The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-12 00:00:00

ORANGE. LODGE SOCIETIES.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Stn,—On Saturday last I went over to Barnsley to
ascertain the proceedings that actually took place t'nere in,
1832, only a part of which it seems I inserted in the columns
of the Sheffield Independent. This was copied by you ;
a small extract from it was also copied by the Morning
Post, of the 30th ult., which paper asserted that the
statement was a fabrication of my own, to which I replied
on the 31st ult. _ .

The Standard, of the 3d inst., then thought proper to ca-
lumniate my character, sorrowing that W. B. Fairman
had not the means of entering an action against me, and
doubting whether I was of_ that grade worth contending
with. So far it is well to patch up a bad cause. It is only
like the Royal Duke denying his ever having granted war-
rants to any Orange Lodge in the army, when, as I stated
on a former occasion, " he might as well deny his own ex-
istence ; for I hold in my possession a Circular, dated Feb.
7, 1831, in the Grand Lodge ; present, Field Marshal his
Royal Highness Prince Ernest Duke of Cumberland, Grand
Master of the Empire, wherein three Hon. Members of the
Army were admitted as part of the Grand Committee, and
three distinct warrants granted to the Army."
I have now, Mr. Editor, a word or two more to say.
When I was at Barnsley on Saturday night (being Lodge
night) in my official capacity, I was called to the chair ;
when I made known to the Lodge my mission regarding
what had transpired. I there found I had not disclosed
half the language the Royal agent made use of in 1832, for
he then and there further insinuated, " that there was a
young Girl of fifteen, and who was heir to the Throne, but
it was expected that not she, but the Duke, their Grand
Master, would be called to the Throne," and at
the same time he directed " that the health of the
King, William IVth, (a previous toast in all Orange Lodges)
be dispPnsed wills in future," which has been the case (by
order of W. M.s of Lodges in that district) ever since,
until I gave it on Saturday evening from the Chair.
He (W. B. Fairman) further directed " that oaths in
future must be dispensed with in making Orangemen, to
prevent the present Government from making any inroad
in the Institution." These are incontestable facts,—
known to men who—along With myself--are ready. at any
time, to confront W. B. Fairman, or any of his abettors.
_ _

I am sorry to see one of the Chaplains of the Grand
Lodge, viz., the Rev. John Coats, of Aldmonbury, Hud-
dersfield, again rearing his head, and vindicating the
D. G. S. to the Royal Duke. Ido not forget the contro-
versy that took place between him and myself, on a petition
I drew up to his Royal Highness in favour of Reform, in
1831, and his letters are forthcoming. He may now vin-
dicate the fettered slave of the Duke, as he then did the
Duke himself, at an expense and waste of that time
which, perhaps, might have been more properly and suitably
appropriated to the interests of his own flock.
You will excuse, Mr. Editor, any warm remarks or un-
courteous language (because such displeases the Spectator),
but when the Ex-Colonel threatens a prosecution, and I see
a letter of condolence is published by the Rev. Divine, it
tries one's patience a little.
I am Sir, yours,
An Ancient and Free Orangeman,
J. HAYWOOD, G.M. and G.S.
First Central Body, Yorkshire.
Sheffield, Nov. 9.