Original Crrespondence.

uoeni is made up of many old " saws , " which he has incorporated into and perhaps expanded in his witty verses . Bro . Bernard will have it that 1 did quote Butler , though 1 1 say I did not , and in his superabundant spirit of the truest Masonic teaching , he not only gives me the lie direct but is persuaded that I have never read Butler at all . This , I beg to observe , is a piece of gratuitous and vulgar

impertinence . After a longish life , and much careful study of the English as well as foreign and ancient classics , it is a little too bad to be told by a brother svho professes to write Masonically , though he knows nothing of me he says , that he will be " greatly surprised " if I possess - " any familiarity " with the poem .

Those of us who have read "Typcc" will remember hsw the amusing writer finds one great merit in poor " Toby , " that he knew his Hudibras , and as Butler has been very familiar to me for many years , and many are the quotations I have transcribed for " lectures" and other purposes from its pleasant pages , lam not likely so to have blundered . I was also aware that an old

controversyhad taken place about this very couplet , and that the commonly quoted verses were not Butler ' s actually , though very commonly attributed to him—that is to say . that the correct version was somewhat different . I should then not have been guilty of such literary " laches , " as quoting Butler for what he did not actually write . III . With regard to Bro . Bernard ' s misspelling , when in

one place he spells " odorous " " orelerous , " and 111 another " oderous " in the same copy one cannot but feci that a writer who is so slipshod in his spelling , and also in his verbiage as " do he , " which is a pure " provincialism " is not a competent critic of any other writer , and thai all

such pesuelo criticism in his hands is ridiculous and unmeaning , in fact hardly deserving of notice . IV . One thing is clear from this correspondence , how personal and how perverse some Masonic correspondents can be . T . pt me rerommenil Bro . Bernard before he ventures

again to assail others to remember , that ignorance is not criticism , anel vulgarity is not wit . The Freemasonry we both profess tei believe in might have taught him a truer love , and as 1 do not wish to waste my time in replying to a correspondent who , instead of being critical , is only personal , I must decline the honour of continuing such a puerile and worthless logomachy . TIIK WHITISH or THE AHIICI . I :. [ This coirespondence must now cease ] .

THE MASONIC CHARITIES . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Allow me to corect what appears to be an error in your article entitled "Recent Provincial Grand Lodges , " published in your last number . You say , " In West Lancashire , under the presidency of

our active and distinguished Deputy Grand Master , the Provincial Grand Lodge ( in accordance with the powers of the Book of Constitutions ) has unanimously resolved to tax all the lodges in West Yorkshire for the purposes of benevolence , and in order to aid the charities . " And you further add , " No doubt this may appear , and probably will be , a heavy burden on some lodges which are not so

prosperous as others , but it is a step which we venture to deem greatly calculated to promote the cause anil real end of Freemasonry . " * Now I think you must surely be in error , for West Lancashire has no power or authority to tax West Yorkshire for the benefit of the Masonic charities . . But if you really mean that West Lancashire is about

to tax all the lodges in that province for the benefit of the charities , I for one am very glad to hear of it , inasmuch as I have for a long time thought that a pro rata system of support of our charitable institutions would be more reliable and efficient than the present impulsive and desultory mode . In fact , I have on two separate occasions brought the

subject under the notice of the Provincial Grand Lodge of West Yorkshire ; the first time was so far back as 18 G 8 , and the second was at our last Provincial Grand Lodge , held at Sheffield on the 20 th ult . On the first occasion I proved from statistics extending over the previous five years that less than twopence-halfpenny per member would have been sufficient to meet all the claims made upon

West Yorkshire during that time ; and I have not the slightest doubt that a similar small sum pro rata would meet all our present claims . This , I think , is an answer to your remark that the pro rata principle would be a heavy burden 011 some lodges , for surely any lodge ought to be able out of its yearly income to afford such a small sum , nay , even were it doubled or trebled , it would only be cutting down a supper or two

during the year , in order to meet any additional demand for the support of our charities . And when wc consider that the lowest yearly subscription to a lodge is one guinea per year , it is obvious the pro rata system would not be a burden upon any . I remain , dear Sir and brother , yours fraternally , S . O . BAILEY , P . P . G . S . of W ., W . Yorks . * West Yorkshire was a misprint for West Lancashire .

THE MARK . DEGREE . To Ihe Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Permit me ( through your paper ) to thank " Mark Master " for answering my queries so fully , and for which

I am obliged , especially for answer No . 4 , and if the English Royal Arch Masons , not being Mark Masters , are debarred from entering a chapter while at work in Scotland , Ireland , Canada , and the United States , fire , the sooner it is made likewise compulsory in England the belter , either before

Original Crrespondence.

exaltation or before Royal Aich certificate is granted . If the Mark Degree is recognized by the lodges so much abroad it should be in England -, at all events , I am about to be exalted ( hence , my making the enquiry I have ) , and have come to the conclusion that I had better become a Mark Master also , as I should feel rather vexed , as an

English Royal Arch Mason abroad , to find myself shut out of a chapter at work through not being a Mark Master . The English Masonic laws want mending on this point , it appears , otherwise it would render their own Royal Arch perfect , so as to enable them to enter foreign chapters without the inconvenience of being elebarred therefrom . Yours fraternally , As- ENQUIRING M . M .

To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir anel Brother , — I do not propose to take part in this controversy , for it is in able hands , further than to say that I quite concur with " P . M . of Mark Lodge " as to his statements anent the York Grand Lodge and Mark Masonry . I note a statement of Bro . Yarker ' s that the York Masons

recognised the Knights Templar and the priestly order of Mclchezidck . Where Bro . Yarkcr got his information from I know not ; it is new to mc , and will be , I fancy , to Bro . W . J . Hughan . The York Masons worked no degrees but the three Craft , and the R . A . Knight Templarism appeared among them about 17 S 0 , not earlier , anil it was altogether a separate grade , though the G . S .

of the Vrrk Grand Lodge then appears also to have been a Templar—hence the seeming union . Bro . Yarker may be in possession of facts of which I am ignorant . Of course he has some authority for his statement , so I shall be glac to know it . The old idea , so long prevalent , that York was the origin if High Grade development is a pure myth . A MASONIC STUHENT .

MASONIC JEWELS . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I am very IIIULII obliged to Bro . Nepean for his reply to my letter upon the subject of Masonic jewels , but 1 certainly cannot agree with him in his saying that the jewel does not appertain to the Third Degree . I beg to

eiuote liro . Nepean s words , Certainly the rule laid down in the Book of Constitutions is rather vague , but we have no intimation either in the ritual or elsewhere that I know of , that that jewel in any way appertains to the Third Degree . " Now , in the first place , the " five-pointed star " represents the five p s of f p , which appertain to the Third Degree , and in the second place , on those points you are raised , and therefore must consider that the jewel

belongs to the I lurd Degree . As the question regarding this jewel has turned up , it will be as well to have this question finally settled at the-Grand Ledge " whether the jewel is a Third Degree jewel , " ' and all M . M . ' s entitled to wear it , " shoulel Ihcy wish to do so . What is the "Charity jewel " mentioned by Bro . Nepean ? I remain , yours fraternally , AN Esonmso M . M .

To Ihe Editor if Ihe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — The much-vexed question of the legality of wearing such jewels as the five-pointed star , and square and compasses , as honorary jewels , is still open in your columns , and I am greatly surprised to see that they find in you an editorial adherent .

I fail to discover that the Hook of Constitutions in any way mentions the live-pointed star as a jewel appertaining to any degree in Masonry , nor do I see it mentioned anywhere amongst the jewels , except as forming part of that appointed for the D . G . M . Your correspondent Bro . J . J . II . Wilkins very dogmatically assures " An Enquiring M . M . " that the five-pointed star is a perfectly

legitimate jewel , ivc , because , forsooth , he has worn it in Grand Lodge , and at the installation of the Prince of Wales as M . W . G . M ., but because he incorrectly wears it , and it passes unnoticed by those who are engaged in more important work elsewhere , it does not f . illow that it is a legal jewel . I have seen the Mark jewel worn both in Grand Lodge and at the installation referred to , but that

does not constitute it a legitimate jewel . I agree with him , however , that the question should be at once set at rest , and can only say further that so much am I convinced of its illegality that should a brother enter a lodge in which I were W . M . I should at once request him to remove it .

I am yours fraternally , J . DANIEL AIOOIII :, P . G . S . B ., ling ., P . M . 281 , 1051 ; W . M . 1561 , tic [ Our correspondent docs not see that the five-pointed star is " consistent" with the three degrees recognised by Grand Lodge , the Mark jewel is not . —Ei > . ]

Royal Masonic Institution For Boys.

ROYAL MASONIC INSTITUTION FOR BOYS .

The General Committee of the Royal Masonic Institution for Boys met on Saturday , November 6 , at Freemasons' Hall , Bro . J . Symonds , Vice-Patron , in the chair . The other brethren present were Bros . J . Boyd , Winn , Moutrie , Herbert Dickctts , I . I . II .

Wilkins , S . Rosenthal , Jesse Turner , J . C . Dwarber , J . G . Chancellor , J . W . Dosell , H . V . Garman , Hyde Pullen , George Palmer , -W . Paas , A . II . Diaper , F . Aellard , W . Roebuck , Col . Ridgway , N . G . Philips , F . J . Cox , C . Horsiey , II . Day , J . France , Benjamin Head , and others . Bro . Binckes , the Secretary , read the minutes of the

General Committee of October 2 nd , winch were confirmed . On the minutes of the Audit Committee being read , and which showed a balance in favour of the institution of £ 3681 5 s . 51 ! ., it was recommended that £ 2000 Consols should be purchased as an investment .

Royal Masonic Institution For Boys.

Bro . Dvvarber wished upon this to ask a question . He was not so frequent in his attendance at their committees as he ought to be , and the question he wished to put was . solely for the purpose of obtaining information , and that was , would the vote of the committee be final upon thh matter as to the proposeil investment in Consols . The Chairman said he believed so , as it was so in the

Girls' School . Bro . Dvvarber said he wished to have an answer either in the negative or affirmative . Had that committee the power to come to such a vote , or was there any other power to negative their action in this matter ? Several members . —No , no . Bro . Dwarber was very happy to hear it , and so he

believed would be every brother present , and he thought they ought to congratulate themselves on their prospects for the future . He was glad they had got some money to be invested in Consols , but at the same time he hoped there would be no attempt to force this charity beyond its healthy and natural limits . He hoped that it would allay the agitation which had been got up out of doors , and as they had

got something in Consols , it would be a happy thing for them to point to , and thus allay those agitating sr i 1 its who made attacks on their institution . It was then proposed , seconded , and carried unanimously , that £ 2000 Consols be purchased on behalf of the institution . Bro . Col . Ridgway ' said , as one of the members of the

committee , although he was not so frequent in his attendance as he ought to be , he thought that was a good opportunity for expressing his great satisfaction at the resolution which had just been passed . He could scarcely agree , however , with the brother who had just sat down , that while they invested a sum in Consols , they o : ; ght not to push the benefits of the society beyond natural and

health ) limits . Now , for his part , he believed tl-at there could be no limit to charity in Masonry , and tha ; no limits could be deemed unnatural or unhealthy when they looked at the progress of the school , the good ti . at was done in it , and the interest that was taken in it by the Craft . Their school afforded an immense amount rf education to the sons of their poorer brethren , and there could

scarcely be any limits to such a healthy extension of it . ( Cheers . ) He knew not what took place out of doors , but he thought that too much attention ought not to be paid to it , and if there was any complaint to be made , let those who made it come in doors and bring forward some specific resolution , for they all had a deep interest in the institution . They had to consider the proper condition of the school ,

and after having secured such great results in the benefit of education , they had still been enabled to invest £ 2000 Consols for future operations . It was for that the committee had great cause for congratulation , and it ought to inspire them with confidence for the future ( hear , and cheers ); and show to the world at large the successful position to which they had attained .

The next business was the reception of three candidates for the next election , and their names were orelered to be placed on the list . Bro . Binckes , the Secretary , then rose , and said he wished to call attention to a charge which had been made against him in a pamphlet which had been circulated by a member of the Provincial Grand Ledge of West

Yorkshire , i i conjunction with the late Head Master of the School , this being the first committee meeting since it had been issued . He should not have brought the matter forward weie the charges confined to the management of the institution or its condition , his own manner , demeanour , or the language he employed , for those were matters upon which every brother had the right fully and freely to

express his opinion ; but when imputations were made upon him in a pamphlet circulated throughout the Craft , in which he was charged with being guilty of a malversation of the funds of the institution , and after having for 14 years acted as their Secretary , he felt bound to clear himself in the mind of every member of that institution . Such a charge could not be made with impunity , for it cut at

the very root of mutual confidence which without he had no right whatever to hold the position of their Secretary . He confidently asserted , without fear of contradiction , that no item of expenditure , whether it was for food , clothing , or anything else , had ever been passed without the proper voucher for it being brought before the committee . In a pamphlet published in reply to one by himself at page 20

he found the following words : — " Since writing , and as we had hoped , concluding , the preceding pages , wc have discovered an item in the accounts for 1872 , 18 73 , anel 1874 , which of itself is enough to warrant us in contlemning in the strongest terms the way in which the school expenditure is presented . We refer to the item under the head of " Gratuities " to ( with grants and outfits for ) boys

leaving the institution . The amount expended ( see different reports for 1872 , 1873 , and 1874 ) for the last three years is £ 314 5 s . ( viz . £ 119 in 18 72 , £ 126 ios . in 1873 , and £ 68 15 s . for 1874 ) , of which sum only £ 172 10 s . are accounted for , leaving £ 141 15 s . of which no account is rendered . " In page 30 it goes on to say : — " In fine , all the retums under this head of grants are so confused that

it is not surprising that those who before investigated them have been entrapped . We have looked in vain for the missing sum of £ 141 15 s ., and must wait , perhaps , till some satisfactory explanation is given of this most bewildering statement of accounts of a great and noble institution , supported by the voluntary gifts of some hundreds of our brethren . " Now , he said , it did not require anv

great knowledge of the English language to sec that if these words meant anything at all they meant this , that he , as the Secretary of their institution , had embezzled the sum of £ 141 15 s . Although every item was doubly checked , the inference which his accusers wished to be drawn was that he had appropriatcel £ 141 15 s . to his own use . Now , he had had a statement prepared ,