Letter: An open secret
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: The short answer to Chris Mullin's question 'Do we ever learn from our mistakes?', in his article on the Royal Commission set up when the Birmingham Six were released (7 July), is that he hasn't yet. He persists in promulgating his mistaken view of Freemasonry - perhaps because if he admitted he was wrong his pet horse would not carry him.
Once again I have to say that Freemasonry is not a secret society. Statute says it is not unlawful. Practice shows that it is not secret. Mr Mullin is wrong to categorise as secret a society whose aims and basic principles are a matter of public record, whose rule book is on sale to the public, whose meeting places are known (and some, such as Freemasons' Hall in Great Queen Street, are open to the public) and whose members are encouraged in appropriate circumstances to disclose their membership. A reluctance to flaunt membership, born either of Freemasonry's insistence that it should not be used to advance interests or of fear that disclosure will be so misunderstood as to harm the discloser may fairly be called an inclination to privacy, but it is not secrecy.
Freemasons concerned in the administration of justice (as in any other walk of life) know very clearly that their civil duties take priority over masonic interests, as they take priority over any other private interests. To compel them to declare their membership in a public register is not necessary, and Mr Mullin should know that.
Yours faithfully,
M. B. S. HIGHAM
Grand Secretary
United Grand Lodge of England
London, WC2
14 July
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments