street in white aprons and gloves. This was construed into a grave offence against the standing rules of the Order.

"Bro. Noorthouck did not attend the ensuing Lodge, but he sent a strong remonstrance against the proceeding, and threatened to bring the matter before the Grand Lodge, if the Lodge of Antiquity did not, then and there, pass a resolution affirming that, as a Lodge, they not only totally disapproved of and repudiated the transaction, but also absolutely censured and condemned the ten individuals engaged in the (so called) procession for such an unwarrantable breach of Masonic law.

"Bro. Bottomley was intrusted with the resolution, and proposed it in form. The Brethren were taken by surprise; but the motion being duly seconded, it was of course submitted by the Master to the deliberation of the Lodge, and a debate ensued.

"On this evening a distinguished visitor was present, in the person of Capt. George Smith, an active and zealous Mason, who was on terms of intimacy with the Grand Master, and the personal friend of Bro. Preston. He had studied Masonry both at home and abroad, and was presumed to be well acquainted with the Laws and Constitutions of the Order. Eminent in Masonic attainments himself, he was ever ready to estimate and proclaim the same excellence in others. Belonging to an honourable profession, he was too chivalric to allow passion or prejudice to interfere with justice and equity, nor would he suffer the weak to be oppressed without

lending a helping hand, even though his exertions in their behalf might chance, like the seventh bullet in 'Der Freischütz,' to recoil upon himself. In the present case, he was impressed with the idea that the charge against his friend was too trifling for any serious notice; and he determined to use an effort for its defeat. For this purpose he craved permission of the R. W. M. to offer an opinion on the question at issue, which would have been readily conceded, if Bro. Bottomley had not entered a protest, alleging that, as a visitor, he had no voice there. Capt. Smith bowed to the decision, and informed the Chair that he should content himself with watching the proceedings in silence.

"You may watch as you please,' Bro. Bottomley added, so long as you have the kindness to refrain from speaking. You are not a Member, and have no vote here.'

"It was an unpropitious commencement," the Square continued, “and I should gladly conceal the subsequent proceedings, if I consulted my own inclination. The debate continued to a late hour. Bro. Bottomley persisted in his argument, that the act of appearing in public decorated with Masonic badges

But I suppose we

7 The Square once more anachronizes. must excuse the lapse, on the Horatian maxim, "quando bonus dormitat Homerus."-P. D.-[An error, with submission to the above erudite authority; for the Square appears to be wide awake. Though recording the past, he is represented as an existing reality; and a reference to any transaction of more recent date than the period of which he treats is therefore grammatically correct.-ED. F. Q. M. & R.]

constituted an infraction of the spirit, if not of the actual letter of the law, and merited censure.

"As to the fact,' said Bro. Buchanan, 'we do not deny it. We did appear in Masonic clothing. But if any person chanced to see us, which is not proved, during the half-minute employed in crossing the street, he passed on without either notice or remark, and therefore it is evident we attracted no extraordinary observation.'

"How know you that?' Bro. Rigg asked, sneeringly.

"Because,' Bro. Buchanan replied, I can use my eyes.'

"If your eyes,' Bro. Rigg responded, 'serve you no better than your judgment, there will be some danger in intrusting your veracity to their keeping.'

"This was sharp practice," continued the Square, "and Bro. Wilson, the R. W. M., thought it time. to interfere. Come, come,' said he, 'this language is not Masonic, and is a greater breach of the law than walking ten yards in a white apron. Let us, by all means, have order in our debates, whatever may be the ultimate decision. The question before the Lodge is, whether we are inclined to repudiate or discountenance the Brethren who attended Divine Service in St. Dunstan's Church, on St. John's day?'

"With submission, R. W. Sir,' Bro. Bottomley objected; the resolution which I have had the honour to propose refers not to the men so much as to the measure. The Lodge is called on to discoun

tenance the breach of Masonic law committed on that occasion.'

"If this be the real question at issue,' said Bro. Preston, it is first incumbent on you to prove that it was a breach of Masonic law; for no man devoid of prejudice would be capable of affirming that the law respecting processions actually debars the Members of any private Lodge from offering up their adorations to the Deity in a public place of worship, in the character of Masons, under the direction of their Master. The very idea of such restriction would be the height of absurdity, and could not be admitted by any person who professed himself a friend to the Society. Example will ever exceed precept, and it is surely commendable to see a Lodge of Masons patronizing the established religion of their country, and thus recommending the practice of piety and devotion to their fellow-subjects. Besides which, the Lodge of Antiquity has its own peculiar rights, formally secured to it, at the revival in 1717, when the present Grand Lodge was established; and we are determined to preserve them inviolate. And I again affirm that no existing regulation was infringed, even if it be admitted—which is very questionable-that the Grand Lodge is empowered to make laws binding upon a Lodge which has acted on its own independent authority from a period long anterior to the existence of that body.'

"This avowal," said the Square, "was received with so much applause, that Bro. Bottomley exclaimed, 'Ay, those are the sentiments which we are deter

mined to rebut, be the consequence what it may. I affirm that the Grand Lodge is absolutely and to all intents and purposes, infallible; and its dictates, whether for good or evil, must be obeyed, even by the Lodge of Antiquity, though it was in existence before the reconstruction of the Grand Lodge.'

"Keep your temper, I beseech you, Bro. Bottomley,' said the R. W. M., mildly, we are assembled to deliberate, and not to indulge in personalities and recrimination: otherwise, I shall be under the painful necessity of closing the Lodge without coming to a decision.'

"The Master's authority, however, was not sufficient to stem the tide, and the debate became so stormy, that he had great difficulty in keeping order. At length the question was put from the Chair, and it was negatived by a majority of eighteen against four.

"This decision was so unpalatable to the accusing Brethren, that at the ensuing Grand Lodge, a Memorial signed by John Bottomley, John Smith, William Rigg, and John Noorthouck, was presented, stating that a flagrant outrage had been committed against the Institution by the Master, Wardens, and some of the Brethren of the Lodge of Antiquity, principally instigated by the persuasion and example of Bro. Preston, its Past Master, who, at a recent Lodge, violated his duty as a Mason, by justifying public processions, and claiming for that Lodge an inherent right to act in such affairs without the authority of the Grand Lodge, and questioning the