The Provincial Grand Lodge Of Norfolk.

THE PROVINCIAL GRAND LODGE OF NORFOLK .

LONDON , SATURDAY , AUGUST 24 , 1861 .

"We have received so many coinimmicatioiis relative to the recent Provincial Grand Lodge of Norfolk , in connection with the attack made on the proceedings by the Norwich Mercury because a reporter belonging to that paper , not being a Mason , was excluded admission , that

we can no longer refrain from adverting to it . We shall pass by the fact that one or two of the Norwich brethren disgraced themselves by a too liberal indulgence at the table , which led , perhaps , to an abrupt termination of the proceedings , though that fact is not wholly

admitted , and the bad taste of the editor of any paper in alluding to such a circumstance ; and address ourselves to the impropriety of , at any time , admitting to Masonic banquets others than Masons , excepting it be at those social gatherings to which the brethren introduce the ladies of their families , ancl when , in fact , they cease to

be Masonic meetings . It is almost impossible that at a meeting of Ereemasons , that some word or sign should not escape , which it is neither desirable or proper should be observed by a non-Mason ; and so particular are we on this subject—we speak now for the benefit of our non-Masonic contemporary—that even the most simple toasts

are drunk with " tyled" doors , or , were it not so , we should be betraying our Masonic obligations were we to follow them up with Masonic honours—honours whieh must be dispensed with where strangers are present .

The editor of the Mercury contends that the respected Prov . G . Master , Bro . Cabbell , on being applied to , had expressed an opinion that he could see no objection to a reporter being present ; but we feel assured , knowing how strict a disciplinarian is Bro . Cabbell , and how

steadily he resists anything like innovation on our landmarks and customs , that when he expressed such an opinion , he could not have understood that the person asking admission was not a Mason ; and we may here inform the editor of the Mercury that so strictly is this

rule adhered to in London , that even at the festivals of our charities , where publicit y is always desirable , and where ladies attend in the gallery , no tickets are issued to the press , unless it be for reporters who are , at the same time , Masons .

The editor of the Mercury , however , refers to the fact that his reporter was admitted to the banquet which followed the Prov . Grand Lodge at North "Walsham in 1859 , when the same gentleman now refused was present ; but that very fact should have made him acquainted how distasteful his presence , or that of other

strangers , was to the Craft , and prevented his again attempting to thrust themselves upon the meetings of the brethren . On that occasion our reporter writes : — " The banquet was not restricted to Masons , though only a few strangers were present , aud a good deal of dissatisfaction was expressed at the restraint imposed upon the

brethren , and the necessity it entailed of omitting the impressive ceremonies of a Masonic banquet . ITroui the general feeling which was evinced regarding what , in a Masonic sense , can scarcely be considered otherwise than an impropriety , there can bo little doubt that on the next occasion the banquet will be in every respect thoroughly Masonic . "

Such was the expression of feeling at the time , and after such a manifestation . Bro . Leedes Eox , the Prov . G . Sec . could not with propriety have adopted any other course than that which he has done , viz ., refuse the admission of non-Masons to the Prov . G . Lodge banquets . But we need not rest on what was stated by our reporter ,

for there we may naturally be supposed to be somewhat prejudiced , but can refer to higher authority . In returning thanks for his health , Bro . Dr . Harcourt , the D . Prov . G . M . for Surrey ( who has since been honoured by the G . M . with office in the Grand Lodge of England ) , said : —

" There was one point , however , which he could not but feel was open to improvement , and thafc was the admission of non-Masons to the banquet . He thought the banquet ought to be part of the lodge . The presence of non-Masons certainly did curb the tongue , and prevented many allusions to Freemasonry that would be agreeable to the majority of the brethren . He hoped , and indeed he had little doubt , that at the next Provincial Grand Lodge their banquet would be as closely tyled as their lodge . "

And further Bro . the Bev . E . W . Ereeman , D . Prov . G . M . for Suffolk "Expressed his concurrence wifch Bro . Dr . Harcoitrfc as to the propriety of restricting the banquet to brethren . " Again Bro . the Bev . Samuel Titlow , Prov . G . Chap . said ,

" He felt that in order that this fraternal feeling might be indulged without restraint , it would be decidedly advantageous on these occasions for the brethren to unite more particularly as Masons , because they knew that in the presence of strangers they were obliged to exercise a caution which , on such an occasion , was not agreeable to the brethren . "

After such an expression of opinion we cannot admire the taste ofthe editor of a newspaper who would attempt again'to force the representative of his journal on the meetings of the brethren — whilst we regret that there should be found a member of our profession so little alive to his own independence and position , as to

suffer himself to be put forward and endeavour to obtain admission to an assembly in which he had been so plainly told that his absence would be more welcome than his

company . Such an editor or such a reporter we do not believe could be found in any office , excepting that ofthe Norwich Merew-y . A Masonic banquet is as much a private assemblage ( so far as non-Masons are concerned ) as a gathering at

the house of a nobleman or gentleman , and the attempt to report the proceedings of it-against the wishes of the brethren , nothing but a piece of rank impertinence which should exclude the perpetrators from society—moreover the use that was made of a piece of scandal as to the indiscretion of one or two brethren , is of itself sufficient to show that the representatives of the paper in question are