-
Articles/Ads
Article PERSECUTION ← Page 6 of 21 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Persecution
That His Royal Highness might be King of the Craft , but that personally he owed him no respect , and implied that His Royal Highness never paid his Subscriptions , nor for his aprons and jewels , and was altogether a most contemptible person ; That His Royal Highness often said one thing at one time , and the contrary at another ; That as His Royal Highness had often eaten his words , so he expected
him to repeat that feat in this matter ; That His Royal Highness had , in fact , said and done that which His Royal Highness has declared he NEVER did either say or do ; viz ., give his consent to the building- of the Asylum or Workhouse . So that , altogether avoiding the other parts of the case , Aid . Thos . Wood , attorney , in solemn verity and substance , repeated most disgusting falsehoods and scandalous insults against His Royal Highness ; adding , and I here believe himthat " as he happened to be a Trusteeso long as he lived
, , he never would part with the money subscribed , except for the building . " * « * the answer , as far as they would hear me , was , that " the bad word of some men was no disgrace to any man , much less to His Royal Highness ; and that I had not heard a single syllable to induce me to alter the decided opinions I had expressed in that letter . Some person then requested I would withdraw the letter ; but as I valued truth beyond the report of any such persons , I would not , and did not retract it .
The question was then put by Dr . Crucefix and carried ; but with some few honourable dissentients . The minutes and resolutions of the former Meeting were then read , and proposed for confirmation .
Brother J . C . M'Mullen moved that they be not confirmed ; and expostulated with Alderman Thomas Wood upon the disgraceful language he had used , and the base motives he had imputed to His Royal Highness . Being interrupted , Mr . Udall reproved Brother M'Mullen for inconsistency , in coming to undo his own works . Brother M'Mullen showed that there was no inconsistency in his having said , at a former Meeting , that if certain concessions were made he thought
His Royal Highness ivould listen to them ; but he utterly disclaimed having said that he brought a message to the Meeting from Plis Royal Highness . Mr . Stevens made a speech to the effect that His Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex is no gentleman , because he had declined receiving a deputation , and imputed " King Craft , " that is deception , to His Royal Highness . Brother Barnard assigned his reason for voting against the Workhousethat with the monies to be expended on bricks and mortar , more good would be done by granting Annuities .
Brother Warrmer called the attention of the Meeting to the singularly garbled manner in which Plis Royal Highness ' s letter , dated December 6 , 1837 , had heen printed by the Committee . Mr . Sangster attempted to show that leaving out whole sentences was not garbling ! The question of confirmation was then put and carried ; but with many honourable dissentients . Mr . Stevens then moved some rude resolution about forwarding the proceedings to the Worshipful Grand Master .
Mr . Bell wished the resolutions were more courteous : But Mr . Stevens hoped that with respect to His Royal Highness there would be no more " soft sawder . " Mr . Bell did not understand the terms " soft sawder ; " they were not Masonic . Mr . Stevens referred him to " Sam Slick . " The Secretary , Brother Farnfield , then tendered his resignation in conlequence of these painful proceedings , and the Meeting shortly broke up .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Persecution
That His Royal Highness might be King of the Craft , but that personally he owed him no respect , and implied that His Royal Highness never paid his Subscriptions , nor for his aprons and jewels , and was altogether a most contemptible person ; That His Royal Highness often said one thing at one time , and the contrary at another ; That as His Royal Highness had often eaten his words , so he expected
him to repeat that feat in this matter ; That His Royal Highness had , in fact , said and done that which His Royal Highness has declared he NEVER did either say or do ; viz ., give his consent to the building- of the Asylum or Workhouse . So that , altogether avoiding the other parts of the case , Aid . Thos . Wood , attorney , in solemn verity and substance , repeated most disgusting falsehoods and scandalous insults against His Royal Highness ; adding , and I here believe himthat " as he happened to be a Trusteeso long as he lived
, , he never would part with the money subscribed , except for the building . " * « * the answer , as far as they would hear me , was , that " the bad word of some men was no disgrace to any man , much less to His Royal Highness ; and that I had not heard a single syllable to induce me to alter the decided opinions I had expressed in that letter . Some person then requested I would withdraw the letter ; but as I valued truth beyond the report of any such persons , I would not , and did not retract it .
The question was then put by Dr . Crucefix and carried ; but with some few honourable dissentients . The minutes and resolutions of the former Meeting were then read , and proposed for confirmation .
Brother J . C . M'Mullen moved that they be not confirmed ; and expostulated with Alderman Thomas Wood upon the disgraceful language he had used , and the base motives he had imputed to His Royal Highness . Being interrupted , Mr . Udall reproved Brother M'Mullen for inconsistency , in coming to undo his own works . Brother M'Mullen showed that there was no inconsistency in his having said , at a former Meeting , that if certain concessions were made he thought
His Royal Highness ivould listen to them ; but he utterly disclaimed having said that he brought a message to the Meeting from Plis Royal Highness . Mr . Stevens made a speech to the effect that His Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex is no gentleman , because he had declined receiving a deputation , and imputed " King Craft , " that is deception , to His Royal Highness . Brother Barnard assigned his reason for voting against the Workhousethat with the monies to be expended on bricks and mortar , more good would be done by granting Annuities .
Brother Warrmer called the attention of the Meeting to the singularly garbled manner in which Plis Royal Highness ' s letter , dated December 6 , 1837 , had heen printed by the Committee . Mr . Sangster attempted to show that leaving out whole sentences was not garbling ! The question of confirmation was then put and carried ; but with many honourable dissentients . Mr . Stevens then moved some rude resolution about forwarding the proceedings to the Worshipful Grand Master .
Mr . Bell wished the resolutions were more courteous : But Mr . Stevens hoped that with respect to His Royal Highness there would be no more " soft sawder . " Mr . Bell did not understand the terms " soft sawder ; " they were not Masonic . Mr . Stevens referred him to " Sam Slick . " The Secretary , Brother Farnfield , then tendered his resignation in conlequence of these painful proceedings , and the Meeting shortly broke up .