cemetery, but that no stranger could enter that way. On being JAMPS DK asked why none but the brethren of the order were permitted 4 , n^fsiw. to be present at the reception and profession of brothers, he said he knew of no reason, but that it was so written in their book of rules. Between the 2/)th of October and the 17th of November, thirty-three knights, chaplains, and serving brothers, were examined, all of whom positively denied every article imputing crime or infidelity to their order. When Brother Hitnbert Blanke was asked why they had made the reception and profession of brethren secret, he replied, Through Ike'tr oti-n unaccount. able folly. They avowed that they wore little cords round their shirts, but for no bad end j they declared that they never touched idols with them, but that they were worn by way of penance, or according to a knight of forty-three years' standing, by the instruction of the holy father St. Bernard. Brother Richard de Goldyngham says that he knows nothing further about them than that they were called girdles of chastity. They state that the receivers and the party received kissed one another on the face, but everything else regarding the kissing was false, abominable, and had never been done. Brother Radulph de Barton, priest of the order of the Temple, and custoe or guardian of the Temple church at London, stated, with regard to Article 24, that the Grand Master in chapter could absolve the brothers from offences committed against the rules and observances of the order, but not from private sin, as he was not a priest ; that it was perfectly true that those who were received into the order swore not to reveal the secrets of the chapter, and that when any one was punished in the chapter, those who were present at it durst not reveal it to such as were absent ; but if any brother revealed the mode of his reception, he would be deprived of his chamber, or else stripped of his habit. He