-
Articles/Ads
Article Untitled ← Page 2 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Ar00700
it a case of " sequitur" at all ? A brother may examine a visitor , who passes the examination perfectly , and ,, recognizing him as a " begging Ma" son , " he may , and with propriety , refuse to vouch for him . As we read the Book of
Constitutions , " vouching" is to a certain extent dependent upon examination , but not entirely so . " Vouching " expresses " personal " conviction as well . The Book of Constitutions gives us two conditions of admission of visitors . The one is
" personally known and recommended " by one of the brethren , or " well vouched for after due " examination . " The addition of " well " points to something else besides the mere result of examination . It implies a distinct assurance , no
doubt after examination , of the reality of the visitor ' s claim to brotherhood . On the whole , we think , as we said before , with all due respect and good feeling for Bro . STEWARD , that the lodge acted rig htly , and strictly in accordance with Masonic practice and law .
* IT seems from a communication from E . Lancashir thatan itinerant Mason , professedly named THOMAS RICHARD RICE STACK , and who has been sent to prison for obtaining money by false pretences , is
now professing to give lectures to expose Masonry , and which have , it is averred , a strong Fenian and disloyal tendency . We warn our brethren against him . He has sent a most insolent
postcard to our worthy Bro . B . H . GOSLING , W . M . 1145 , who had a good deal to do , properly , with bringing him to justice . These itinerant Masons are a curse in Yorkshire and Lancashire , and we shall recur to the subject in our next .
* * THE Chicago Times thus speaks on August 17 th : " We presume it is true , as everybody seems to "believe , that never on this continent has there " been a pageant so fine and imposing as was the
" grand parade of the Kni ghts Templar in this " city to-day . At all events ,, Chicago has never " witnessed its equal , many as have been its " parades and processions in the past . " There seem to have been 25 , 000 Templars in line , and
several hundred thousand spectators . 200 , 000 visitors are said to have come into the city by rail . There appear also to have been some drawbacks , and practicall y the Grand Encampment was put in a second place . Such assemblages are very
magnificent and may have their good side . It strikes us at this distance , we confess , that such manifestations are somewhat questionable both in policy and utility . A magnificent collection of Templars , a noble procession , religious services , a suitable
collection for Templar and humanitarian purposes would , we think , have produced a better effect . Sociality need not have been left out , and our fair sisters might have been well cared for . From the
Chicago Tunes , for winch we are indebted to a brother in the city , it would almost seem as if the matter had been " too big an affair" for organization , and order , and comfort .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ We do not hold ourselves responsible for , or even approving of , the opinions expressed by onr correspondents , but we wish in a spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ]
THE COMING ELECTIONS IN OCTOBER . Dear Bro . Kenning , — Emboldened by the kind and cheerful support given to my modest requests (?) on a previous occasion by so many of my brethren , I beg to ask all subscribers to the
uoys' and Girls' bchools , if they have no cases of their own , to let me have their voting papers , as the London Association has some very distressing- cases to support and carry which need every vote . With many it is the last chance . Yours fraternally ,
A . F . A . WOODFORD . 25 a , Norfolk-crescent , Hyde Park * , W .
FREEMASONRY IN OXFORDSHIRE . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — In the interesting- account of the progress of Freemasonry in Oxfordshire , in your issue of to-day , it is stated that amongst those members of the Apollo Lodge who "ave distinguished themselves in politics " is Robert Lowe . « ow Lord Brabourne . c . May I point out an error ? Bro . Lowe is now Viscount ""¦ merbrooke , whilst Lord Brabourne was formerly Mr .
Original Correspondence.
Knatchbull-Hugessen , M . P . They were both raised to the peerage by Mr . Gladstone on his accession to office in May ; hence , I suppose , the mistake . I shall he glad to learn that both Lords Brabourne and Sherbrooke are Masons . Yours fraternally , HENRY WRIGHT . nth September . 1 SS 0 .
To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — The writer of the article in your issue of the 1 ith inst ., under the above heading , has omitted to mention three lodges formerly esisting in Oxfordshire warranted by the "Ancients , " viz .: — ( 1 . ) No . 172 , meeting at the Ram , Chipping Norton ,
warranted 5 th June , 1771 . This lodge appears in the lists of 1 S 07 and 1 S 13 as meeting at the Cock , Banbury . ( 2 . ) No . 1 S 0 , meeting at the Starr Cross Inn , Oxford , warranted 25 th Feb ., 1773 , and rewarranted 2 nd April , 1702 . This lodge appears in the lists of 1 S 07 and 1 S 13 as
meeting at the Starr Inn , Market-place , Oxford ( now the Clarendon Hotel ) . ( 3 . ) No . 214 , meeting at tl . e Duke of Atholl ' s Arms , Oxford , warranted 13 th Oct ., 17 S 1 . This lodge appears in the lists of 1 S 07 and 1 S 13 , called "City of Oxford . " None of the above appear in the Union list . I am , yours truly and fraternally , E . L . H .
FREEMASONRY IN CAMBRIDGESHIRE . To the Editor ofthe "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I have no wish to enter into a prolonged correspondence with the writer of thc article on Cambridgeshire , but I can hardly pass by his letter of to-day . In the admission , which he so justly makes , of the zeal and activity of
the D . P . G . M ., he practically modifies the sweeping accusation which he made in his first statement . As I now understand him , he brings forward three " facts " in support of thc charge against the province generally—1 . VVe have not of late years started any new lodges . 2 . We do not send as many Stewards as he thinks right to the anniversary festivals of the Charities .
3 . He does not see anything about us in the newspapers . I reply—1 . The starting of new lodges is not a sure sign of zeal and activity . The town of Cambridge is , geographically , so well situated that it is found more convenient for the majority of the lodges to meet in that town rather than elsewhere . Counting numbers , not lodges , I believe we fully hold our own . We might have many small lodges
and so make more show ; we prefer a few good , strong lodges . I believe that all our existing lodges are doing good work . Is it not the fault of the present time that new lodges are hastily started , and in a few years , after having injured the mother lodges , become weak and inefficient ? By all means start new lodges when and where wanted , but do not consider them as the necessary outcome of zeal and
activity . As a matter of fact , the Isaac Newton has started a new lodge of late years—the Alma Mater , No . 1492—which is composed entirely of present or former members of the Isaac Newton , but which meets outside the province for the convenience of those members of the University who have taken their degrees . In addition to this , I know of several lodges throughout the county founded chiefly by
Cambridge men . Surely we also may claim ( what , in this week's issue , the writer allows to the Apollo ) that the Isaac Newton exercises an " influence generally throughout the country . '' 2 . Whilst fully admitting the value of the services of those who act as Stewards at our Charitable Festivals , I cannot admit that it is fair to argue much either way upon
these services . A brother by a mere money payment may annually serve as Steward to all our Charities , but he need never do more than sign his cheque . He may be unable to open or close the lodge , and be utterly unskilled in all Masonic science , and yet wear the Charity jewel . On the other hand , a brother may practise most truly the Masonic virtue of charity , and , at the same time , be an excellent
working Mason , and yet never serve as Steward . I have not described any improbable cases ; I know many who would answer to either description , and I , therefore , urge that , " per se , " Stewardships are not an infallible sign of zeal and activity , and that a province may be " charitable " without sending many Stewards . 3 . I plead guilty to the third charge . We do not often
appear in the newspapers , and this probably is the reason why we have been so hardly judged by the writer . He reverses the ordinary proverb , omne ignotum pro viagnifico . We are old-fashioned people in Cambridgeshire ; we do our work and don't make a fuss about it . I fear the writer and myself will have to agree to differ . I must ask him to excuse me if I have too warmly defended my cause , but I could not keep silence when , for nearly
twenty years , I had known the province to be zealous and active in all good Masonic work . Surely this personal knowledge is a " fact" of some value . I remain , yours verv fraternally , J . STUDHOLiVfE BROWNRIGG , P . Prov . S . G . W . Cambridgeshire , D . P . G . M . Berks and Bucks . Moulsoe Rectory , Newport Pagnell , September nth .
THE UN-MASONIC TRIAL . To the Editor of thc "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Before your readers respond to the appeal made n your columns by the defendant Bro . Trevor herein , allow me to call their attention to a few facts in connection therewith , which ma }* , perhaps , have the effect of makintrthem
think twice before they act once . I may premise that I am a Mason and a solicitor , and was present at the trial of this cause ( though not in any way engaged in this particular case ) , and , as a Mason , took great interest in it throughout . Therefore , my remarks being , as they will be , perfectly unbiassed , and made in the interests of true Masonry , may tend to give a broader , and probably , in some respects , a
more truthful view of the matter than those already expressed in your journal . I cannot , of course , in the necessarily short space at my disposal hope to give anything like a detailed account of the proceedings , or even to correct all the garbled and occasionally untrue statements made by your correspondents ; all I can expect to do , and all I wish to do , is to give you some good and substantial reasons why Bro . Trevor should not be benefited in the way he wishes , and I do this
Original Correspondence.
from a pure wish that justice may be done between man and man—between Mason and Mason . Bro . Trevor , in his letter , wishes to make your readers believe that Bro . Voigt , and not himself , was the cause of the case coming before Mr . Justice Bowcn at Nisi Prius . This is simply untrue , and evidently intended to ¦ mislead your readers . The fact is simply this : After Bro . Voigt
had commenced his action , and the defendant had pleaded in due course to his statement of claim , the plaintiff demurred to the defendant ' s pleadings , and the demurrer was duly heard before Mr . Justice Field in London . After this the plaintiff , thinking probably that Masonry had been sufficiently exposed to the public , and letting his personal feelings in the matter give way to the higher considerations
of expediency and public good , let the action . drop , and if Bro . Trevor had not forced it on ( by taking out a summons to show cause why the plaintiff should not proceed or pay the defendant ' s , Bro . Trevor ' s , costs ) , the case , according to the evidence , would never have been heard in open court at Nisi Prius . This Bro . Trevor himself admitted , and , therefore , I say , he seems to me to be guilty of
intentionally and deliberately trying to mislead his brother Masons when he wishes them to believe that the plaintiff forced the case into Court . Your correspondent , " P . P . G . Sec , " seems to look upon this as being the great cause of complaint against the plaintiff when he says " Of course the action is inexcusable . " Perhaps after this explanation , "P . P . G . Sec . "
( who , by-the-bye , writes in a very fair and Masonic spirit ) will alter his opinion as to the person to be blamed for the origin of the action . As to the original blackballing—about which , on the plaintiff ' s part , the libellous circular was penned by the defendant , Bro . Trevor—according to the evidence , Bro . Voigt was , in my opinion as a Mason , perfectly justified in
acting as he did . He was only , if I remember rightly , doing business , pro tem ., for the absent Secretary , consequently , when he saw that all the proceedings were out of order and undeniably informal , he had no choice in the matter—he was obliged to do as the Secretary himself , had he been present , would have felt himself bound to do , namely , to protest , by blackballing , against the manifest
irregular proceedings . Perhaps the strongest reason , however , why Bro . Trevor should not meet with the help he asks for is to be found in the fact that he acted in the matter without being in any way called upon to do so—not being an officer ofthe lodge —and , further , that he acted in a grossly unfair and un-Masonic manner . He is asked by the W . M . to draw out a circular anent Bro . Voigt's conduct , and if he had
originated a reasonably fair and honest epitome of the obnoxious business , and left it to the brethren afterward , in open lodge , to have decided whether Bro . Voigt's conduct was or was not to be condemned , he might have escaped blame ; but "dressed in a little brief authority , " he evidently wished to vent all his spleen against the offending member in one virulent manifesto , and in doing so , in my opinion ,
he either went beyond his instructions , or he followed a course of conduct which he ought , as an upright man and Mason , to have refused to lend himself to . In conclusion , I would remark that the defendant , Bro . Trevor , through his counsel , Mr . Lockwood , made several inuendoes against the plaintiff's conduct ; but as the proverb says , " the proof of the pudding is in the eating , "
and Mr . Dodd , the plaintiff ' s counsel , in his final addressto the jury , pointed out that , although several members of the Alexandra Lodge—including the Past Masters—were present in Court , yet—mirabile dictu !—not one . of them was called to contradict any one statement of the plaintiff's .
Apologising for trespassing to such length on your valuable space , and trusting that the importance of the subject matter may be some excuse for so doing , Believe me to be , dear Sir and Brother , fraternally yours , AUDITOR . [ We have turned " Mr . " Trevor into " Bro . " Trevor all through . We cannot understand our correspondent ignoring his Masonic prefix . —ED . F . M . ]
To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I have seen with some suprise in your issue of August 28 th a letter signed " Tudor Trevor , " the defendant in the late Masonic libel case tried at Leeds , asking for subscriptions to defray his expenses . Now I consider that , far from awarding him our sympathy and pecuniary aid ,
he deserves only our severest censure and reprobation . The course of proceedings , the conduct of all connected with the Alexandra Lodge at Hornsea , as revealed at the trial was not only not Masonic , but very questionable . It is _ satisfactory to find that the Masonic authorities took this view in their censure of the lodge generally . Evidently suspecting that there would be some difficulty in the election
of the proposed candidates , the lodge is hurriedly opened , without waiting the arrival of the Hull brethren , who h « d to come by train . The minute book is not * to hand , so the minutes of the previous meeting could not be read and confirmed . Then comes the un-Masonic voting . Only one member of the lodge , the S . W ., votes , with the exception of those three whom it was suspected intended to
blackball the candidates . Furthermore , Bro . Carr , the said S . W ., informs the W . M . that his bean was a white one—• the others being black . Thus the sacredness of the ballot was done away with—as it was taken in such a manner as obviously to disclose the voting . This is utterly against the rules of Masonry , and also of any club where gentlemen . neet , and admission to which is obtained by ballot .
Our greatest authority in Freemasonry lays down the law distinctly : " No brother can be made accountable for his vote , as otherwise his vote would cease to be independent . The very use and purposes of the ballot box imply secret and irresponsible voting , and an entire exemption of every brother from the consequences , be they what they may . " It is clear from this , that the circular drawn up by Bro . Tudor , a very scurrilous one , reflecting on the conduct of
Bro . Voigt , because he had exercised his undoubted prerogative , was not according to the spirit or laws of Freemasonry , or according to the amenities of life , as practised by gentlemen in any club in the land . A Mason has his Masonic redress , and his civil one , and if a brother makes a cowardly attack on him , by means of such a circular , and then seeks to hide his responsibility by calling it a " privileged communication , " the plaintiff was
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Ar00700
it a case of " sequitur" at all ? A brother may examine a visitor , who passes the examination perfectly , and ,, recognizing him as a " begging Ma" son , " he may , and with propriety , refuse to vouch for him . As we read the Book of
Constitutions , " vouching" is to a certain extent dependent upon examination , but not entirely so . " Vouching " expresses " personal " conviction as well . The Book of Constitutions gives us two conditions of admission of visitors . The one is
" personally known and recommended " by one of the brethren , or " well vouched for after due " examination . " The addition of " well " points to something else besides the mere result of examination . It implies a distinct assurance , no
doubt after examination , of the reality of the visitor ' s claim to brotherhood . On the whole , we think , as we said before , with all due respect and good feeling for Bro . STEWARD , that the lodge acted rig htly , and strictly in accordance with Masonic practice and law .
* IT seems from a communication from E . Lancashir thatan itinerant Mason , professedly named THOMAS RICHARD RICE STACK , and who has been sent to prison for obtaining money by false pretences , is
now professing to give lectures to expose Masonry , and which have , it is averred , a strong Fenian and disloyal tendency . We warn our brethren against him . He has sent a most insolent
postcard to our worthy Bro . B . H . GOSLING , W . M . 1145 , who had a good deal to do , properly , with bringing him to justice . These itinerant Masons are a curse in Yorkshire and Lancashire , and we shall recur to the subject in our next .
* * THE Chicago Times thus speaks on August 17 th : " We presume it is true , as everybody seems to "believe , that never on this continent has there " been a pageant so fine and imposing as was the
" grand parade of the Kni ghts Templar in this " city to-day . At all events ,, Chicago has never " witnessed its equal , many as have been its " parades and processions in the past . " There seem to have been 25 , 000 Templars in line , and
several hundred thousand spectators . 200 , 000 visitors are said to have come into the city by rail . There appear also to have been some drawbacks , and practicall y the Grand Encampment was put in a second place . Such assemblages are very
magnificent and may have their good side . It strikes us at this distance , we confess , that such manifestations are somewhat questionable both in policy and utility . A magnificent collection of Templars , a noble procession , religious services , a suitable
collection for Templar and humanitarian purposes would , we think , have produced a better effect . Sociality need not have been left out , and our fair sisters might have been well cared for . From the
Chicago Tunes , for winch we are indebted to a brother in the city , it would almost seem as if the matter had been " too big an affair" for organization , and order , and comfort .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ We do not hold ourselves responsible for , or even approving of , the opinions expressed by onr correspondents , but we wish in a spirit of fair play to all , to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ]
THE COMING ELECTIONS IN OCTOBER . Dear Bro . Kenning , — Emboldened by the kind and cheerful support given to my modest requests (?) on a previous occasion by so many of my brethren , I beg to ask all subscribers to the
uoys' and Girls' bchools , if they have no cases of their own , to let me have their voting papers , as the London Association has some very distressing- cases to support and carry which need every vote . With many it is the last chance . Yours fraternally ,
A . F . A . WOODFORD . 25 a , Norfolk-crescent , Hyde Park * , W .
FREEMASONRY IN OXFORDSHIRE . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — In the interesting- account of the progress of Freemasonry in Oxfordshire , in your issue of to-day , it is stated that amongst those members of the Apollo Lodge who "ave distinguished themselves in politics " is Robert Lowe . « ow Lord Brabourne . c . May I point out an error ? Bro . Lowe is now Viscount ""¦ merbrooke , whilst Lord Brabourne was formerly Mr .
Original Correspondence.
Knatchbull-Hugessen , M . P . They were both raised to the peerage by Mr . Gladstone on his accession to office in May ; hence , I suppose , the mistake . I shall he glad to learn that both Lords Brabourne and Sherbrooke are Masons . Yours fraternally , HENRY WRIGHT . nth September . 1 SS 0 .
To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — The writer of the article in your issue of the 1 ith inst ., under the above heading , has omitted to mention three lodges formerly esisting in Oxfordshire warranted by the "Ancients , " viz .: — ( 1 . ) No . 172 , meeting at the Ram , Chipping Norton ,
warranted 5 th June , 1771 . This lodge appears in the lists of 1 S 07 and 1 S 13 as meeting at the Cock , Banbury . ( 2 . ) No . 1 S 0 , meeting at the Starr Cross Inn , Oxford , warranted 25 th Feb ., 1773 , and rewarranted 2 nd April , 1702 . This lodge appears in the lists of 1 S 07 and 1 S 13 as
meeting at the Starr Inn , Market-place , Oxford ( now the Clarendon Hotel ) . ( 3 . ) No . 214 , meeting at tl . e Duke of Atholl ' s Arms , Oxford , warranted 13 th Oct ., 17 S 1 . This lodge appears in the lists of 1 S 07 and 1 S 13 , called "City of Oxford . " None of the above appear in the Union list . I am , yours truly and fraternally , E . L . H .
FREEMASONRY IN CAMBRIDGESHIRE . To the Editor ofthe "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I have no wish to enter into a prolonged correspondence with the writer of thc article on Cambridgeshire , but I can hardly pass by his letter of to-day . In the admission , which he so justly makes , of the zeal and activity of
the D . P . G . M ., he practically modifies the sweeping accusation which he made in his first statement . As I now understand him , he brings forward three " facts " in support of thc charge against the province generally—1 . VVe have not of late years started any new lodges . 2 . We do not send as many Stewards as he thinks right to the anniversary festivals of the Charities .
3 . He does not see anything about us in the newspapers . I reply—1 . The starting of new lodges is not a sure sign of zeal and activity . The town of Cambridge is , geographically , so well situated that it is found more convenient for the majority of the lodges to meet in that town rather than elsewhere . Counting numbers , not lodges , I believe we fully hold our own . We might have many small lodges
and so make more show ; we prefer a few good , strong lodges . I believe that all our existing lodges are doing good work . Is it not the fault of the present time that new lodges are hastily started , and in a few years , after having injured the mother lodges , become weak and inefficient ? By all means start new lodges when and where wanted , but do not consider them as the necessary outcome of zeal and
activity . As a matter of fact , the Isaac Newton has started a new lodge of late years—the Alma Mater , No . 1492—which is composed entirely of present or former members of the Isaac Newton , but which meets outside the province for the convenience of those members of the University who have taken their degrees . In addition to this , I know of several lodges throughout the county founded chiefly by
Cambridge men . Surely we also may claim ( what , in this week's issue , the writer allows to the Apollo ) that the Isaac Newton exercises an " influence generally throughout the country . '' 2 . Whilst fully admitting the value of the services of those who act as Stewards at our Charitable Festivals , I cannot admit that it is fair to argue much either way upon
these services . A brother by a mere money payment may annually serve as Steward to all our Charities , but he need never do more than sign his cheque . He may be unable to open or close the lodge , and be utterly unskilled in all Masonic science , and yet wear the Charity jewel . On the other hand , a brother may practise most truly the Masonic virtue of charity , and , at the same time , be an excellent
working Mason , and yet never serve as Steward . I have not described any improbable cases ; I know many who would answer to either description , and I , therefore , urge that , " per se , " Stewardships are not an infallible sign of zeal and activity , and that a province may be " charitable " without sending many Stewards . 3 . I plead guilty to the third charge . We do not often
appear in the newspapers , and this probably is the reason why we have been so hardly judged by the writer . He reverses the ordinary proverb , omne ignotum pro viagnifico . We are old-fashioned people in Cambridgeshire ; we do our work and don't make a fuss about it . I fear the writer and myself will have to agree to differ . I must ask him to excuse me if I have too warmly defended my cause , but I could not keep silence when , for nearly
twenty years , I had known the province to be zealous and active in all good Masonic work . Surely this personal knowledge is a " fact" of some value . I remain , yours verv fraternally , J . STUDHOLiVfE BROWNRIGG , P . Prov . S . G . W . Cambridgeshire , D . P . G . M . Berks and Bucks . Moulsoe Rectory , Newport Pagnell , September nth .
THE UN-MASONIC TRIAL . To the Editor of thc "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Before your readers respond to the appeal made n your columns by the defendant Bro . Trevor herein , allow me to call their attention to a few facts in connection therewith , which ma }* , perhaps , have the effect of makintrthem
think twice before they act once . I may premise that I am a Mason and a solicitor , and was present at the trial of this cause ( though not in any way engaged in this particular case ) , and , as a Mason , took great interest in it throughout . Therefore , my remarks being , as they will be , perfectly unbiassed , and made in the interests of true Masonry , may tend to give a broader , and probably , in some respects , a
more truthful view of the matter than those already expressed in your journal . I cannot , of course , in the necessarily short space at my disposal hope to give anything like a detailed account of the proceedings , or even to correct all the garbled and occasionally untrue statements made by your correspondents ; all I can expect to do , and all I wish to do , is to give you some good and substantial reasons why Bro . Trevor should not be benefited in the way he wishes , and I do this
Original Correspondence.
from a pure wish that justice may be done between man and man—between Mason and Mason . Bro . Trevor , in his letter , wishes to make your readers believe that Bro . Voigt , and not himself , was the cause of the case coming before Mr . Justice Bowcn at Nisi Prius . This is simply untrue , and evidently intended to ¦ mislead your readers . The fact is simply this : After Bro . Voigt
had commenced his action , and the defendant had pleaded in due course to his statement of claim , the plaintiff demurred to the defendant ' s pleadings , and the demurrer was duly heard before Mr . Justice Field in London . After this the plaintiff , thinking probably that Masonry had been sufficiently exposed to the public , and letting his personal feelings in the matter give way to the higher considerations
of expediency and public good , let the action . drop , and if Bro . Trevor had not forced it on ( by taking out a summons to show cause why the plaintiff should not proceed or pay the defendant ' s , Bro . Trevor ' s , costs ) , the case , according to the evidence , would never have been heard in open court at Nisi Prius . This Bro . Trevor himself admitted , and , therefore , I say , he seems to me to be guilty of
intentionally and deliberately trying to mislead his brother Masons when he wishes them to believe that the plaintiff forced the case into Court . Your correspondent , " P . P . G . Sec , " seems to look upon this as being the great cause of complaint against the plaintiff when he says " Of course the action is inexcusable . " Perhaps after this explanation , "P . P . G . Sec . "
( who , by-the-bye , writes in a very fair and Masonic spirit ) will alter his opinion as to the person to be blamed for the origin of the action . As to the original blackballing—about which , on the plaintiff ' s part , the libellous circular was penned by the defendant , Bro . Trevor—according to the evidence , Bro . Voigt was , in my opinion as a Mason , perfectly justified in
acting as he did . He was only , if I remember rightly , doing business , pro tem ., for the absent Secretary , consequently , when he saw that all the proceedings were out of order and undeniably informal , he had no choice in the matter—he was obliged to do as the Secretary himself , had he been present , would have felt himself bound to do , namely , to protest , by blackballing , against the manifest
irregular proceedings . Perhaps the strongest reason , however , why Bro . Trevor should not meet with the help he asks for is to be found in the fact that he acted in the matter without being in any way called upon to do so—not being an officer ofthe lodge —and , further , that he acted in a grossly unfair and un-Masonic manner . He is asked by the W . M . to draw out a circular anent Bro . Voigt's conduct , and if he had
originated a reasonably fair and honest epitome of the obnoxious business , and left it to the brethren afterward , in open lodge , to have decided whether Bro . Voigt's conduct was or was not to be condemned , he might have escaped blame ; but "dressed in a little brief authority , " he evidently wished to vent all his spleen against the offending member in one virulent manifesto , and in doing so , in my opinion ,
he either went beyond his instructions , or he followed a course of conduct which he ought , as an upright man and Mason , to have refused to lend himself to . In conclusion , I would remark that the defendant , Bro . Trevor , through his counsel , Mr . Lockwood , made several inuendoes against the plaintiff's conduct ; but as the proverb says , " the proof of the pudding is in the eating , "
and Mr . Dodd , the plaintiff ' s counsel , in his final addressto the jury , pointed out that , although several members of the Alexandra Lodge—including the Past Masters—were present in Court , yet—mirabile dictu !—not one . of them was called to contradict any one statement of the plaintiff's .
Apologising for trespassing to such length on your valuable space , and trusting that the importance of the subject matter may be some excuse for so doing , Believe me to be , dear Sir and Brother , fraternally yours , AUDITOR . [ We have turned " Mr . " Trevor into " Bro . " Trevor all through . We cannot understand our correspondent ignoring his Masonic prefix . —ED . F . M . ]
To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I have seen with some suprise in your issue of August 28 th a letter signed " Tudor Trevor , " the defendant in the late Masonic libel case tried at Leeds , asking for subscriptions to defray his expenses . Now I consider that , far from awarding him our sympathy and pecuniary aid ,
he deserves only our severest censure and reprobation . The course of proceedings , the conduct of all connected with the Alexandra Lodge at Hornsea , as revealed at the trial was not only not Masonic , but very questionable . It is _ satisfactory to find that the Masonic authorities took this view in their censure of the lodge generally . Evidently suspecting that there would be some difficulty in the election
of the proposed candidates , the lodge is hurriedly opened , without waiting the arrival of the Hull brethren , who h « d to come by train . The minute book is not * to hand , so the minutes of the previous meeting could not be read and confirmed . Then comes the un-Masonic voting . Only one member of the lodge , the S . W ., votes , with the exception of those three whom it was suspected intended to
blackball the candidates . Furthermore , Bro . Carr , the said S . W ., informs the W . M . that his bean was a white one—• the others being black . Thus the sacredness of the ballot was done away with—as it was taken in such a manner as obviously to disclose the voting . This is utterly against the rules of Masonry , and also of any club where gentlemen . neet , and admission to which is obtained by ballot .
Our greatest authority in Freemasonry lays down the law distinctly : " No brother can be made accountable for his vote , as otherwise his vote would cease to be independent . The very use and purposes of the ballot box imply secret and irresponsible voting , and an entire exemption of every brother from the consequences , be they what they may . " It is clear from this , that the circular drawn up by Bro . Tudor , a very scurrilous one , reflecting on the conduct of
Bro . Voigt , because he had exercised his undoubted prerogative , was not according to the spirit or laws of Freemasonry , or according to the amenities of life , as practised by gentlemen in any club in the land . A Mason has his Masonic redress , and his civil one , and if a brother makes a cowardly attack on him , by means of such a circular , and then seeks to hide his responsibility by calling it a " privileged communication , " the plaintiff was