The Freemason

I take it that nothing can more strongly prove the soundness of the opinion there given than the protracted and heated controversy which has now been going on for many weeks in your paper and those of your contemporary . Some remarks are , I think , called for , and I venlure to make them in the hope of bringing matters back to the true issue , and of dispelling perhaps some of that cloud of wordy dust which is attempted to be thrown in our eyes .

Those who have signed the circular are accused of seeking to dictate to Grand Lodge . Nothing can be more absurd or unfounded . I venture to say that they are a thoroughly representative body of Grand Lodge , whether representing London or the Provinces ; they have not , and they cannot have , any object of their own to gain ; they seek not to dictate to Grand Lodge , but to assert its dignity and its advantage , and to prevent its being saddled with a new

Grand Treasurer every year at the dictation of some five or six brethren , who 1 am informed are the prime movers in the proposed change , and who from their position have unusual means of obtaining votes , and who , if rumour tells the truth , are putting up [ a most honourable oflice to the highest bidder . It is well at times to speak the plain truth . VVe have most of us heard thc names of one or two other brothers to whom the office has been promised in future

years by those who are " financing" the present scheme . Sir , this is not a question of individuals , but of principle . Thc circular explains in clear and becoming language why we object to a new Grand 'Treasurer every year . Bro . H . Marshall may be , and doubtless is , an excellent man ; ouronly reason for pressing the re-election of Bro . Allcroft is simply because he is a good and fit man for the office , and has not yet filled it for one year .

I am sorry to have read what I may call the " Dr . " and "Cr . " account of the actual sums given by each of these brethren to our Charities . To say the least of itsuchacomparison is especially odious , and onc that must be very distasteful to both the brethren named . The signatories are charged with having issued their circular after a goad many dinners ; though quite willing to take my share of equal responsibility , such as it is , with others who signed the circular , I must

draw the line at dinners—if there were any such dinners , I was very unkindly left out , for I never heard of them . Much has been said about a pledge having been given to hold the office for one year only . I am assured that no such -pledge was ever given , and I hold it to be exceedingly wrong to endeavour to exact such a pledge ; but I might ask , Who demanded such a pledge ? Who was entitled to demand it ? Who were the dictators there ? I

repeat wc do not seek to dictate to the Craft , but we arc of those , and their name is many , who would oppose the dictation of a very small " cave of London brethren who seek to play a particular game for a particular purpose , and that purpose , to our thinking , not to the advantage of the great body of the Craft . Before concluding this too long letter , let mc do an act of justice to Bro . Frank Richardson . I sec that he and

Golden-square are charged as having originated the circular . 1 am sorry to hear that 1 am not a " persona grata " at Golden-square , and if it had come from there alone , I fancy that I should not have been asked to sign it . The simple facts arc , that at thc first meeting Bro . F . Richardson was asked to act as Secretary ; hc kindly consented ,

has done his work admirably well , and I think wc arc all much indebted to him . In thc words of thc circular , "I earnestly beg all those who hav thc interests of thc Craft solely at heart to help us " b y their votes at next Grand Lodge . I dislike anonymous letters , and prefer to sign myself , yours truly and fraternally , JOHN HAVERS . February iSth . —

To the Editor of thc "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — I am very pleased to note that you speak so emphatically as to thc manner in which a luasonic controversy should be conducted . I quite agree with you that " all controversialists alike on both sides equally " should " give as much of'honey and as little of gall'as they possibly can . " I also agree with you that some Freemasons , when thev rush

into print , become " the most intolerant and inconsiderate of beings , " and I am confident every right thinking brother must cordially sympathise with you in the trials to which you arc so frequentl y condemned " by those who seem to be of opinion that all is fair in controversy , and who even insinuate , when they do not openly assert , much that they must have known , when they penned it , would deeply grate on a brother's sensibilities and sympathies . " I do

hope _ and trust that after this solemn yet seasonable warning , that pestilent correspondent of yours " Obsta Principiis " will behave himself in a somewhat more seemly fashion . The comparative mildness of his letter of last week leads mc to believe hc must by this time have pretty well exhausted his vocabulary of exceedingly naughty and un-Masonic words and terms such as " caucus , " " cabal , " "impudent dictation , " and thc like , the onc conspicuous

exception to his generally improved tone being the " boredom of twaddle" which , vvith exemplary judgment , he is pleased to appl y to the utterances of those who appear to disagree with him , 1 lowever , now that you have spoken your mind so freely and emphatically , he vvill doubtless sec good cause for endeavouring to shape his language in accordance with your suggestions . 1 will only further trespass upon your space in order to

ascertain , if possible , when we may hope to be favoured with something like arguments in support of the statements contained in the vexatious circular issued b y certain brethren as yet unknown to fame , unless , indeed , Bro . While ' s surmise as to * ' Obsta Principiis " being one of thc number is correct . I would remind those brethren that the day for the election is fast approaching , and some of thc questions 1 propounded in my first letter are still

unanswered . Thus , I invited the author of the circular to state if he was anxious it should be understood " that differences of opinion among Masons as to the eligibility of a candidate for office , or on any other subject , " were "forbidden . " I also inquired of him what were "the ' old ' elements of discord already existing * among the members of Grand Lodge ? " seeing that , in his opinion , a yearly election was " likely to introduce ' new ' dements of the same

unsatisfactory character . " These and other questions that have been asked deserve some notice . Even the authoror authors—of the circular must kqovy that if they cannot meet these inquiries by something else than bare assertions the whole of their case , in spite of the strong array of very "distinguished" brethren—the term is borrowed from "Obsta Principiis "—must topple to the ground . —Fraternally yours , ' TENAX PROPOSITI .

The Freemason

To thc Editor of thc "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , When I read the opening apology of " Opponent to All Principle , " otherwise "Obsta Principiis , " I was inclined to rejoice , for I vvas in hopes that he would then appear " clothed , and in his right mind . " But , alas ! I vvas premature in my conclusions . The poor fellow is so

persuaded that he ranks | as a Masonic Pope , and is therefore infallible , that he can scarcely conceal his terrible rage . He adds , in his last epistle , to the vocabulary of his vulgar abuse , and , vvith a charming lack of logic , while upholding the circular promoters , who form the only " organised band "to work in the matter , hc denounces all who have faith in the common sense of Grand Lodge , and holds

those who differ from him as acting as a " caucus , " as a " clique , " and now , as " a few brethren banded together to dictate to Grand Lodge . " He made assertions in his last letter which I showed to be positively untrue , and yet he has no apology to offer for his unwarrantable statements , which had not the least foundation in fact . 1 must therefore say to this person , whom I cannot recognise ,

either by his name or language , as a brother , " Are you honest ? Are you fair ? " And I can answer both questions in the negative , for one who makes assertions in print which are proved to be wrong , and has no word of regretl for having written them , shows a lack of honesty , and his lack of fairness is evidenced by his illconcealed and most un-Masonic rage at having thc truth

placed before the brethren who vvill be called upon to decide , not a question of persons , but a matter of principle . The only " clique" in this matter , the only " caucus , " the only "dictation , " will be found to be in connection with the promoters of the circular , who have a nervous dread of their brethren , even though those brethren are all " rulers in the Craft . "

Again , I take the liberty of warning those who have been led to sign this unconstitutional circular , which calls upon the constituent body of Grand Lodge to abdicate its rights , to sec how far they are being led on the wrong road by so indiscreet a person as this " Obsta Principiis " evidently is . He shows himself to be the personification of absolutism and sarccdodalism . He was never a Mason in his heart ,

cither before or after initiation , and is doubtless some " periwigpatcd fellow " who would tear the Constitution to pieces . He calls all who would pronounce against the exercise of thc franchise " distinguished brethren "—these being the brethren who have got up an organised oppositionwhile those brethren who simply , in the interests of good order , when town and country were met together , had a

3 met chat as to how they should exercise thc franchise to o justice to merit , and honour to active , benevolent , and worthy Craftsmen , are met , not by open charges , but by unworthy insinuations , b y allegations without a shadow of truth , by inuendoes , by , in fact , as vvas well said by your correspondent "Tcnax Propositi , " ** envy , hatred , malice and all uncharitablencss . "

'Those who suggested thc name of Brq . Brooks Marshall to the notice of the Craft arc amply justified by thc result , even of this correspondence , inasmuch as no word has been found cast upon his public or private character , and hc has gained—as a distinguished citizen of London , as a gentleman , as moreover ( thc phrase is in thc circular as thc reason why the brethren should re-elect thc present

Grand Treasurer ) " a man of good mcans _ and position , " with a paramount love for thc principles of thc Craft , exemplified by activity in all thc work of thc Craft throughout his Masonic life—thc goodwill of all vyho know him , and thc respect and esteem of those who , like myself , have only watched him from afar . The opposition , so far , is not directed against Bro . Brooks Marshall : but

it is a jealous dictation against the brethren generally , through thc representatives of lodges , in Grand Lodge bestowing honour where honour is due , by electing to this onc collar annually . This unjustifiable jealousy fears " what is to come" in respect to future holders of the cross keys ; and I would beg to impress this point vvith emphasis upon all who have the courage to " be just and fear not . " 'There

is , I venture to declare , as much desire to maintain " thc dignity " of Grand Lodge among the blues as among thc purples , and hc is no true man or Mason who strives , by word or act , to set class against class . This thc " Opposed to Principle" has done , and even thc promoters of the

circular will do well to repudiate onc who has proved that a " little knowledge is a dangerous thing , " for a signature such as this illogical inventor of allegations has adopted to be that of an anonymous opponent of right and justice , would discredit any cause . I have the honour to be . sir , yours fraternally and faithfully , U 5 , Loughborough-rd ., S . W . J OIIN WHILE .

To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother ( Since thc publication of thc circular in your issue of the loth ult . 1 have received from several brethren , list of whom I enclose , requests to add their names . —I remain , faithfully and fraternally yours , FRANK RICHARDSON . 28 , Golden-square , London , W ., February inth .

FURTHER LIST OF NAMES . J . S . Archer , P . M . 1404 and 14 , P . P . G . S . W . Middx . Geo . Hy . Ballard , S . VV . 1414 . Ino . Bodenham , P . M . 726 , 751 , 1575 , and 1 S 9 G , P . P . G . S . W . N . Wales and Shrops , P . P . G . T . Staffs . James Churchill , I . P . M . and Sec . 1149 , P . P . G . S . D . Surrey Wm . Henrv Cronk , P . M . 1414 .

E . Evans Cronk , P . M . 1414 . George F . Carnell , P . M . and Treas . 1414 . John F . Carnell , 1414 . Thos . Sam . Curteis , VV . M . 1414 . I . Dundas Down , P . M . 416 , 1149 , P . P . G . S . W . Surrey . ' Edward C . Davis , P . AI . 23 , P . G . S . Kent . C . Holman , P . M . 41 G , P . P . G . LW . Surrey .

John Lees , P . M . 41 G , P . P . G . J . W . Surrey . T . Franklin Lloyd , P . M . 41 C , P . G . S . W . Surrey . E . Carter Morrison , P . M . 416 , P . P . G . R . Surrey . Ernest W . Morrison , P . M . 416 , P . P . G . R . Surrey . Geo . K . Paxan , P . M . 41 G and 1140 , P . P . G . J . W . Surrey , Edmund A . Pontifex , P . M . 2 and 143 , P . G . S . Chas . Jas . Smith , P . M . 416 .

Charles VV . Smith , P . M . OSo , 1414 , and 2000 . W . Harry Stangcr , P . M . if- ? - Alfred Strong , 53 , P . M . 111 S , J . W . 2022 . Thomas Wood , P . M . 1149 , S . W . 416 , P . P . G . J . W . Surrey . J . Lucas Worship , P . M . 1414 , P . P . G . S . W . Kent . " F . C . Weymss , P . M . 1615 . A . Young , P . M . 1414 .

The Freemason

THE ROYAL MASONIC BENEVOLENT INSTITUTION . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , 1 believe only one article has recently appeared in your columns in which the expenses of management of this Institution are referred to , and I shall be obliged , as the writer of it , if you vvill accord mc a little in which to

space offer a few words of explanation . This explanation 1 conceive to be necessary , as it is now a matter of publicity that the said expenses are deemed extravagant by a member of the Committee of management , and the general body of your readers will very naturally attach importance to a statement of opinion coming from such a source . In my bumble judgment , the brother who raised this question at the Committee meeting on the 13 th inst . would have shown

a greater sense of the responsibility attaching to his position if hc had withheld his remarks , more especially as he docs not appear from your report to have exhibited a very profound knowledge of the subject he was anxious to discuss . Thc expenses of management were set down in thc article referred to—see Freemason , p . 40 , 2 < 3 th January last—as , ( . 3060 ; and but for a clerical error , due , no doubt , to the badness of my hand writing , the amount would have been

stated as £ 3160 . The process by which I arrived at these figures vvas very simple . I took the published report of the Institution for 1 SS 3 and added together the disbursements on the three funds , Male , Female , and Sustentation of Building . From the total obtained I subtracted the sums paid in annuities and the cash at call , and the sum remaining gave _ me the expenses . Thus : Disbursements—Male Fund , £ 9141 lis . id . ; Female Fund £ 8015 ns . id . ;

, Sustentation of Building Fund , £ 29 is . ; total , £ i 7 , iS (> 3 s . 2 d . ; less , Annuities Male and Female Funds , £ 11 , 527 ; and Cash at Call on ditto , £ 2500 ; or together , £ 14 , 027 ; balance for working ; expenses £ 3159 3 s . 2 d ., or , as stated in round figures , £ 3160 . A reference to the report will suffice to show the correctness of these figures , while , as to the process employed , I must leave it to Bro . Moore to state if a better or a simpler could have been found .

Having established the accuracy of thc amount which has been made the subject of censure , let me endeavour to show how causeless is the charge of extravagance , thc round £ 30 expended in respect of Sustentation of Building being omitted as having no influence one way or the other . Adding together , where necessary , the amounts entered under the Male and Female Funds respectively , 1 find thc expenses composed of thc followincr itemsnamc-lv

, "Salaries , Office , " "Collector , Commission , " and "Messenger , " together £ 1319 Ss . Cd . ; "Stationery , Printing , " & c ., £ 339 ios . $ d . ; "Advertisements , " £ " 32 5 s . 3 d . ; "Postages , & c , including Expenses of Election , ' " £ 3 61 14 s . Sd . ; " Petty Expenses , " £ 30 18 . 71 ! . ; " Hire ofTlall on day of Election , " £ 5 5 s . ; " Rent , & c , of Ollice , " £ 90 ; "Law Charges , " ^ 3 1 S 3 . ; "Assistance in Office , " £ 14 14 s . I hese together amount to £ 2190 17 s . 3 d ., and nearl in total vvith 6

so y correspond thc £ 219 * 7 s . stated by Bro . 'Terry as representing , from his point of view , the total of the " working expenses , " that 1 almost feci justified in regarding them as thc identical items hc took out for the purpose of his calculation . The following items belong to the Asylum , namely : "Medicine for Residents at Institution , " £ 25 ; "Warden , " £ 20 ; " Matron , " £ 02 ; "Pension to late Gardener and Gardcnct's Salary , " £ 83 4 s . ; "Rates and Taxes . " £ a ± AI . 8 , 1 ., N ,. n .- * ir < :

Painting , & c , and goods -supplied , " £ 311 7 s . Sd . ; " l-Wirtainment ' of Stevvards and Annuitants , " £ 100 12 s . yd . ; "Rent of Field , " £ 33 17 s . sd . ; " Architect ' s Commission , " £ 13 17 s . ; together £ 744 3 s . 6 d . There arc likewise four other items foe " Provincial , & c , Expenses , " " Premium on Collector ' s Guarantee Policy , " "Gratuities , " and "Bankers' Charges , " £ 2 2 s . sd ., makinir a third sum of

£ 189 is . 3 d . ; the grand total being £ 3130 2 s . 2 d ., which , with the £ 30 spent for Sustentation of Building , gives the £ 3160 alread y noted . If it be said that a mere enumeration of the items of expense is no proof of economy , 1 will compare the abavc with thc expenditure stated in onc of the earliest reports I have at hand—that of 1 S 75—the first that vvas issued after thc installation of the Prince of Wales , Bro . Tcrrv havinir

been Secretary for rather more than two years . The expenditure as therein set down amounts to £ 1534 15 s . Cd ., the principal items being—salaries , commission , and pension of £ 200 to the then late Secretary , Bro . Farnfield , amounting to £ 953 1 is . ; printing , stationery , & c , £ 139 25 . Sd . ; postages , & c , including election expenses , £ 142 13 s . 4 d . ; rent , & c , office , £ 36 , or together £ 1271 7 s . 1 he balance does not need to be described . The increase

is no doubt considerable , but 1 think a glance at thc following facts , which are derived from the published reports , will show that it is perfectl y justifiable . The proceeds of the festival in 1 S 75 were £ 7020 ; in 1 SS 3 , £ 13 , 250 ; increase £ 6230 . In 1 S 75 the Government Stock held by the Male and Female Funds together was £ 41 , 400 ; in 1 SS 3 , £ 01 , 525 ; increase £ 20 , 125 . In 1875 , the donations and annual subscriptions amounted for the two Funds to

£ 7849 ; m iSSjto £ i 2 , SSS : increase £ 5039 . Owing to these increases and thc larger grant by Grand Lodge , the number of annuitants has been raised from 20 S ( 120 men and SS women ) with 14 half-pay widows to 315 ( 155 men and 1 G 0 women ) with 10 half-pay widows , and the annuities from £ 3 6 ( men ) and £ 28 ( women ) to £ 40 and £ 32 respectively , the sums paid in annuities being in 1 S 75 £ 6720 , and in 1 SS 3 £ 11 , 527 . The numbers now on the funds are

103 men and 1 C 7 women , or together 330 . It may be also interesting to state that the 11 festivals held since Bro . Terry became Secretary have together yielded £ 120 , 208 , in round figures , giving an average per festival of £ 10 , 928 , of which tlie last nine—from 1 S 75 , inclusive—have given £ 107 , 9 88 , or £ 11 , 999 P festival . The average for the 14 festivals from 1 S 59 to 1 S 72 , both inclusive , vvas £ 2762 . I notice from your report that Bro . Moore began by attacking the whole expenditure as being too costly , and

finished by finding fault with part of the commission received by the Collector . All who are acquainted with that officer are aware that he not only works very hard for what he receives , but that he also voluntarily attends lodge and chapter night after night in order to plead the cause of the Institution , and that he does so very successfully . I leave it to others to say if much in the way of saving is likely to be effected by meddling overmuch vvith an executive which accomplishes such splendid results as I have indicated . —Fraternally yours , 'THE WRITER OF THE ARTICLE ON THE R . M . B . I .