Original Correspondence.

, ¦¦ ¦ - — - —r . * i . , To the \\ Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir nnd Brother . — I hope you will kindly give the enclosed a place in your next number of The Freemason . I went a long way to Plymouth in order to be present at the Masonic reception of H . R . H . and

you may imagine how disgusted I was when I found that my cenirades in arms were prevented from joining in the procession . I , with others , endeavoured to get the prohibition cancelled . In the Plymouth garrison there were about 120 non-commissioned officers who are Masons , all

of them very estimable men , and I know that all we who could put on a black coat for the occasion would have been delighted to have seen those sergeants and corporals walking side by side with us , and were very much disappointed at their absence .

Yours truly and fraternally , AN OFFICER AND A P . P . J . G . W . "WHAT BETTER THEME THAN MASONRY ?"

To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , In your leader " On the Onward Progress of Freemasonry" in your last impression , I observe the following sentence— " ' What better theme than Masonry ? ' says a good old poetic brother , now , alas ! no longer to the fore . "

As the author of the Masonic song bearing the title quoted , I am , naturally enough , surprised to find myself referred to in the above named terms , for , whatever qualities may be credited to me by your contributor , as I am only now about to celebrate my jubilee , I do not

think the second adjective altogether applicable , and as to the remainder of the sentence , it reads like a lament over one departed , which , I thank the G . A . O . T . U ., is not yet my case . Of course 1 presume your contributor really refers to my song , the title ot which , " What

better Theme , & c , ' I have always believed to be original , never having met with any similar words in any of my Masonic researches . If otherwise , and he will kindly inform me thereof , he will confer a favour which will quite

Satisfy me for the surprise his remarks have occasioned . If , on the contrary , he does allude to me , I should wish it to be known , that if I am " no longer to the fore , " I am not far in the rear , and am as ready for service in the vanguard of

Freemasonry as ever . Yours truly and fraternally , J AMES STEVENS . P . M ., P . Z ., & c .

Clapham , August 29 , 1874 . [ We apologise to our most excellent and worthy Bro . Stevens for taking away his due honours from him , and inadvertently consigning him to the " limbus poetarium . " The truth is

we made a slight " beefsteak , " and confounded our living Bro . Stevens , with our defunct and regretted Bro . Carpenter . Will Bro . Stevens , on the Masonic principle of returning good for evil , favour us with a little " refrain" for the next Free mason . —E u . ]

THE SECRECY OF FREEMASONRY . To the Editor ofthe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , In my former letter I suggested that the first objection which can with any degree of reason be urged against Freemasonry arises from the fact of its being a secret society . In other

words , that this is an inherent objection to any society , however innocent or even praiseworthy its objects may be , whose meetings are held in private , and whose members have a bond of union , known only to themselves , and kept concealed from the world at large .

Now if in reply to this broad assertion we ask , ' What is the objection , " or , why is there such objection ? we get from some of our opponents , generally people of a pragmatical disposition , the same sort of answer as ladies sometimes give

to the question asked by their male friends , Why is smoking an ungentlemanly habit ? " Because it is . " In other words , such persons entertain an objection which they cannot express in words , but which is sufficiently apparent to themselves , and valid enough to keep them out-

Original Correspondence.

side the pale of our Order . And such a feeling ought by all means lo be respected . God forbid that Masons above all men should mock at a difficulty , honestly felt and consistently regarded ! But surely we may demand that an attempt should at least be made to formalise the objection ,

in order that we may , in our turn , have the opportunity of attempting a reply to it . Let me then state the objection thus , " * Much mischief , political and religious , has been wrought by secret societies , therefore secret societies are mischievous . " Now we will examine the logic

of this reasoning presently , but first let us observe that it is " nihil ad rem . " In granting that there are , and have been , at home and abroad , secret societies of men , banded together to promote civil and religious discord , Freemasonry has nothing in common with these , " But , "

pursues our objector , " Freemasonry abroad has been actually forbidden in some countries , because of its fomenting political strife ; and as Freemasonry is one and indivisible , the stigma attaches to the whole body . " To which we reply , " Freemasonry is one and indivisible in

this sense only , a Freemason in London is a Freemason in Paris , or Vienna , or any where else . But each country his its distinct constitution , and if foreign Masons allow their Craft to be prostituted to civil purposes , it in no way affects us , whose Masonic constitution absolutely forbids

anything of the kind . Nay , further ; if any English Mason was visiting a lodge , say in Vienna , and he found that any plotting against the government were going on therein , it would be his bounden duty , as a Freemason , to leave that lodge at once , because he is bound not to

propose , or in any way to encourage any act which may tend to subvert the peace and good order of society , and to render a due obedience to the laws of any state which may for a time become the place of his residence , or afford him its protection . "

Let me now put the objection grounded on the secrecy of Freemasonry in a syllogistic form . It will run thus , " All secret societies are mischievous ; Freemasonry is a secret society , therefore Freemasonry is mischievous . " My good friend , I deny your major premiss . I have

shown you that we have nothing to do with any mischief-plotting abroad ; and to turn our eyes homewards , what secret societies are there here , absolutely unsuspected of any mischievous tendency ! You must modify your major premiss , and so vitiate your conclusion . Granted that

some secret societies are or have been troublesome inchurch or stateygranted even Freemasonry abroad has been so abused in troublous times , we assert that there are many secret societies in England at the present time , not only illegal , but allowed and protected by the law . What

are the Odd Fellows , Druids , Foresters , Good Templars , but secret societies ? And has any one ever laid political or religious disturbance to their charge ? On the contrary , are not their objects well known , and innocent , or even laudable ? If members of Benefit or Temperance

Societies may , without detriment to the commonwealth , league themselves together by the tie of a common secret and a solemn obligation , surely the Masonic body may do the same , whose object is not to receive a " quid pro quo" for their subscriptions , or to pick out one only virtue for

practice , one only vice for abhorrence , but who are bound by the strongest ties to the fear of God , obedience to the laws , and the practice of every moral and social virtue . Nay more ; if once political or religious discussion were admitted into our lodges , the very framework of our

Order would fall to pieces , our obligations must be altered , our ceremonies re-modelled , our ancient charges abandoned , our exhortations and lectures scattered to the winds , in one word , Masonry would be Masonry no more . Of all men Masons have reason to cry , " Give peace in

our time , O Lord , " because when men are excited by the heat of religious or political animosity , they are not in a suitable frame of mind for the duties of a Masonic lodge . So then , we may triumphantly reply to all such

objectors , " yes , Freemasonry is a secret society ; its members , dispersed over the face of earth and water , need no letter of recommendation or introduction ; wherever there i . s civilisation , there is Freemasonry , and there every Mason , however

Original Correspondence.

poor , may find friends and a home . " Publish our secrets to the world;—we need not blush ; they are harmless in every respect—but by doing so you take away the very charm nnd recommendation of Freemasonry , you destroy the mystic tie which binds brother to brother ; you deprive us of

our means of mutual intercommunication , with which no stranger intermeddleth . Who dare venture to raise any objection to a husband and wife , or father and children , separated by the changes of life , communicating , if they choose , by means of a cypher , in order that the expression of their

secret thoughts might not become legible or intelligible to any one in the world ? Why then find fault with us Masons , in the North , East , South , and West , bound together by ties , which strangers cannot comprehend , because we have the power of making ourselves known to each

other , in a way which you cannot divine ? There is no secrecy in our objects , in the time and placer of our lodge ' s assembling , in our long roll-call of members , in our fidelity to the constitution and laws , in our brotherly concord and mutual affection . Our only secret , dear to us as life

itself , is the chain whose links of magic sympathy bind us each to the other . Join us , thenj become partakers of our secrets , work heartily with us , explore our mysteries , become imbued with our spirit , so far as we are ourselves worthy * of our Order , and you will find that , not for one

moment , or by the breadth of one single hair , will you be a less faithful servant of God , a less dutiful subject of the Queen , a less loving husband , a less tender father , a less firm and abiding friend , a less honest and upright man . Sir , even as I write , I feel assured that these poor words of mine will awaken an echo in thousands of

Masonic breasts , and that they will add their testimony to mine that , though we would face death , God helping us , rather than betray the secrets of our Order , yet , so far as we are concerned , we need no fear the publication of our secrets to the whole

world-Nothing is said in a Masonic lodge which would raise a blush on the purest cheek ,, nothing done therein which the most scrupulous penitent need fear to acknowledge in the Confessional . Nay , if strangers could be admitted within our walls , and witness there our labours ,

begun in order , conducted in peace , and closed in harmony , the shame would be to our detractors , and the ready blush would mantle on many a cheek among those who , in their ignorance or prejudice , have censured that they which they knew not , and derided that which they did not understand .

Sir ; there are other secrets besides those of Freemasonry , which the Roman Priest in the Confessional , forbidden by the laws of his church to be either husband or father , cannot fathom or comprehend ; and the authorities of that church , may with as much reason forbid the sacramental tie of marriage , as the deep mysterious bond of

fraternal love , as forbid her children to be Masons , because we are bound together by ties in . which the church and the world have no share . I am , Dear Sir and Brother , Yours fraternally , P . PROV . G . C . OXON , CHAPLAIN AND SEC , 489 .

PROVINCIAL GRAND LODGES . To the Editor ofthe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — In your leader of the 22 nd inst ., yon again draw attention to the title " Grand Lodge " being applied to " Prov . Grand Lodges , " and I quite agree with you , that it is very objectionable .

Can you ; however , be surprised at the mistake being made , when the chief organ of the Craft , The Freemason , in its reports of tbe meetings , uses the same incorrect title . In those cases where the words of the speaker are given , I suppose , he ( the speaker ) must be held responsible , though even in this case , I

would suggest , the editor mi ght correct the error , but in many instances the title of Grand Lodge is used when reference is being made to what takes place , and is not an extract ofa speech . In one report of the Prov . Grand Lodge of Devon ( which indeed calls forth the remarks in question ) you say , in speaking of thu