period of the solar day all nature seems hushed in tranquil slumber, while nought is heard to disturb the pensive serenity of the night but the rattling through the street of some distant vehicle conveying perhaps its dissipated owner from the bustle of some festive revel to a sleepless agitated couch. At this dread hour what fitful reveries flit athwart my brain! What strange events the passing day has brought to life! What griefs! What strifes its moody beams have witnessed! A curse rest on the soul of him who first invented gaming! How shall I mourn over the weakness, the rashness, the folly of a who, disregarding all natural sense, all social decency, all honourable feeling, could meanly stoop to insult a disabled by the ties of nature and of duty to defend himself from brutal outrage. Ah, lucre, filthy lucre, thou sower of the dragon's teeth, thou stirrer up of bitter ire, and fierce dissension, how paltry is thy recompense when weighed against the meannesses some submit to in acquiring thee!

*

*

*

Did mine ears deceive me? or was it but the delusion of a dream? Would to heaven it were a dream! Alas, it is too true-the indignant throbbing of my heart replies! My character odiously stigmatised— my honour grossly impeached—my filial esteem attributed to mercenary motives-my whole conduct arraigned with the most opprobious epithets -yet ring loudly in my ears pealing a doleful truth to doubting incredulity.

The inquiry which instantly suggests itself is, did I merit the tirade of abuse the violent and brutal attack-which was made on my finest feelings? No, Conscience wholly acquits me of any malicious view in protesting against the liberty that had been taken with my name to assist the circulation of a document whereby my reputation might ultimately be sullied. Nothing, therefore, can justify those ill-timed virulent censures; nor shall they be forgotten to the latest hour of my existence, nor the confidence they have helped to forfeit ever be restored. My immediate determination is to quit this inauspicious city and my evil genius with all his nefarious chimeras, to the keen remorse of a distracted mind and the perpetual condemnation of the "still small voice within."

This morning found me ardently expatiating upon the immorality of gambling. Now a fresh topic presents itself to illustrate the foibles of

anger.

The mind of man under a state of violent irritation becomes, as it were, ignited by the smallest spark of opposition, and, like the sudden explosion of a magazine of combustibles, blazes forth with all the impetuosity and terror of ungovernable rage. I know not if the remark has ever been made before, but a man in a state of intoxication and a man under the influence of passion are much in a similar condition. In each case the individual loses the power of reason, giving utterance to whatever rises uppermost in his thoughts, From this circumstance I contend that a man, in either state, will most probably speak the real sentiments of his heart; and truth, spontaneous truth, will involuntarily burst out unrestrained by the check of cool, calculating reason. judgment of the mind is necessarily relaxed, interest and selfishness for the moment lose their sway, and the victim of either passion, be he drunk or mad, rashly offends, unconscious of the irreparable mischief he has committed against his own interest, until sober reflection reveals

The

the painful sequel, by thus prematurely, though unintentionally, opening the eyes of the deluded party to the real opinion entertained of him. Thus the miserable wretch not only exposes himself to the scorn and pity of the person whom he designed to cajole, but also perhaps, be forced to endure through his passionate ebullition of candour and openness of mind, innumerable privations and distresses, rendered doubly aggravating from the sensation that they sprung out of his unpremeditated, undesigned, intention to disclose the truth.

*

*

*

*

*

It would puzzle a conjuror to divine what share of happiness is allotted to a being who, like myself, rarely tastes it in any large or lasting proportion. Here I am still at Paris, contrary to my own wishes, with the prospect of academical duties coming fast upon me, but feeling almost incompetent to meet them, doling away my time in slothful inactivity. Upon my faith, the contemplation of fresh literary labours with the downright certainty of having to overcome many obstacles in prosecuting my future profession perfectly enervates me, annihilating every latent effort to throw off this indolent lethargy. Indeed, I have partly formed a resolution to invest the remnant of my fortune in the purchase of some classic retreat where I can shut myself up, sequestered from the empty professions of a deceitful world, and enjoy the unsophisticated innocence of rural simplicity and the taciturn communion of my books.

(To be continued.)

FREEMASONRY IN THE IRISH COURTS OF LAW, 1808.

Ar the assizes for the county of Tyrone, held at Omagh, an action was brought by Alexander Seton, Esq., a Barrister-at-law, against a Mr. William F. Graham, of Dublin, and which was tried before Judge Daly and a special jury.

The declaration was opened by Counsellor T. Macklin, who stated that the plaintiff brought his action against the defendant for defamation, and the publication of three libels;-the first, a resolution, dated 2d April, 1807, of the Grand Lodge of Freemasons in Ireland, stating, that Alexander Seton had been expelled the Grand Lodge and Masonry in general; the second, cautioning the Brethren against receiving or sanctioning certificates signed A. Seton, dated since 1st May, 1806, as he had not held any office under the Grand Lodge since that period; and the third, being the resolutions of the Grand Lodge of England, dated London, September 2, 1807, stating that the Grand Lodge of England would not on any account receive or acknowledge any certificate issued by or under the hand of the said Alexander Seton, dated any time subsequent to the 5th of June, 1806, nor should any person, by virtue of such certificate, be thereby received into any Lodge under the Grand Lodge of England. The plaintiff laid his damages at £2,000, and the defendant pleaded the general issue.

The case was stated on the part of the plaintiff by Counsellor Rolleston, who at great length expatiated on the injury done to the character and property of the plaintiff, by thus stating to the public his expulsion from so ancient and respectable a society, and the natural ignominy and

VOL. Y.

Н

disgrace that would attach to his character, if the jury did not in damages prove to the country and to the society the falsehood of such a charge, and which only could be done by their verdict. The learned counsel also stated, that by this action the right of the plaintiff would be proved to the situation of the Deputy Grand Secretaryship to the Freemasons of Ireland, and thereby instruct the members of the Order where they ought to apply for such Masonic documents as they had occasion for, the defendant having assumed upon himself the situation, and thereby claiming the fees that were attached to the office, and also in that right publishing and circulating the libels on which the present action was founded. The plaintiff then proved the publication and circulation of the alleged libels, and, after the examination of several witnesses, closed his case.

The learned Judge then intimated his opinion that the plaintiff should be nonsuited; and the plaintiff having stated his determination to appear, and not submit, but leave the question to a jury of his country, the defendant's counsel declared, that out of respect to the Court, they would not state any case, nor call any evidence.

The Judge, after a most able and eloquent charge, and having gone into every minutiae of the evidence, directed the jury to find for the defendant.

The jury retired, and, after some consideration, brought in a verdict for the defendant, with sixpence costs, thereby allowing the right of the Grand Lodge, and the justness and propriety of publishing the expulsion of its members, and clearly ascertaining the defendant to be its proper officer.

COMMON PLEAS, DUBLIN, 1808.-Alexander Seton, Esq., Barrister-atlaw v. William Francis Graham, Esq.

This was a motion on the part of the plaintiff, to set aside the verdict had for the defendant, at the last assizes at Omagh. On the report of the Right Hon. Judge Daly, who tried the action, it appeared that the plaintiff had declared, in the situation of D. G. Secretary to the Grand Lodge of Freemasons in Ireland, for the publication of libels, stated to be circulated and published by the defendant, to the following effectamong others, "Grand Lodge of Ireland, Thursday, April 21, 1807; Resolved, That Alexander Seton be expelled this Grand Lodge, and Masonry in general." And that by evidence given on the part of the plaintiff, the action was brought more to try his right to the office of Deputy Grand Secretary to the Grand Lodge of Ireland, than anything else. The other libels alleged to be published, were the subsequent acts of the Grand Lodge of England and Ireland, confirming such expulsion of Mr. Seton. The learned Judge in his report, which was very full, and embraced the entire of the evidence given by the plaintiff, stated his opinion, that the plaintiff ought to have been nonsuited; but the plaintiff having directed his agent to appear, and not having done so, he had directed the jury to find for the defendant, the plaintiff's evidence not supporting his declaration. The Court, on hearing the learned Judge's report, did not conceive it necessary to call on the defendant's counsel; and after hearing for a considerable length of time counsel for the plaintiff, Lord Norbury was pleased to declare his opinion as follows:

That the action, on the part of the plaintiff, was a mere contest for office, a scramble for emolument, and appeared so by the declaration and evidence that the plaintiff's refusal to be nonsuited was an indiscretion; that if the publication were unnecessary, and not according to the duty of the defendant, that then it would be a different case, and that it ought to be left to the jury; that the right to the office was the matter in contest, and that the Court had not any right to interfere; that the plaintiff stated the society to be of a very great length of standing, being upwards of seventy years' old, that it therefore had a right to act as it thought proper; but it appeared that the several publications were distributed, and sent to the different Lodges of Freemasons in Ireland, as information to that body, by the defendant, Mr. Graham, who was then the officer of the Order; and that nothing in the case was to be left to the jury, but whether the defendant did, as directed by the Order, in his situation, and that it appeared he only communicated the publications to the Order in that light; that the society was regulated by its own laws, and that the plaintiff might have resorted to it for relief, if he had thought proper; that the plaintiff had set up the institution and the laws of it, and on them grounded his case; and that if the Court believed him, they would state he had no right to the office; that under these circumstances the Court would not disturb the verdict, and that the Judge's report was correct.

Alex

Judge Fox, in observing on this case, stated it to be a very novel one, that it was an action for defamation: after stating the first count in the declaration, he observed, that if a man defamed a character, not called on by his office to do so, it was libellous; but that this case would not stand that test. He referred then to the publication, which was as follows :-“ Grand Lodge of Ireland, Thursday, 2nd of April, 1807. Brother John Leech, Esq., Grand Secretary, informed the Grand Lodge, that pursuant to their order made on the 5th of March last, he had demanded the books and other muniments, the property of this Grand Lodge, to be given up by Brother Alexander Seton, late Deputy Grand Secretary, which demand had not been complied with: Resolved, That Alexander Seton be expelled this Grand Lodge, and Masonry in general. ander Jaffray, D. G. M. John Leech, G. S." That the publication contains more than is set out on the face of the defendant's declaration; that by it, it applied that the cause of the expulsion was for not giving up the books of the Order, and that in consequence of the plaintiff's disobedience, he was expelled; that it could not be contended that it was libellous, if a man acted contrary to the society he was a member of, and was expelled that society, to state the fact; and alluded to the case of expulsion of a member of a club, for not paying his subscription, and the publication and distribution of it among the members; that the special damage was laid in the plaintiff's declaration, it was not material, it appearing the publications were made in discharge of the defendant's duty, that it could not be therefore taken as a libel.-[Here he compared it to the case of Sir John Carr, tried not long ago in England, and said, you might extract libel out of holy writ, if you stopped at particular sentences, and not take in the whole context.]-That it appeared by the plaintiff's evidences, that the defendant, Mr. Graham, acted as a Mason and Secretary to that body; that he took the order of expulsion from the Chair, and then published it; that it was his (Mr. Graham's) duty to do so; and that the business of a society could not exist if it were otherwise; that it could not be looked upon as a libel, being within the

sphere of the person doing it, and that therefore no action could be sustained for it; that the declaration was not sustained by the publication; that no publication appeared out of the Order, and that the publications distributed appeared necessary; that therefore the verdict ought to stand, and the cause shown by the defendant be allowed with costs; thus ascertaining the right of the Grand Lodge of Freemasons in Ireland to expel the members who act contrary to their order, and proving the defendant, William Francis Graham, to be their Deputy Grand Secretary.

Mr. Justice Fletcher." I concur in opinion with the rest of the Court."

ANECDOTES.

It is not our business to discuss the propriety or illiberality of making invidious distinctions, but merely to dole out for the amusement of our readers such anecdotes as may appear to be authentic, and at the same time interesting. With this prelude we give the following.

CANTABRIGIANEA.—As you egress from the gate leading out of Neville's Court, Trinity, into a beautiful avenue of horse-chestnut trees, the spire of a village church (distant about three miles from Cambridge on the St. Neot's road) is seen, forming an unique coup d'œil to the vista: "That spire appearing at the end of this long walk," said the late Professor Porson, walking with a friend there one day, "reminds me of a long fellowship with a church at the end of it."

66

66

Among other on dits it is reported, that when a certain celebrated architect went down to Cambridge for the purpose of making a survey of some repairs required to be performed in the roof of the hall of Trinity College, Professor Airy was appointed to attend him. Accordingly our learned mathematician accompanied the professional gentleman to his survey, and while the examination of the decayed parts was going on, the professor suddenly suggested a plan to overcome a difficulty in the construction, which appeared insuperable to the architect. Well, Mr. don't you perceive my design? See now, a beam placed in that direction must suffice to support that portion." 6+ Really, sir," replied the architect," though I dare say your idea is correct on mathematical principles, I confess myself unable to comprehend it.” Then," answered the professor drily, while going out of the hall, "I pity you!" SIDNEY WALKER'S LAST.-The fame of this gentleman in scholastic lore and literary eminence was not confined to the precincts of Alma Mater. Sidney Walker, walking with a friend, proposed to relate to him a fable of his own imagining. His friend of course replied he would be very happy to hear it; whereon he began. "A rich man strolling on the sea-shore saw a little fish swimming and staring at him. Why do you stare at me, little fish?' said the rich man. Surely a cat may look at a king,' the little fish replied. Moral-The rich man ate up the little fish." To elucidate this quaint effusion it may be remarked, that the worthy gentleman was compelled to vacate his fellowship, because he would not take orders on account of some conscientious objection to subscribe to the "Thirty-nine Articles !"

PORSON One day entering the front gates of Trinity College, observed a large hog wending his way with a significant grunt towards the stately