The Mark Degree.

fatuity they missed their opportunity , and contented themselves with the formation of an " English Grand Mark Lodge , " ivhich has been , and will be , barren and useless in the endeavour to establish unanimity with the great body of Masons hailing under the United Grand Lodge of England . To your correspondent signing himself "A" ( if one ofthe English Mark ) I would recommend a little more reflection , if not a little more modesty on the subjectfor the riht of an authorized bodlike the Chapter

; g y supreme of Scotland to grant warrants for the Mark in England ( where the supreme Masonic heads at present refuse to recognise it ) must be clear and indisputable . But if " A" he a recreant from a Scotch Lodge established in England , it will be perfectly unnecessary to hold argument with him , let him rather remember the stringent nature of his obligations and for evermore keep silence on the question .

Fo , sir whenever it shall please Grand Lodge to re-establish the Mark degree , you will hear no more of Scottish authority in this realm , for the Scotch charters are limited to that period . But until then , lie assured , no other authority will be deemed legitimate or possible by hundreds of Mark Masters in this country , to whom a second Grand Lodge for Masonic purposes is distasteful , and it is thought inexpedient , constituting an imperiuni in imper ' w to which all Freemasons should be strongly opposed . I am , dear Sir and Brother , yours fraternallv , P . ( MK . ) M ,

Masonic Impostors.

MASONIC IMPOSTORS .

TO TUB EDITOR OP THE FREEMASONS' MAGAZINE AND MASONIC MIRROR . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I beg leave to caution the brethren against two impostors professing to belong to St . Andrew ' s Lodge , No . 1 - > lj , Kilmarnock , Scotland , who , I have no doubt , will be able to impose upon the unwary , as they have done to some extent upon me , although I suspected them both at the time I relieved them . The first , named Robert ,, ! , called about two and had document

upon me years ago , a purporting to be a private Lodge certificate , apparentl y signed by the Master , Wardens , & c , ofthe above Lodge , and dated 4 th July , . 1855 ' , the particulars of which 1 took down , intending to write to the R . W . M . oi' such Lodge , but it at the time escaped my attention , and only came into my mind on Tuesday last , when a person culling himself Robert C -, and producing what purported to be private Lodcertificatedated 4 th Jul 1850 si b 0

a ge , }' , , gned y . Brown , as E . W . Master ; ' Matthew Neil , S . W ' . ; Wm . Hyslop , J . W . ; James Black , Sec , with a red wax seal attached , which I suspected at the time , ( and have no doubt of now ) , had been impressed from a mould taken from another impression . However , I relieved the man , after having shown him that I suspected himand wrote by the next post to the Master ofthe Lod he professed to

, ge belong to , and yesterday morning I . received a letter from the E . W . M . from which I extract the following : — " There has been no private Lodo-e certificate granted to any brother for many years , consecpiently the two you mention must have been forged or altered from some very old ones , ¦ 2 s a