_To the Editor of the_ DUDLEY EXPRESS.
SIR,--How is it the Committee of the forthcoming Masonic Ball
should have so lacked "foresight" as to have lost all idea
of the marriage of the Princess Royal? Here is a "fact" well
known for months, and here is a Ball for "charitable purposes,"
got up within a few weeks, and fixed to take place FOUR days,
before the great event named. Would you not suppose, Sir, that
_common sense_ would have dictated, at once, the proper day
for the holding this annual affair? Would you not have thought
it a glorious opportunity to blend the two objects, and by
so blending, to secure a very large attendance of visitors,
and a great increase to the funds hoped to be obtained by the
Committee for the charities of the town?
If the _common sense_ of the Committee could not have suggested
this course, it would have been as well if they had drafted
into their councils one or two men of
_UN_-COMMON SENSE.
_Dudley, Jan. 14, 1858._
P.S.--I have seen an advertisement of this Ball in a
"Birmingham" paper, but, though it is a "Dudley" Ball, got up
by "Dudley" men, and for the Charities of "Dudley," I have
looked in vain for an advertisement of it in any one of the
three "Dudley" papers. Can you tell a wondering reader (though
of _un_-common sense) why this is, for _un_-common sense is
unable to solve the mystery.
* * * * *
"UNCOMMON SENSE _VERSUS_ THE LATE MASONIC BALL COMMITTEE."
_To the Editor of the_ DUDLEY EXPRESS.
SIR,--A letter in your last week's "Open Platform" contains
some crude remarks on the proceedings of the Dudley Masonic
Ball Committee, written to show that its want of foresight
"Omitted the glorious opportunity to blend two objects
together"--viz., "The Princess Royal's Marriage with the
Masonic Ball."
As Chairman of the Ball Committee, sir, I beg to inform
your anonymous scribbler, that the propriety of holding the
Masonic Ball on the evening of the Royal Marriage received the
_due consideration_ of the Ball Committee _at its earliest
sittings_, and had your "Uncommon Sense" correspondent
possessed the same amount of "foresight," good feeling, and
_gentlemanly intention_ evinced by another writer in your
columns, signed J. H. M., he would not have so foolishly rushed
into print, but would have anticipated with the Ball Committee
that the _proper officials_ of Dudley would, ere now, have
suggested such a mark of public demonstration of loyalty on
that joyous occasion as to leave no room for complaint by
any of your correspondents on that particular head. Under
these impressions, the Masonic Ball Committee _avoided_ the
possibility of clashing with other hoped-for demonstrations in
the town; so that the 21st was deemed the most appropriate day
for holding this time-honoured and benevolent assembly.
As to the propriety of "drafting one or two men of uncommon
sense" into the councils of the Ball Committee, I should first
be glad to know whether the _animus_ and _diction_ of "Uncommon
Sense" were to be taken as a _specimen of his fitness_ to sit
on that committee, and as an evidence of his capability of
discerning approaching events with prophetic eyes? If so, I
opine that, as his present qualifications do not appear to be
up to the mark, his presence must be respectfully declined.
Touching the non-appearance of any advertisement of the ball in
the Dudley newspapers, I can assure you that such an omission
was far from being made with an intention of disrespect to the
worthy efforts of the Dudley press to enlighten the horizon of
this darkened locality. And when I inform you that the Masonic
Ball Committee, for some years past, has deemed it advisable to
bring the notices of the ball _immediately_ into the presence
of every respectable family in this locality _by circular_,
it will at once suggest the inutility, in some degree, of
expending so much of its funds in public advertisements. As
the peculiar objects of this ball ever have been to render as
much seasonable assistance to the indigent as possible, it
becomes imperative upon its promoters to avoid that spirit of
_over-doing things_ which the present age unfortunately seems
to foster.
By kindly admitting this letter to your "Open Platform," you
will oblige,
Your obedient servant,
C. F. G. CLARK,
Chairman of the Masonic Ball Committee.
_Dudley, January 19th, 1858._
This Easter, we had another parish election of the Board of Guardians.
No description of Guardians seemed to satisfy the whims and fancies of
the "Irreconcilables," so there was no way of squaring the captious
ideas of some large ratepayers but having a friendly fight for it, with
the usual attendant compliments to and about one another.