-
Articles/Ads
Article CORRESPONDENCE. Page 1 of 8 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Correspondence.
COREESBO ^ bENGE .
[ The Editor does not hold himself responsible for any opinions entertainedbyCorrespondents . ] '
v OUR GOSKESPONDENTS AND THE 44 OBSER ¥ ER PAKTY . " 10 THE EDITOR OF THE ¦ '¦ EREBMASON . S * MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIRROR . Sir and Brother . —Your correspondent , S . G . W ., in your number of the 29 th September last , having told you what occurred to him on reading ¦ A ' " 4 y Courrtry Masonsletter , will excuse my replying tb ^ it occurs to me
that , were he not blinded by a feeling of annoyance at the recent castigation received by those connected with the Masonic Observer \ he would hot have given rhe credit for that which I did not deserve , namely , unacquaintance with that unenviable publication , excepting in a single instance . I never stated such to be the fact , much as every one would doubtless wish to repudiate the acquaintance , unless actually connected with the
publication I . am , what I professed to be , a country Mason , taking considerable interest in the working of our Order , and the sayings and doings of its several members , and in my letter to you , sir , I express , asThavea right to do , my opinions upon such sayings and doings , gratified , however , in knowing that lam , at the same time , expressing the opinions of a great many of my brother Masons .
If I rightly understand the object of S . G . W . ' s letter , it is to infer that , whilst I deprecate the slander of the fair fame of a brother Mason , I am myself guilty of this crime , as against Lord Carnarvon . If such he the fact , I deeply regret it ; to Lord Carnarvon I would willingly apologize , ifmisled by " a currently received opinion "—I wronged him in connecting his name with a print which descends to so vile a course of proceeding as has
the Masonic Observer ; at the same time , I repeat that his lordship , by not repudiating the connection , gives us fair ground to suppose it exists . Lord Carnarvon ^ name was prominently brought forward in the article complained of , and has been so indeed in every number of the Masonic Observer , and his lordship ' s non-appointment to office is made the groundwork and excuse for the slander . lean see nothing in my letter of the 2 nd September which a sense of truth would not prompt me to repeat , though I never attempted any defence of the M . W . G . M :, who certainly needs none .
S . G . W . is pleased to pity those in my locality who are unacquainted with the Masonic Observer , I thank him for his pity , but recommend him to let it begin at home , for I cannot but think that , whoever would attempt to vindicate the proceedings of that publication is much more to be pitied than those w ] ip are ignorant of its existence . 2 y 3
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Correspondence.
COREESBO ^ bENGE .
[ The Editor does not hold himself responsible for any opinions entertainedbyCorrespondents . ] '
v OUR GOSKESPONDENTS AND THE 44 OBSER ¥ ER PAKTY . " 10 THE EDITOR OF THE ¦ '¦ EREBMASON . S * MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIRROR . Sir and Brother . —Your correspondent , S . G . W ., in your number of the 29 th September last , having told you what occurred to him on reading ¦ A ' " 4 y Courrtry Masonsletter , will excuse my replying tb ^ it occurs to me
that , were he not blinded by a feeling of annoyance at the recent castigation received by those connected with the Masonic Observer \ he would hot have given rhe credit for that which I did not deserve , namely , unacquaintance with that unenviable publication , excepting in a single instance . I never stated such to be the fact , much as every one would doubtless wish to repudiate the acquaintance , unless actually connected with the
publication I . am , what I professed to be , a country Mason , taking considerable interest in the working of our Order , and the sayings and doings of its several members , and in my letter to you , sir , I express , asThavea right to do , my opinions upon such sayings and doings , gratified , however , in knowing that lam , at the same time , expressing the opinions of a great many of my brother Masons .
If I rightly understand the object of S . G . W . ' s letter , it is to infer that , whilst I deprecate the slander of the fair fame of a brother Mason , I am myself guilty of this crime , as against Lord Carnarvon . If such he the fact , I deeply regret it ; to Lord Carnarvon I would willingly apologize , ifmisled by " a currently received opinion "—I wronged him in connecting his name with a print which descends to so vile a course of proceeding as has
the Masonic Observer ; at the same time , I repeat that his lordship , by not repudiating the connection , gives us fair ground to suppose it exists . Lord Carnarvon ^ name was prominently brought forward in the article complained of , and has been so indeed in every number of the Masonic Observer , and his lordship ' s non-appointment to office is made the groundwork and excuse for the slander . lean see nothing in my letter of the 2 nd September which a sense of truth would not prompt me to repeat , though I never attempted any defence of the M . W . G . M :, who certainly needs none .
S . G . W . is pleased to pity those in my locality who are unacquainted with the Masonic Observer , I thank him for his pity , but recommend him to let it begin at home , for I cannot but think that , whoever would attempt to vindicate the proceedings of that publication is much more to be pitied than those w ] ip are ignorant of its existence . 2 y 3