Original Correspondence.

NOTITIiE TEMPLARLE .

To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — A word or two in reply to the Past Grand Officer , who writes in your last number under the head of " Notiti . x Templariae . " I cannot quite understand what it is he

quarrels with , as to the new Statutes , unless it is that he was not asked to assist in making them . He alludes to the " time-honoured regulations of the old Statutes , " and yet supposes that " both the old and the new were compiled by a single individual , and submitted to a committee ,

who placed implicit confidence in the knowledge , astuteness , and good faith of the compiler , and were then passed by Grand Conclave . " I would now ask Past Grand Offieer what more he would require than this . P . G . O . says he remembers a noble [ lord

accusing ( unjustly ) a very high and eminent Sir Knight of attempting to pass a measure in Grand Conclave by a side wind . I was present at the time he alludes to , and quite agreed with the remarks that were made by the two noble lords as to their opinion of the improper and

undignified attempt ; and Grand Conclave , by their vote on the occasions fully endorsed the remarks of the noble lord . But there is no comparison between that case and the passing of these new Statutes . I have attended Grand Conclave many times ,

and believe it is quite able to understand what is brought before it , and to decide ; and when measures are brought before it in due course , as these New Statutes were , and duly passed , I think it ill-becomes a single member to complain because the decision differs in soaie way from

his own idea . He surely out to recollect the charge that was given to him at the time he was admitted into Freemasonry , namely , that he was to cheerfully acquiesce in all resolutions passed by a majority of the brethren . —I am , Yours fraternally , EXCELSIOR .

rHE ORDERS OF THE TEMPLE AND HOSPITAL .

To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — As a Blue Mason I have been much interested in seeing , by means of the Notes and Correspondence in The Freemason , how members of certain high degrees are knocking their heads against each other . I honestly pity poor Bro .

Holmes— " Lupus ' and Civis had already knocked him out of time , when down came " Sero Sed Serio " who ( acting well up to his motto ) tripped him up and sat upon him . Such a calamity could never have happened to our dear brother had he stuck to the old colour , but he was ambitious . He began to worship the sun almost before the dawn . Poor Bro . Holmes ! he

deserved a better fate ; he has fought stoutly , after his fashion , for his new masters , Colqhoun and Bowyer ; unluckily the latter has no visible means of rewarding him , as , though he has made use of him , I doubt whether he would recommend him to any small office under the Pope ; but from the former at least he may expect reward , and a Grand Cross of the brand new " Order of the

Temple and Hospital" would indeed be most fitting reward for so well-intentioned , though so unfortunate a champion . But Sir , let us spare pity for our unlucky brother , there are grounds for giving him sincere and hearty thanks . Emra Holmes is indeed a brother

who for his services to Blue Masonry might well be remembered by Grand Lodge with the envied purple and gold of high office . He has been the instrument of exposing the absurdities which Masons are apt to commit when they leave the beaten track of pure and ancient Freemasonry . He has shown us that the Masonic Templars

have worn crosses , and mantles , and swords , until they have got to believe that " fine feathers make fine birds ; " until they have swallowed a set of Statutes which it is difficult to believe a body of sensible Masons could digest , a set of Statutes whose title at once ignores all Masonic ori gin , and pretends to something entirely unmasonic .

Original Correspondence.

More extraordinary still , when one or two brethren , who are evidently not ashamed of their Masonic origin , and of their allegiance to Grand Lodge , have come forward in opposition , Bro . Holmes has gone the length of parading the opinions of a Roman Catholic Baronet with the

view of confuting his opponents . Masonry must indeed have reached a low ebb when such an opinion can thus daringly be introduced to guide a party or support an argument in Freemasonry . What have we , as Masons , in common with Sir George Bowyer ? Who and

what is he to us ? Simply a man whose delight it must naturally be , whose absolute duty it is , to sow dissension amongst Freemasons . Whether the " honourable body" which exists in England and claims a true descent for the Ancient Order of Hospitallers ( more modernl y known as the " Order of Malta" ) has a true

claim or not is a matter which cannot possibly concern Freemasons , who , because they are Masons , and for no other reason , are eligible to belong to a Masonic degree known until recently to the " Masonic Order of the Temple . " Bro ; Holmes has gone out of his way to attack a body to which he never can belong , and which is not MasonicJiCia bono ? I think he has committed

a grave error as a Mason . I would strongly urge my brethren who are beyond the pale of the so-called" Order of the Temple" to carefully read the entire discussion which has so long occupied the columns of The . Freemason . They would then , perhaps , thank Providence that they are still , as " Civis" puts it , " honest men and Masons . " I think their thanks

are due to you , too , for having permitted Bro . Holmes to afford them an opportunity of doing so . fraternally yours , TRUK BLUE .

BRO . HOLMES'S NOTES ,

To the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I feel that I shall only be giving utterance to the sentiments of many of my

brethren , when I most emphatically protest against the unnecessary and unwarrantable attack , made by Bro . Holmes in his " Notes" as published in your columns upon the English Langue of the Order of St . John of Jerusalem .

There was not the slightest occasion for drasrging the English Langue into the discussion . ,-If the members of the Masonic Order of Malta have the legitimate right to the title and status of Knights of St . John which Bro . Holmes would fain claim for them , he had

simply to state the facts which establish and demonstrate that right . If they have nut , it does not in any way better their case to assert ( even if it were true ) that another body has assumed the same title and status upon insufficient

grounds . Two " wrongs" cannot make one " right : " nor can a false claim upon the part of one body be justified or excused by the fact ( real or alleged ) that a similar claim has been made by another . Bro . Holmes has set his heart upon "a universal brotherhood of srentlemen" which he

considers a " grander idea than a " universal brotherhood of men . " He does not seem in this matter to be going the way to realise his idea . The first canon of "gentle" conduct is always to respect the feelings of others , and never to inflict unnecessary pain . That Bro .

Holmes has violated this canon by stepping out of his way to make a needless and unprovoked attack upon the English Langue—a body of honourable persons , quietly engaged in the hi gh and holy work of ministering to suffering

humanity—is , I trust , for their own sakes , the opinion of many members of the Craft , and of the chivalric Orders connected therewith , who are readers of your paper . It is certainly the opinion of yours , fraternally , M . A . OXON and E . C .

I'HE BENEVOLENT FUND FESTIVAI

To lite Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I beg to thank you for your prompt insertion of my advertisement , in answer to which Bro . Binckes , into whose charge the bracelet had been given , very kindly communicated with me , and thus enabled me to claim it ;

Original Correspondence.

but the brother who took my coat , and knew at the time that it was not his own , returned to the hall next morning and claimed his own , but did not return the one he had taken away . He refused to give his address , but promised to send

it ( the coat ) to the head waiter per return , which he had not done at 6 o ' clock on Wednesday , the jjth instant . He has been applied to personally , I have written to him , and he acknowledges having seen the advertisement , still he refuses to return the coat .

I am only young in the Craft , but I thought a Mason was quite above such conduct . I enclose his name , but do not wish it published , as I have no desire that the brethren of his lodge , & c ..

should feel disgraced by having such a dishonourable brother amongst them . Yours faithfully and fraternally , HENRY W . GOMPERTZ , Earl of Zetland Lodge , t -564

MASONIC HALLS .

lo the Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Is it lawful and right for the members a Craft Lodge , built and solely used for Masonic purposes and duly consecrated , to hold a ballad

concert in the lodge-room , and to allow ladies and gentlemen ( not Masons ) to be present ? Your reply or that of any of your readers will oblige . Yours very fraternally , AN OLD P . M .

ROYAL MASONIC BENEVOLENT INSTITUTION .

To the Editor oj The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I expect you will be as much surprised as I was to find that our Institutions are not lighted with gas , and that the death of one of the inmates may probably be laid to that cause . Had

there been a light in the hall when poor Mrs . Parish was coming down stairs , she would have seen she had another stair yet to go , and possibly have been alive now instead of in her grave . I would ask the simple question , " why have they not gas ? " Not from want of funds ; nor is there

any difficulty about laying it on , as it is laid on up to the entrance . Then I say , Sir , by all means let them have it . They have all seen brighter days , and no doubt been used all their lives to gas , and now they require it most through failing eyesight and old age , they must sit and read by a

tallow candle . Every male inmate has been asked the question , " what do you most stand in need of ? " Let the same question be put to them now , and hear their answer . Hoping , Sir , you see the desirability of inserting this , with a few icmarks from your own able pen , I am , yours fraternally , W . D . MAY , P . M . 700 .

UNAUTHORISED OFFICES

To ihe Editor of The Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Referring to the letter signed " II " in your number of the 22 nd of February , some years ago I had some correspondence with the P . G . M . of my province as to the appointment of a brother to the office of M . C . The first reply

was a letter congratulating the lodge of which I was W . M . on its great prosperity , so great as to require the services of a Man Cook . In the Book of Constitutions no mention is made of a "Director" of Ceremonies , but if Provincial Grand Masters insist on calling the" Master" of Ceremonies the " Director , " we cannot be surprised if the members of private lodges do the

same . In your issue of i / jth ult ., I observe a brother is mentioned as D . P . M . What on earth does this mean ? It is to me a greater puzzle than my M . C . was to my Provincial Grand Master . I have also noticed that Deputy Provincial Grand Masters are often styled Right

Worshipful . I have a strong impression that some years ago ( I think 1865 ) Lord Zetland caused a circular to be issued censuring the assumption of this title as unwarrantable . Can you give your readers any information on this point r While I am on this subject of titles , can you , say which is correct , Senior Grand Warden , Hcc ' .,