-
Articles/Ads
Article PERSECUTION ← Page 20 of 21 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Persecution
REJECTED OR NON-PERMITTED EVIDENCE . February 29 , 1840 . —LAURENCE THOMPSON . Questions overruled by the Hoard . Is that your usual mode of signing papers ? ( Alluding to not knowing who wrote them ) . On what day did you sign the memorial ?
Have you not been charged at the Board of General Purposes for Masonic irregularity ? Have you never been excluded from a Lodge ? On what account ? Was it not for default of payment of dues iu 1829 ?
March 2 . —PETER THOMSON . Questions that could not be put , as not relating to the Charges . AVho printed that paper ? Then , by your not requesting the Chairman to call Alderman Wood and Brother Stevens toorder , did you not equally give them your countenance and support ? Have you been Steward to the Asylum Festival ?
Before the Annuities were suggested ? Did the Chairman bully the waiter ? Did not the waiter , on being called in , state that he could not see the person who employed him to distribute the papers ? Did you ever say to me , or to any one else , that the Asylum ought to have been the first object of Masonic benevolence , and not the last ? Did you ever say to me , or to any one else , that the Grand Master ought either to ive up his Birthday Festivalor to make it the Festival of the
g , Aged Masons' Asylum ? Did the Masonic treason levelled at the Pro- Grand Master , in the paper , escape your attention ? Did you never state to me , or to any one else , that the Duke of Sussex had violated the Articles of Union ?
Dr . CRUCEFIX then stated , that before he entered on his address—being desirous of avoiding a repetition of the insults to which he had been twice exposed by the unblushing and calumnious imputations of Brother Laurence Thompson—it was his intention to retire immediately on concluding his address , without waiting to hear any reply from the prosecutors . Tbe address of Dr . Crucefix was very elaborate , and embraced the whole question , from the meeting of the Asylum to the closing of the evidence . AA e subjoin the heads or points .
1 . The triumphant evidence in favour of the defence . 2 . Maliciousness of the charges . 3 . History of the proceedings , shewing the utter falsehood of the charges . 4 . Conduct of the author of the Circular . 5 . Vote of censure passed upon him . 6 . M'Mullen ' s vain-glorious epithet applied to the Grand Master as " King ofthe Craft . " 7 The fact that none of the prosecutors addressed the Chairman to order .
. 8 . The unanimous vote of thanks to the Chairman . 9 . The correspondence quoted . 10 . The objectionable mode of taking evidence . 11 . The Board at once judge , witness , advocate , juror . 12 . Contradiction in evidence of M'Mullen and Bossy—their conduct at the Grand Officers' mess .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Persecution
REJECTED OR NON-PERMITTED EVIDENCE . February 29 , 1840 . —LAURENCE THOMPSON . Questions overruled by the Hoard . Is that your usual mode of signing papers ? ( Alluding to not knowing who wrote them ) . On what day did you sign the memorial ?
Have you not been charged at the Board of General Purposes for Masonic irregularity ? Have you never been excluded from a Lodge ? On what account ? Was it not for default of payment of dues iu 1829 ?
March 2 . —PETER THOMSON . Questions that could not be put , as not relating to the Charges . AVho printed that paper ? Then , by your not requesting the Chairman to call Alderman Wood and Brother Stevens toorder , did you not equally give them your countenance and support ? Have you been Steward to the Asylum Festival ?
Before the Annuities were suggested ? Did the Chairman bully the waiter ? Did not the waiter , on being called in , state that he could not see the person who employed him to distribute the papers ? Did you ever say to me , or to any one else , that the Asylum ought to have been the first object of Masonic benevolence , and not the last ? Did you ever say to me , or to any one else , that the Grand Master ought either to ive up his Birthday Festivalor to make it the Festival of the
g , Aged Masons' Asylum ? Did the Masonic treason levelled at the Pro- Grand Master , in the paper , escape your attention ? Did you never state to me , or to any one else , that the Duke of Sussex had violated the Articles of Union ?
Dr . CRUCEFIX then stated , that before he entered on his address—being desirous of avoiding a repetition of the insults to which he had been twice exposed by the unblushing and calumnious imputations of Brother Laurence Thompson—it was his intention to retire immediately on concluding his address , without waiting to hear any reply from the prosecutors . Tbe address of Dr . Crucefix was very elaborate , and embraced the whole question , from the meeting of the Asylum to the closing of the evidence . AA e subjoin the heads or points .
1 . The triumphant evidence in favour of the defence . 2 . Maliciousness of the charges . 3 . History of the proceedings , shewing the utter falsehood of the charges . 4 . Conduct of the author of the Circular . 5 . Vote of censure passed upon him . 6 . M'Mullen ' s vain-glorious epithet applied to the Grand Master as " King ofthe Craft . " 7 The fact that none of the prosecutors addressed the Chairman to order .
. 8 . The unanimous vote of thanks to the Chairman . 9 . The correspondence quoted . 10 . The objectionable mode of taking evidence . 11 . The Board at once judge , witness , advocate , juror . 12 . Contradiction in evidence of M'Mullen and Bossy—their conduct at the Grand Officers' mess .