Original Correspondence.

This hint " Consistency , " for a purpose best known to himself , has converted into an " argument that the entertaining lodges at Southampton should have had more honours given them , simply because they made the necessary arrangements , " and a dirge on " the loss of the prestige" of the Gloucester . My letter speaks for itself . 1 neither " argued " the one nor did I " mourn" the other

point as thus put . On the contrary , I distinctly alleged that the Gloucester had fully maintained its prestige , in the best and widest sense in which that term can be used . I held , am ! still insist , that to distribute but two collars between practically six loelges—forming close upon a fourth of the whole , lodges in the province—in the town where Grand Ledge being held this year it cannot be expected to

visit again for ten years , ami especially to exclude from recognition the senior lodge of the number , was not an equitable or wise arrangement . For this I expressly said " I cast blame on no one , " and I suppose it was my moderation which excited "Consistency " to make charges that it would scarcely be exaggerating to call odious in their character .

According to him , the Royal Gloucester—ron whose behalf there were special reasons , about which something further may yet be heard , for noticing its omission from honours on this occasion—has not only " monopolised the best purple offices during the last decade " of years , but it has likewise hael " two of the so-called permanent officials as members , which no doubt ( " Consistency" has the

temerity to say ) materially assisted them in obtaining the superior appointments . " I can sympathise with "Consistency" if , being by merit entitled to honour , that " deference to the weight of a brother ' s social position or money bags , " which he affects to abhor , has left him unnoticed , or , it may be , has presumed to offer him a collar unequal to the estimate which he has formed of his own importance .

But I venture to say that even if favouritism has been shown in the past , it is scarcely to be atoned for by quietly ignoring the claims of the present , as his letter seems to contend . It would be scarcely " consistent " with the ordinary rules of civilized life to offer to brethren holding high social and public positions in a town like Southampton collars

which might , without offence , be proferreil to a village cobbler ; and it docs so happen that eluring the last quarter of a century or more , the Gloucester Lodge has numbered as its masters and officers brethren who have done something towards " monopolising " municipal no less than Masonic honours , as the lists of Southampton Mayors , Sheriffs , Aldermen , and officials signally testify . These

could hardly , I submit , have been asked to become Pursuivants , Sword Bearers , Directors of Ceremonies , and what not , in an assemblage regaideel by its chiefs of such social import that it has lately been complaineel of them they usually attend it " attireel in walking costume of various hues ! " Not to press uneluly a point which " Consistency ' s " letter would justify my doing , I will test his complaints and

insinuations by some considerations bearing upon the Masonic worth and merit of the brethren whose honour he has impeached , premising , as a matter of fact , in reference to the Dep . Prov . G . M ., and the Prov . Grand Secretary , that they are not active members of the Gloucester Lodge ; and so any insinuation based on the supposition that they fall to the ground .

Taking , then , the " best purple offices , " which , by a curious piece of arithmetic , " Consistency" alleges the Gloucester to have monopolised during the last ten years , 1 find with regard to the two Senior Wardenships , first that the Present Dep . Prov . Grand Afaster received a collar in 1869 , just within the elecade , following nine years of service as Prov . Grand Secretary ; and I , for one , shall be glad

to hear of the favouritism which "Consistency" alleges to have " mateiially assisted" to such a , recognition of past services . The second Senior Grand Warden collar was given to Bro . H . Abraham , ( a " lewis , " whose father hail been W . M . of the Gloucester , ) in 18 7 6—following his holding for twenty or twenty one years a collar for a minor Prov . Grand office—on his retirement , to fill the mayoralty of

Southampton , if I recollect aright , from the office of Treasurer to the Gloucester , which he hail held for five and twenty years , leaving it in a good financial position , though he founil it in debt , and during the time applying the amount presented to him as a testimonial in recognition of his services in the purchase of life governorships of the charities . Will " Consistency" tell me which received the greater

honour in the bestowal of this collar , any brethren who might have " materially assisted" in the recognition of such services or the Prov . Grand Master and Prov . Grand Lodge ? With respect to the two junior wardenships distributed during the decade , in 1871 a collar was given to Bro . Booth , many years previously made either Prov . G . Pursuivant or Swoid-Bearer , than whom I doubt if there is a Mason in

the South West of England who has installed a larger number of W . M ' a ., or striven more earnestly to maintain and uphold the purity of our ritual and the ancient landmarks of the Order . The same collar the following year , bting the centenary of the Gloucester Lodge , was conferred on its W . M ., Bro . Pocock , who received from Masons high in authority the warmest possible recognition of the princely

manner in which he and the lodge entertained the Marquis of Kipon anel the officers of the Grand Lodge cf England on that occasion . There were special Masonic circumstances ( well known locally ) , apart from his efforts for the charities , which well entitled Bro . Thomas to the S . G . Deaconship two or three years ago . The Superintendentship of Works was conferral in 1868 on a Past Grand

Steward of England , an architect whos : handiwork has been thought of sufficient importance to engrave in last Saturday ' s Builder , anil who holds one of the few of the Earl of Zetland ' s jewels as an officer on the occasion of the inauguration festival of Freemasons' Hall . Last year ' s Directorship of the Ceremonies was conferred on the very brother ( M . Miles ) to whose efforts to secure a valuable Masonic charity , worth more than £ iooo , for the Southamp-

Original Correspondence.

ton brethren your own columns of Saturday last bore witness . The first Grand Chaplain ' s collar given to the Gloucester for at least 40 years past was that conferred on a joining brother , the Rev . ( now Canon ) Wilberforce , following the truly Masonic spirit which he showed towards the whole body of Masons , when the rector of the parish in which the Southampton Masonic hall is situate

refusing to loan his church for the celebration of the Gloucester centenary and the reception of Grand Lodge , he threw open his parish church and his own private grounds to them . " Consistency ' s" reference to the organists and stewardships is beneath the contempt of those who know how little the Gloucester brother to whom he refers depends for his reputation as " organist" upon any " honours" Grand Lodge

can confer in that direction , and are acquainted with the estimate placed upon stewardships throughout the province . In view of facts strangely at variance , all the circumstances considered , with the inferences " Consistency" has drawn from his imperfect knowledge , I unhesitatingly challenge him to justify his assertion of favouritism towards the Gloucester Lodge or hereafter to hold his peace . He may

not always have to"deal with brethren who can so well recognize , and act with becoming dignity , as those whose names he has attempted to drag through the mire , Shakespeare's aphorism " Be thou as chaste as ice , as pure as snow , thou shalt not escape calumny . " As to his complaint , and the ill-concealed suggestion he would have the worlel draw from the fact , that the Masons

of Southampton and Portsmouth do not " agitate to secure retirement ( from the principal offices ) after a fair tenure of office ( say five years ) , " I have yet to learn that we have any special responsibility in the matter . Why has not this apostle of purity before made himself heard in respect to it , for , of course , he will without elelay secure discussion of the subject . Perhaps he is not swarc that another of those

creatures of fortune and favouritism , a Gloucester brother , the late J . R . Stebbing , Dep . Prov . G . Master , some years ago made a strenuous effort ( if I recollect aright in the Grand Lodge of England ) to secure some such system of retirement . I can only say that when " Consistency ' brings forward a motion on the subject , whether in Grand orProvincial Grand Lodge , he will not find a warmer

suppoter than myself . I should also like to vote for a consideration of the question whether it is in the best interests of Masonry that some provinces should embrace five or six times the number of loelges , and perhaps even a larger proponion of brethren , than other provinces , thus making P . G . honours ridiculously cheap in some districts and well nigh unattainable in others . But so long as the rule of

" so-called permanent officials pre \ ails' generally , I decline to mix uj > such questions of very high import with what I feel to be an utterly unfounded charge of favouritism , believing as I do in Tillotson ' s remark that " There is no readier way for a man to bring his own worth into question than by endeavouring to detract from the merits of others . " Fraternally yours , A SOUTHAMPTON MASON .

STRANGE DECORATIONS . To the Editor of the" Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — At a recent Prov . Granel Lodge , which shall be nameless , I saw one queer thing . The Provincial Grand Master wore the Knights Templar star , and I saw it also on the breast of another of 'he Past Prov . Grand Officers

on the dais . Is this lawful in a Prov . Grand Loelge or in a Craft loelge ? Yours fraternally , A PAST PROV . G .. OFFICER [ Certainly not . It is perfectly illegal and forbidden . —En . ] — - " LOSS OF THE PRINCESS ALICE "

To the Editor of the ' Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — It is most gratifying to sec the vast sums that arc pouring in to relieve the distressed through this dreadful calamity . My object to ask you to let this letter appear in your valuable columns is to ask the brethren if they would assist in getting up a concert at the Surrey Masonic Hall .

The Hall coulet be obtained for a small sum , and I feel sure that we coulil obtain talent , anil I trust hand over a fair amount to the Lorel Mayor to swell the sum , already received . Brethren who will kindly assist me in promoting this charitable object will send their names early as possible to W . S . Daniel , 84 , Fleet-Street , City , E . C ., J . W . Lodge 1541 . Yours fraternally . W . S . DANIEL .

The Loss Of The " Princess Alice."

THE LOSS OF THE " PRINCESS ALICE . "

The Lord Mayor acknowledges the receipt of the following subscriptions , among others : £ s . el . The Queen ... ... ... . , ... 101 ; o o I I . H . I I . the Prince of Wales 50 o o H . R . H . Prince Leopold ... .. ... 25 o o

John Derby Allcroft ... ... ... ... 25 o 0 Col . Creaton ... ... ... ... ... 220 Lodge Chigwell , No . 453 5 5 ° „ Gresham , No . 879 ... ... ... 300 „ Beacontree , No . 1228 .., ... ... 200

„ St . Michael , No . 1273 ... ... 600 Lodge of Instruction Crusaders , No . 1677 ... 220 Mark Lodge Excelsior , No . 226 ... ... 9 80 Collected at Freemasons' Tavern 600 Florence Nightingale Lodge of Instruction ... 220

THE ABERCARNE EXPLOSION . Grand Lodge of tlu Provinceof Warwickshire 21 00 R . A . Masons at Hampton Court , on Saturday , 14 th inst . 1 11 6

The Quebec Question.

THE QUEBEC QUESTION .

BY BRO . ROBERT RAMSAY .

In a former number of the Keystone , ( June Sth ) , we argued at some length upon the unconstitutionality of the recent action of the Grand Lodge of Scotland , in granting warrants to Masons in Montreal , within the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Quebec , for the purpose of

organizing two new lodgrs in that city , viz ., King Solomon and Argyle . The act was so uncalled for , and the outrage so flagrant , that Most Worshipful Bro . M . M . Tait , Grand Master of Quebec , very properly issued his edict , declaring the proceedings of saiel loelges clandestine and illegal , and orelcring that no Masonic intercourse should take place between brethren acknowledging the supremacy of the

Grand Lodge of Quebec , and those in obedience to that of the Grand Lodge of Scotland . In this proclamation Grand Master Tait only expressed , what we feel confident is the unanimous opinion of the Masons in the Lower Province , and as far as we have been able to ascertain , his action is supported and upheld by the leading Masonic writers and jurisconsults on this continent .

Next month the regular annual communication of the Grand Lodge of Quebec will be held , and then the voice of the Craft in that province will be heard , and we are not afraid to say , that the result of their deliberations will be a calm and dignified protest on the one hand against the infringement of her territory , and on the other hand an earnest appeal to her sister Grand Lodges throughout the

world to support her in her efforts to maintain the doctrine of exclusive Grand Lodge sovereignty as universally acknowledged on this continent . We don't for a moment believe there will be one dissentient vcice on this question The Grand Lodge of Quebec , from her formation in 1869 , has been a staunch adherent to this dogma , having experienced the inconvenience and witnessed the unfortunate

results arising from a concurrent jurisdictional power as was , and is still actually the case so far as the Grand Lodge of Canada is concerned , since there is at present one lodge in Ontario , L'Orignal , working (?) under the authority of the Grand Lodge of Ireland . We repeat , the Quebec Masons , on constitutionally seceding from the Grand Lodge of Canada in October , 1869 , had felt the inadvisability of

allowing foreign lodges to practice within her jurisdiction , and at almost every Communication of Grand Lodge proclaimed her doctrine of exclusive Grand Lodge sovereignty , proving their determination to uphold the theory by declining to accept the exchange of Grand representatives with the Giand Lodge of Missouri , as that Grand Body , in offering recognition , did so on condition that the Grand

Lodge of Quebec should not interfere with the rights and privileges of those lodges still working in her jurisdiction under the authority of the Grand Loelges of England and Scotland . The Granel Lodge of Quebec , under the circumstances , very properly eleclincd to accept the recognition , as she did also that of the Grand Loelge of England , which stipulated that the lodges in Quebec , working under

her charters , should not be interfered with by the Grand Lodge of Quebec . These conditional recognitions were , we repeat , respectfully declined . Such being the case then , wc feel confident the Grand Lodge of Quebec will heartily and unanimously endorse the action of her able and erudite Grand Master . The question , however , arises , " Cannot something more

than a mere protest be accomplished ? " We think so , and our view is this : The present imbroglio between the Grand Lodges of Quebec and Scotland , is not one of a mere local character ; it is one that should interest the Masons of Pennsylvania , New York , Ontario , California , and every State , Province anil Territory on this continent , as much as the brethren of Quebec . Such being the case ,

we should advise that the Granel Lodge of Quebec should authorise its Grand Master to invite duly authorised delegates from every Granel Loelge in the United States and the Dominion of Canada to assemble , at an early date , in the city of Montreal , and there , in conference , calmly and deliberately discuss this question of Masonic invasion . The very existence of our cherishcel doctrine of Grand Lodge

sovereignty hangs tn the balance , and if once wc permit the Granel Lodge of Scotland to plant her banners on the soil over which the Grand Lodge of Quebec has , according to forty-eight Granel Lodges , sole anel exclusive sovereign jurisdiction , we tacitly admit the right of that Granel Lodge , or any other foreign Grand Loelge , to invade our Grand Lodge jurisdictions . If Scotland can invade Quebec with

impunity , California can issue warrants to Masons in New Brunswick , and Canada can send her dispensations to brethren in Pennsylvania anil Ohio , and the very bulwarks cf our Grand Lodge system would be pulled down , till they would present one chaotic mass of confusion , turmoil and discord . We would then respectfully suggest that the Grand

Lodge of Quebec , at its annual session next month , take the initiative in this movement . A conference , whose members were amongst the leading minds of the Craft from the Atlantic to the Pacific , woulel carry great weight and power to the Masonic worlel , that the Masons of this continent are an unit on this question , and will not permit their rights to be trampled on by any Grand Lodge ,

however venerable or however luflucntial she may be . Such a conference , too , could not fail to accomplish much good . Brethren would be brought together from all parts of the Uniteel States and the Dominion of Canaela , and interchange alone of the ordinary Masonic courtesies would do much to draw the bands of American and Canadian Masonry closer , whilst the hospitalities , of which the

Montreal brethren arc so profuse , woulel make the visit one of pleasure as well as profit , Of course , some Grand Lodges woulel not be represented , but we feel confident a large ma * jority would hasten to accept the invitation , or at leas * some of their Grand Officers woulel cnelcavour to be present , te > aid by their counsel and advice an object of such im « portancc as the one under disscussion . —keystone .