Dwellings For Artizans.

one continued departure from every law which health would demand , or propriety suggest . " We have , then , always advocated , and always shall advocate , the building of better cottages and dwellings for the labouring population of the Empire . In some places the good work has

been done in a great measure , in many it is going on , in more , let us hope , this new act will set it in motion . Better late than never . Henri Quatre said he wished every Frenchman could enjoy his homely meal . Good old George III . declared he hoped that every Englishman would

have his Bible- we say to-day that the best wish we can frame for those who compose the great base of the pyramid of society is that they may have a comfortable and decent dwelling , where they can learn for themselves the elevating

lessons of self-respect , self-restraint , and self improvement , and where they can teach their children alike by word and example the ever needful maxims of prudence and propriety , of economy and industry , of piety to God , and of regard for their fellow creatures .

International Exhibition At Philadelphia In 1876.

INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION AT PHILADELPHIA IN 1876 .

A kind brother correspondent having sent us from America a copy of the rules and regulations for this important gathering , we shall call attention to it next week , and publish in extensc the regulations for exhibition .

Original Correspondence.

Original Correspondence .

[ We < lo not hold ourselves responsible for , or even as approving of thc opinions expressed by our correspondents , but we wish , in a- spirit of < air play to all , to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion , —ED . 1

A QUOTATION . To the Editor ofthe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — The ingenuousness of your correspondent signing himself " The Writer of the Article , " as displayed in and- by his letter headed " Hudibras " in your issue of the nth inst ., is most refreshing , and were I in possession of a

scrap bonk for the effusions of newspaper correspondents , I should certainly think this one deserving a little trouble and paste , as a literary curiosity . 1 I rejoice to hear that I have been the means of " amusing " your correspondent , although by the tenour of his letter , I should have thought that " annoying " would more appropriately have expressed his feelings . At thc

same time I must candidly admit that it was not my intention to do either . He continues by complaining "that hardly any one can write on the commonest subject without becoming personal . " If this be true , I agree with him that it is much to be regretted , yet if . he really thinks so , why do ( sic ) he act differently ? It surely cannot ; even according to his logic , bc good in him and bad in others to follow the same

course . After sarcastically referring to mc as " so learned a critic , " he states , "I happen to know my ' Hudibras , ' as well as he knows it , it may be even better . But comparisons are ordorous . " ( sic ) Self praise , I find by this , is now and then a great recommendation , and that" The Writer of the Article , " amongst his otheraccomplishments ,

possesses , " undisturbed by conscientious qualms , the art of admirably blowing his own trumpet . What does he know of my familiarity with the work in question ? I presume I am , even by name , to him a perfect stranger . His assertion , therefore , is simply absurd . If , however , he possesses the virtue which he assumes , why not do the author justice hy quoting him correctly instead of making him

talk nonsense . He should remember that the art of quotation requires more delicacy in the practice than those conceive who can see nothing more in the quotation than an extract . Whenever the mind of a writer is saturated with the full inspiration of a great author a quotation gives completeness to the whole ; it seals his feelings with undisputed authority . As for comparisons being "

oderous , " ( sic ) Ipresumeyour correspondent means " odious , or he would not have misapplied this quotation . Shakespeare makes Dogberry use the expression , but not in the manner of a Mrs . Ma'aprop . As for his using the verse ( thc quotation in dispute ) " as others have used it , better men than either of us ( another comparison ) , with no question or concern as to its correctness , " I can only say , that

if an author is worth quoting from at all , that some " question or concern " as to thc accuracy of the quotation is due to his reputation in return for the benefit derived at his hands . ' •The Writer of the Article" then tries to get out of his difficulty by saying , " I did not quote Hudibras at all ! " He admits " using a verse . " Whose verse was it then ? As for not quoting Hudibras , that is true . He misquoted it , and as for conveying his "

meaning most appositely , that is a matter of opinion . I am informed that "for a long time everyone who cares about cuch things has known that there was an error in the actual quotation itself . " Where is the error , and what authority refers to it ? I have examined two old editions of the poem , and a very good modern one , " published by J . Walker and the other proprietors , " in 1817 , besides reading several commentaries by eminent authors , yet cannot find any pronf or mention of what your correspondent as-

Original Correspondence.

serts . As for a man being " convinced against his will , being a state of mind not uncommon , I can only say that it is impossible . It is easy to understand a man " complying against his will , " but I never knew or heard of an instance of one being so convinced . What he means by "Burke ' s concluding sentence may be reckoned equally " sublime and beautiful , " I do not

know . My concluding sentence , "With just enough of learning to misquote , " was Byron ' s . Your correspondent ' s introduction of " The Sublime and Beautiful" prevents me attributing this to a misprint . Whether it looks like " sreased lighting , " or not , I cannot say . Of that article I know nothing , and therefore leave it without any

encroachment of opinion , as a subject perhaps deserving of some attention from " The Writer of the Article . " Hoping in the meantime that our little correspondence may not be unproductive of even a'little good , and that where no offence was intended none will be taken , Believe me , yours fraternally , Wst . BERNARD .

To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Having seen Bro . Bernard ' s letter at the office , I venture to subjoin a short reply to his voluminous epistle . As Lord Derby , when Lord Stanley , once said to the famous Lord Macaulay , then Mr . Macaulay , and both in the House of Commons , "the honourable gentleman is

a great critic , " so I think I may venture also to say to Bro . Bernard to-day . Reading carefully now over his two letters , one is really in doubt which most to admire , the " foineness of his writing " or the lucidity of his style . Yet I fear that Bro . Bernard is one of those unfortunate persons you often meet with in the world , who always will be " convinced against" their " will , " " pace , " so

very great an authority . I have already stated that I did not quote Hudibras in any way at all . Bro . Bernard is so polite and Masonic as to give me the lie direct , and to repeat his statement that I quoted , or , rather , misquoted , Hudibras . I have previously remarked that I was not likely to misquote Hudibras , knowing it better than Bro .

Bernard , and I have attempted also to make Bro . Bernard understand , though in vain , that I used the words as an old Jametian " saw , " without any reference to Butler ' s version of it . For the truth is , as another writer puts it clearly , the saying is older than Hudibras , and in its axiomatic form embodies , despite Bro . Bernard again , a very wonted condition of the human mind .

For it often happens that in an argument a man gives way , though not convinced by argument -, but yielding thc point for some reason or other , or withdrawing from the controversy , still retains his own opinion . This is the state of mind well pointed out by the almost proverbial saying , and which , notwithstanding Bro . Bernard ' s condemnation and anathema , 1 venture to believe , as I happen

to know , is a very correct one . Would' it not be well before Bro . Bernard attempts to set everybody else right that he should attend to his own grammar and spelling . I have never yet seen " odorous " spelt with an " e , " nor do I ever remember such a sentence as " why do he act differently . " It is really sublime . But it is useless to go through Bro . Bernard ' s letter , as

it is only another proof not only how much can be said about nothing , but how excessively personal a pseudocritic can be . In fact , there is something excessively offensive and un-Masonic in the tone that Bro . Bernard has thought well to assume , though , as far as I can see , with no pretension to play such a role . I have , as it happens , more important work to attend to than to read , except

often very cursorily , the tedious platitude or the meaningless objection , and I confess to a " lapsus pennce " in substituting Burke for Byron . The truth is Ihe same remark is applicable , and in either case , such a quotation in Bro . Bernard ' s hands is evidently what thc witty American termed " greased lightning . " If Bro . Bernard wishes to improve his style , and learn to be civil and convincing , polite and critical at the same time , let us recommend to his perusal

George Canning ' s famous critique on the " Reformation of the Knave of Hearts , " in the " Microcosm , " page 8 ; , for I feel sure , that the good it must do him will be quite marvellous . Let me fraternally urge him to be a little more courteous when he again assumes the " stylus" of the critic , and not to forget that nothing is so absurd as that childish and carping hyper-criticism , which is generally the refuge of the incompetent , and the intolerant . I am , THE WRITER or THE ARTICLE .

THE MARK DEGREE . To the Editor of tht Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Will you kindly inform me whether the " Mark Degree" is a recognised Masonic Order ( i . e . ) by the Grand Lodge of English Freemasons , and whether they support the various Masonic institutions ?

Their origin , and why Mark jewels are not to be worn in Craft lodges . Whether it is necessary to join the Mark Degree before going to the Royal Arch . Having heard a diversity of opinion upon the matter by several M M . 's is the reason of my troubling you with this enquiry upon the subject . Yours fraternally , AN ENQUIRING M . M .

[ In answer to our correspondent we beg to state that the Mark Degree is not recognised by our Grand Lodge , but that it supports the Masonic institutions , we believe , as a corporate body , we are certain individually . There is some obscurity as to the real origin of the Mark Degree ,

but it is said to have taken its rise in this country in the latter part of the last century , and that the original lodges were dedicated to St . Mark . In our humble opinion it is an adapted Order , and has nothing to do with the operative custom of Masons , Marks . The reason why Mark jewels

Original Correspondence.

cannot be worn in a Craft lodge is , that they do not appertain to any of the degrees recognized by the Grand Lod ge of England . It is not necessary at all to join the Mark Degree before becoming a R . A . —Ed . ]

MASONIC JEWELS . To thc Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Having read the correspondence in your valuable paper hereon , I take it that I am entitled and fully justified in wearing the "five-pointed star" as a jewel of the Third Degree , recognised by the Grand Lodge of England

in my Craft Lodge , and that the W . M . and officers could not object to it . Yours fraternally , AN ENQUIRING M . M . [ With regard to the five-pointed star , our opinion is that under the wording of the Book of Constitutions it is clearly legal . Indeed , if iti s not , we do not see clearly how any other jewels are so , except those actually specified in the Book of Constitutions —ED . ]

MASONIC TOKENS . To the Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I have taken in business during the past week a halfpenny token , in every respect similar to that spoken oi by your correspondent , Bro . Samuel Dutton , excepting that the inscription on the rim is " Masonic Halfpenny Token ,

1794 . " I have also been shown another by a brother of the Lion and Lamb Lodge , so that I cannot think they are as scarce as many of your correspondents suppose . I am , dear Sir and Brother , yours fraternally , WILLIAM STEPHENS , P . M . 116 s and 1480 .

FREEMASONRY IN CANADA . To Ihe Editor of the . Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I desire , through you , to tender my thanks to an unknown correspondent , who has kindly forwarded me a copy of the address of the V , H . and E . Sir Knt . Col . Mac

Leod Moore , Grand Prior of Canada , delivered to the Knights assembled in Grand Priory at St . Catherine ' s , Ontario , on the nth of August last . Yours fraternally , J . EDWARD CURTEIS , P . Prov . G . Reg . and Provincial Chancellor , Devon , Member of the Council of Great Priory , England .

MASONIC JURISPRUDENCE . To the Editor ofthe Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — Will you kindly favour me with a reply to the following queries through the above valuable paper -. — 1 . Is there such a distinction as honorary member in

Masonry , without the word affiliated , and if so , what is the difference ? 2 . If an individual is entered in the minutes of a lodge as an honorary affiliated member , and that minute passed by the lodge in regular form , and said honorary member pays test fees from time to time , can he vote as an ordinary

member , and is he eligible for office ? 3 . The Master of a lodge being absent , but his Deputy present , who is not an installed Master , but an installed Master is present as a visiting brother , has the Deputy the right to open the lodge in preference to that installed Master , if so , what are the privileges of an installed Master ?

Your kind reply will oblige , dear Sir and Brother , yours truly and fraternally , R . M . [ 1 . Any brother can , by vote of lodge , be admitted an honorary member of the lodge solely . As such he pays no contributions . 2 . A brother admitted as an honorary member ( unless

there be some special provision 111 the bye-laws to the contrary ) cannot become a joining or affiliated member without notice , proposition , and ballot . As an honorary member , unless the bye-laws specially say so , and we believe that such a bye-law would be very questionable , he cannot vote , nor is he eligible for office , on the ground that he bears no

part of the expenses of thc lodge , and is fiot returned as a contributing member to Grand Lodge . 3 . The third question is difficult to answer , as we have no Depute Master in England . In our humble opinion , if in a lodge the Master is absent , and no Past Master of the

lodge is present , the Senior Warden rules thc lodge for thc purpose of all needful business . But he ought not to perform any of the ceremonies of thc Craft , not being an installed Master , and it would be better for him to ask nn installed Master who happens to be present , standing by his side , to go through the needful ceremonial . —ED . ]

A LIST OF PROVINCIAL GRAND MASTERS . To Ihe Editor of the Freemason . Dear Sir and Brother , — I enclose a . list of Provincial Grand Masters , deputed by and under the protection of the Grand Master of England . Deputations for Provincial Grand Masters wert

granted : — In 1726 by Lord Paisley , Grand Master , to Sir Edward Mansell , Bart ., for South Wales ; Hugh Warburton , l ^ 'l-i for North Wales . In 1728 by Lord Kingston , Grand Master , to George Pomfret , Esq ., for Bengal in the East Indies . In 1729 by the Duke of Norfolk , Grand Master , to

Captain Ralph Fanvinter , for the East Indies ; Monsieur Thuannus , for the Circle of Lower Saxony ; Mr . . Daniel Cox , for New Jersey in America . In 1 ^ 31 by Lord Lovell , now Earl of Leicester , Grand Master , " to Captain John Phillips , for all the Russias ; Captain James Commcrford , for the province of Andalusia in Spain ; to Sir Edward Mathews , for Shropshire . In 1734 , by thc Ear ! of Crauford , Grand Master , to Ed-