Knights Templar.

After the close of the Encampment a Priory eJi Malta was opened when Sir Knts . T . C . Smythe , J . Walker and Wm . Jinnies were installed as Knights of Malta . The presence of so many-Sir Knights from the neighbouring towns augurs well for the prosperity of the Order in West Yorkshire .

I PSw 1 cH . — Preccfloiy of Pntdeiice . —The usual quarterly meeting of this Preceptory was held at the Masonic Hall , Ipswich , on Wednesday , April 2 . 3 rd . The Preceptory was opened by the emine-nt Preceptor Sir Knight Emra Holmes , Grand Provost of England with thc usual formalities ,

and the muster roll having heen called , the Knights present answereel ten their names , amongst whom were , the Jlev . R . N * . Sanderson , P . E . C . Sub Prior , Suffolk , and Cambridge ; J . Pitcher , P . E . C . ; G . S . Findley , P . E . C , Registrar ; J . Franks , R . W . Beaumont , R . A ., S . Jl . King ,

and others . T . he Preceptor m resigning office , announced that there were ne ) arrears in subscriptions , every Knight had paid liis dues , the minutes e > f the last regular and special meetings were read , the' resign * : liem of Sir Kni ght C Davy , and Rev . G . W . M . * ¦•> , ! . were accepted ami

confirmed , and Sir ' .. i [ eilmes having resigned the baton in . rids of Sir 1-Lnight Pitcher , who for man . , yeai-s has inducted the Preceptors into their office , that worthy [ niter proceeeled to install Sir Knight Beaumont who had been un . minions ! ,- elected to that

honourable post , Sir Knight Saiulerso * . - . Sub Prior , assisting i : **! the ceremony . 'J'he Kni giiis present then saluted the Eminent Preceptor in anciem form . The Preceptor then proposed as a cc , Vidate for installation . Vr . Clarke , Royal Attillery , his name having be-o .. viously entered on the

summons , and appro- -ei by ihe Provincial Prior . It was decided to defer the ap ]) ointment ed ' officers till Friday , tlie 2 *; lh , when a spe < ' : ri ! meeting was held to receive- the Provincial Priory . At tin ' s meeting , v , iiicti is repented in another column , Dr . Clarke was balloted for anel accepted ,

anel the following were appointed and invested as officers by Dr . Beaumont , R . X ., Preceptor;—Sir Knts . Franks , First Capt . ; P . Cornell , Second Capt . ; Rev . R . N " . Sanderson , Sub Prior Suffolk and Cambridge , Prelate ; G . S . Findley , P . S . C , Registrar ; A . J . Barber ,

Expert ; Capt . Terry , 60 th Rifles , Almoner ; Vacant , Capt . of Lines ; S . 15 . King , First Standard Bearer : Captain Hales , 27 th ( Inniskilling ) , Seconel Standard Bearer ; Capt . Ormsby , 2 nd Dragoon Guards , First Herald ; F .

Ashburner , 2 nd Dragoon Guards , Second Herald ; J . Pitcher , P . E . C , Treasurer . The Knights afterwards dined together under the presidency of Sir Knt . Capt . N . G . Phillips , Provincial Prior of Sull ' olk anel Cambridge .

Red Cross Of Constantine.

Red Cross of Constantine .

KE . VDAL . —Kenlis Conclave ( Ko . 20 ) . —A meetngthis of conclave was held at theMasonic-roenus , Kendal , on the 16 U 1 ult ., under the presidency of M . P . S . Sir Knt . Whitwell , M . P ., G . Chamberlain . Bro . Gooding was duly installed a Knight of tlie Order . Sir Jvnt . John Holme was electee ! anel

enthroned as M . P . S . Sir Knt . H . Rauthmell inducted into the chair <; f E . Sir Knt . Busher , electee ! Treasurer , anel G . Gawith , Recorder . The conclave was visited upon this occasion by-Sir Knts . K . W . Little , G . T ., and H . C Levander , G . I-J . A ., of London , members of the Council of tlie Oreler .

" More than a year ago one of my children was attacked with bronchitis , and , after a King illness , was given up by all . ' physicians as ' past cure . ' I was then induced to try yemr Vegetable

Pain Killer , and from the time 1 began the use of it the chile ! rapidly got better , and it is now strong and healthy . — J * WINSTANLEY , IO , Whittle-street , Liverpool , iS ^ p . —To Perry Davis & Son . "

HOLLOW-AY ' Pn . t . s : Exercise most wonderful powers in promoting appetite-, improving digestion , regulating thc Bowels , ami in removing Nervousness anil Debility . The weakest will take no harm from the use ot this alterative ami tonic Aleilicine , hut will gradually regain their health , tbe Strongc-t will preserve-themsc ) ves from many ofthe mishaps hit ) which their boasted strength anel

fearlessness of lesults often betray them . Long suffering * Invalids may look towards this rectifying and revivifying * Medicine with the certain hope- of having their Maladies rtirigvitedif not removed by its means . — ' 11 short for all ages , circumstances and conditions , Holloway points out the treatment , which is competent to check the progress of disorder t'l and expel its seeds from the human trams , —ADVT .

Original Correspondence.

© dp-a I Contsponbmrc .

Ol'DKR OF THK TEMPLK . To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , —' Jt is often a subject ot remark that the proceedings of private , meetings should so frequently tine ! their way into public print , there to be exposed to the impertinent criticism of those

whose "broad and cheese" depend upon the adroitness ( : ) with which they apply their malignant pen . Pair criticism in the hands of 11 " gentleman , " coulel scarcely be objected to , provieleel the subject on which he writes , be well known , and understood by him . I re'gret that the subject to which I refer has not fallen into such hands .

Some low , disloyal , anel ignorant penny-a-liners have thought fit to spit their insolent venom against an Ancient , Honourable , and Loyal Order , "The Knights Templar , " and just because it happens te ) be presided over by royalty , and receive the patronage of Her Most Gracious

Majesty . 1 grieve to add that editors have been found , not only to admit such virulence , but even to append some equally absurd remarks of their own such as conld only be expected from the pen of a " reviler . " Inthe present day there

seems to be no limit to the license , I will not call it liberty , of the press ; ami there is ne > person , be he prince or peasant , who can pursue the legitimate course of his life without interference , especially if it suits a political purpose to attack him . The writers of the articles in the

Saturday and the Spectator of April 12 th may be Republicans if they please , I hope they are not ! but at any rate should they attempt te ) gain admission to the Order in question they will lind the grapes very sour indeeel , if they have not alreaeiy experienced such disappointment ; and I

may further add that it must be a satisfaction to the Koyal Patroness of the Order , and to His Royal Hig hness the Grand Master himself to know lhat the observations to which f have alluded , have not proceeded from the tneire respectable of the periodicals of the day—they have assumed a different tone .

'J'he members of this and other orders will doubtless in future be more sparing of their contributions to public periodicals . I ; n » , dear Sir , yours faithfully , DEVOXIEXSIS .

To ihe Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — S ;) long as the Installation of our Koyal Grand Master remained to be accomplished , and also so long as the Lupus-Holmes controversy was diverting the attention of Kni ghts Templar

from the far more important subject of the radical constitutional change effected by the vote of Grant ! Conclave , iu December last , f purposely refrained from taking any part iu tlie discussion ; although , in common with a vast number of others , I felt unmitigated dissatisfaction with the

pressure put upon the Grand Conclave , in the shape of what is now , happily , proved to have been an unauthorised , and untrue , intimation e > f the wishes of that Grand Master whom we all rejoice to hail as such . Hut , now that these matters are things of the

past , I wish to be allowed , in till sober sadness , to ask a question , the importance of which it is impossible to exaggerate . As a member of the Templar body , and as a Preceptor eif two Preceptories , I have taken more than one solemn obligation to a Masonic body .

Now , on a former occasion , I have written very strongl y in your columns , about playing fast and loose with Masonic obligations . I have , therefore , now to ask , can a mere vote of Grand Conclave , ( a vote especially , which was practically passed in the ignorance e ) f nine-tenths of that

body , anel uneler pressure put upon the remainder ) , release me from the O . I 5 . which J have taken ? I think not . I conceive that my O . U . as a " Masonic " Knight Templar is still binding —more—1 expect that my undivided allegiance is stiil due to the Masonic body , whereas , 1 may find it . J fear that tha body which now

obtrusively rejoices in its abanelemment eif the Masonic title , has ceased to have any legal or moral claim to the allegiance of those who joined such

Original Correspondence.

body , because they believed , as I did , ( and some years of careful stud ) ' have only deepened the conviction ) , that it [ armed an integral portion of the Masonry of the present day , but has no locus standi whatever , except such as is Masonic .

J think that if you will open the columns of the Freemason to a free and temperate discussion of the question which I have started , you will largely promote the best interests of the Order .

Fraternally yours , P . H . NEWNHAM . Preceptor of All-Souls Preceptory , Past Preceptor eif Hyde-, ditto Preceptory , I'ast Grand Hospitaller '

To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and brother , — Shakespeare says ' What ' s in a name ? "A rose by any either name will smell as sweet . ' Why all this correspondence and disputing abont the omission ofthe word " Masonic" from

the Temple nomenclature ? Do the new statutes say that the Templar Degree is for the future to be chivalric ? Do they not on the contrary make this degree even more Masonic than it was before b y enacting that a

candidate must not only be an R . A ., but also two years a AIaster Alason r What more can the well-wishers of the Templar Decree require ? Your obedient servant , E . R .

To the Editor of thc Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — " When [ doctors * disagree & c , " your correspondents G . Shanks , and Alagnus Ohren , give very different replies to "Cheshire ' s" infjuirj' , unfortunately neither of them eiuote any

authority in support of their assertions . I write to ask if they would both of them be kind enough to state the authority whence their opinions are derived . It might probably help to settle a question which has long remained open .

As a P . Z . I may say that my experience is , that in practice , the First Principal only is addressed as ALE ., but that he always obtains the assent of the second and third principals before issuing the commands ; the summons too is b y command of the Al . E . Z .

But in theory I agree with Companion Shanks , that the three Principals jointly rule the chapter as one , and should always be addressed jointly , the summons too should issue by their joint authority . Dr . Oliver in his " Masonic Jurisprudence "

pp . 4 jo says , "the three Principals are severally three Masters and conjointly one . " As to the title by which they should be addressed 1 can only remark that it certainly appears unsuitable to address the presiding officer

of a private chapter ; by the title appropriated to the heads of the Order , or the G . Supts . of I ' rovinces . Can Comps , Hughan and Brett throw any light on this ? Yours fraternally , Prov . G . S . El

To the Editor tif the Freemason Dear Sir anel Brother . As one of those Masons of long standing , of considerable activity and energy , and I trust of fair skill and experience in carrying out the rituals , ceremonies , charges and lectures of

the Craft , the Af ark , and the Royal Arch degrees , who have resolutely refused to join the chivalric orders , having faileel to see the connexion between genuine Alasonry , as exhibited in the branches named , and that which has been professed to be a Christian extension of it in the various degrees

of Knighthood , I have been much struck with tlie leading article in the Freemason of this day from which I learn that " the prefix Alasonic being eliminated from the Orders of the Temple and Hospital , their only claim for recognition has been removed . " It has always appeared to me that the only claim which the advocates of these

( so called ) high degrees could olf ' er for acknowledgment as branches of Masonry , consisted in the fact , that none could be admitted to them who were not legitimate members of the Masonic boely , and this idea seems to be now strengthened by the remarks of my valued friend Bro . Hughan , in the article referred to . I con-