbe Craffc , and yet all the while to obtain his own terms in his own way , keeping always before Bro . Jack the possibility and power of utterly independent action . This may be fairness , this may be legal

this may be " cute , but _ s it , we venture to ask , consistent with Masonic comity , frankness , and fair dealing ? We pause for a reply from some of our worthy brethren in America ?

Bro . Yorston has declared that Bros . Nickerson and Carson approved of his course , and considered him justified in the action he has taken . As regards Bro . Nickerson , we must , like Bro . Gould , express our very grave aud personal

doubts . We know him by reputation as a very able , worthy and " bright " Mason , and he has shown his high sense of Masonic honour and gentlemanly feeling by refusing to write at all for Bro . Yorston without ; Bro . Gould ' s

consent . Bro . Jack , writing in January 1884 , alludes to the prospectus of a work he had accidentally seen , Brother Yorsfcon not having sent ifc fco him , and mentions it to BroJr ther Yarston , opining , according to the old adage , " latet

anguis in herba , " and therefore declines , as he says , ' " to play " into Bro . Yorston ' s " hands . " This edition was , like the one actually published , to be issued with certain unauthorised additions , and it is no wonder that

Bro . Jack refused fco have his publication amended and altered under Bro . Yorston ' s supervision , being perfectly content with Bro . Gould ' s treatment and handling of the evidences and archaeology of Freemasonry .

It is now quite certain , let us bear in mind , that so far back as 1883 , Bro . Yorston had determined to print , with " your leave or without your leave , " and in that year Brother

Carson agreed with Bro . Yorston to write the American