Ar01000

states that the rumour , to which he calls attention , is prevalent amongst the Metropolitan brethren . It may be so , but we confess , when we first casually heard of it , a week ago , with

reference to the statement of V . S . S ., we could hardly believe it to be either probable or even possible . But we did not see how we could refuse to insert a letter of this kind , which though no

doubt strong in its verbiage and using language about our late Grand Master which is hardly justifiable , in our humble opinion , under any circumstances , yet professes to call attention to a

subject which the writer states has obtained great currency in the Order . Under such a condition of things , silence is no longer " golden , " as the proverb says , but becomes a gteat mistake .

If , the brother alluded to by V . S . S . be the distinguished brother most of our readers will understand is thus attacked , we feel bound to say that we have every warrant in believing the statement

and suspicion are alike unfounded , as unworthy asibaseless . But V . S . S . has not mentioned any name , and therefore we may be wrong in our supposition . We must , however , bear in mind

that because Lord Ripon has become a Roman Catholic , we have no right , on our own principles , to " run a muck" at all Roman Catholic brethren . On the contrary , to be both consistent and

liberal — and Freemasonry is ever both — we should hail gladly the appearance of our Roman Catholic brethren amongst us . But when we say this , we admit , that , we can hardly

understand how any person can be both a Jesuit and a Freemason , at the same time . Such a case might happen , though we do not profess to understandhow consistently with the secret constitution

and vows of a Jesuit , he could be a Freemason , honestly . If , however , V . S . S ., like too many people just now , has rested his suspicion on no safer basis than some idle " canard , " or his

own fertile imagination , he has incurred a very grave responsibility indeed towards the Craft as a Mason , as nothing is so odious to our Order as anonymous or surreptitious

slander , and no Freemason has a right to assail the fair fame of a brother Freemason , to injure his reputation , or seek to weaken his prestige , either through some motives

of unlawful curiosity or of petty gossip , or of childish credulity , or from a censorious tongue , or an unbrotherly spirit of detraction , or from feelings of personal animosity .

Having offered our warnings as we are bound to do , writing chiefly for the honour of the Craft , and in the interest of truth , and right , and

justice equally to all our brethren , we leave the subject , for the present , for future elucidation and disposal .

Original Correspondence.

Original Correspondence .

[ Wc do net hold ourselvvs-rcsponMhle for , or even as approving of the opinions expressed by our correspondents , but we wish , in a spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . —12 « . ] THE ROYAL VISIT TO PLYMOUTH . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — After all that has been said upon this subject , I am sure you will see no reason to change the opinion expressed in your note to the

first letter of " Soldier Freemason , " and I , for one , entitely agree with your remarks , notwithstanding the observations of Bro . Curteis ; for although the General commanding the Western District did undoubtedly prohibit the non-com-

Original Correspondence.

missioned officers from taking part in the procession ( and I think I have satisfied you privately on that point ) yet the Committee of management are much to blame — especially the military members thereof—for they should have taken care that there was nothing in the official

programme which would have the effect of excluding their military brethren from taking their part in the splendid Masonic reception accorded to our Royal Brother . Besides , when the programme was drawn up , the Committee did

not know that the General would not allow the non-commissioned officers to join the procession . Again , had a deputation from that Committee waited on the General and represented the matter properly , doubtless the prohibition would have been withdrawn . There is no class of men

mote loyal , more hard-working , more estimable , than the non-commissioned officers of the British army ; and the reception of His Royal Highness , magnificent as it was , would have been very considerably enhanced by the presence of such a body of military Masons as the Plymouth garrison can put on parade . I was so

sadly disappointed at the exclusion of my comrades that ( had I known the true state of affairs then , as I now do ) , although I travelled a long way to take part in the proceedings , I would have kept aloof from the procession , and would have done my best to induce all other officers to withdraw too . The non-commissioned officers

have just cause of complaint , and I fully sympathize with them ; but it seems to me the case would be fully met , and all heart-burning ( of which there is undoubtedly a good deal ) soothed if the Committee would send you for publication a joint letter , expressing their regret for the

unfortunate contretemps . This , I think , is the least they can do , and our military brethren are certainly entitled to an apology of some sort for the neglect under which they suffered . Believe me , yours fraternally , " LEO . "

28 th Sept ., 1874 . To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — On my return to town I referred to my memoranda and found the particulars of the case I alluded to , as follows : —

On June 21 st , 1871 , the Provincial Grand Lodge of Kent was held at the Priory , St . Martin ' s Hill , Dover . The brethren then marched in procession to St . Mary ' s Church , and two corporals of the Royal Engineers were among them . The two corporals were placed under

arrest , for disobeying orders , and appearing in public improperly dressed , that is to say , with Masonic aprons and gloves . They had rendered themselves liable to degradation to the ranks , with such further punishment as their commanding officer might see fit to inflict . Sentence

however was not passed immediately , but the matter was referred to the Duke of Cambridge , for his approval , and what he decided I never heard . Doubtless the Prov . Grand Sec . for Kent can give further details . I was not present ,

and differ with Bro . Hughan as to what I " ought " to have done . Every soldier knows the law , although some may reckon upon its not being enforced . Yours truly and fraternally , P . G . D .

[ We agree with our excellent brother in principle , but numerous precedents , we believe , exist of soldiers appearing with Masonic clothing , " permissu superiorum . "—ED . ]

To ihe Editor oj the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I have perused with care most of the discussion hanging upon the circumstances connected with the recent Masonic proceedings at

Plymouth . I very much deplore the fact , that the non-commissioned officers were not allowed as Masons to join in the procession . In these days of improved education , they are , no doubt ,

intelligent as men , and zealous in their attachment to our ancient Order , also loyal to our monarchical Institutions . But I wish to submit the following considerations : — 1 . As to party or political processions as prohibited to soldiers . Everybody—within the

Original Correspondence.

pale of Freemasonry or not—is aware , that in this country , at any rate , there is no ground of suspicion that the Order contemplates sedition in any form . All Freemasons are loyal citizens . 2 . All commissioned officers can and do attend Masonic processions as they think fit ;

but they would naturally appear in plain clothes , with Masonic regalia at their discretion . I do not think the Queen ' s Regulations touch these matters in respect of officers holding Her Majesty ' s commission . 3 . It is well known , however , that soldiers

in the ranks are compelled to dress at all times in correct uniform , without deviation of any kind , whether in garrison , or on furlough at a distance . How , then can they appear in public distinguished as Freemasons ? I have already said that I deplore the fact , but so it is . In

lodge a soldier can wear the distinguishing badges of our ancient Order , but he is there protected from the public gaze . This seems to me a simple view of the matter . Yours truly and fraternally , WILLETT L . ADYE .

R . A ., K . T . and 3 o ° K . H . 26 th Sept ., 1874 . [ The whole point turns upon this , are there not many precedents of non-commissioned officer brethren appearing in uniform with Masonic clothing " permissu superiorum " ?—ED . ]

OUR LATE GRAND MASTER . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I must confess to having read with regret the letter of " H . M . G " in your last letter .

The Grand Master , like any other man , is perfectly justified in exercising his inalienable right of private judgment as to which denomination of Christians he thinks it most desirable to belong to . Certainly if majorities are always

right , ( which is part of our political , religion ) the late G . M . is right in the course he has adopted . And having joined the Roman Catholic communion , what else could he properly do than withdraw from all quasi-religious societies

which do not acknowledge the Pope as their head . Either Masonry is a religious society , or it is not . If it is , it undoubtedly lays itself open to the charge , ( and it glories in it ) that it accepts the

standpoint of the Deist , in order to please non-Christians . This , the Roman Catholics , and many members of the Church of England as well , consider want of faithfulness to Christ , If it is not a religious society , then undoubtedly

a lodge is never opened without a breach of the third commandment . In either case therefore , no consistent Roman Catholic can belong to a lodge . That lodges support schools in which what Roman Catholics consider heresy or

irreligion is encouraged clearly enough makes matters worse from the Roman Catholic standpoint . Let us at any rate be just , and try to see matters as our opponents see them , before we form our judgment upon their conduct . P . M .

To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Your communicated article on Rome and Freemasonry contains grave charges against our late Grand Master , which , I believe , it is utterly

impossible to maintain . Let us not forget that Lord Ripon has served us well . Now , that for private reasons of his own he withdraws from us , let us not follow him with absurd accusations . We must give him that liberty in

religious matters which we claim for ourselves . May I ask " Verbum Sat Sapienti" to name the brother who has for years directed the councils of the Craft , and who is affiliated to the Society of the Jesuits , and also to tell us what the " much " is which in the

course of recent events has appeared to him to be mysterious , and which Lord Ripon ' s resignation has now explained to him . I am a Past Master of more than ten years standing , but I have not yet seen the Jesuit brother , or realized the mystery . " English Freemasons , " says " Verbum Sat Sapienti , " "had a right to judge him