Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

We do not hold ourselves responsible / or the opinions of our Correspondents . We cannot undertake to return rejected communications . All Letters must hear the name and address of the Writer , not necessarily for publication , but as a guarantee of good faith .

— : o : — THE NEW LAWS (?) OP THE SCHOOLS .

To the i'dUor of the FUEEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AXP RIUITHEU . —In order to determine what wonld have been exp n-ted from a lawfully constituted Committee to advise on the revision of tho Schools' Laws it is desirablo to bear in mind tho circumstances ( hat brought this necessity prominently before tho Subscribers . I think the suggestion of a Cominitteo originated with

Bro . Browse , after presiding at a meetiugoftho Boys' School in June last , when ho found himself obliged to sanction an admitted irregularity because the laws did not properly define tho modo of election for Committees . At about the same time some of tho Governors of the Girls' School complained of " sharp practices" ; somo of " dishonest cleclitiim , " others of " packing and nursing Committees ; " and

a little later , as will be but too well remembered , even the supposed purity of Grand Lodgo itself was somewhat sullied by tho result of an investigation commanded by the Pro Grand Master . Supposing , then , a revising Committee to have lieen legally appointed , what wonld have heen their principal duties ? Obviously , to suggest such alterations iu the Laws governing theso Institutions

as would prevent in the fnture a repetition of tho scandals complained of ; to frame regulations for the nomination and election of Committees , so as to ensure a fair representation of the Governors in the management ; to enquire into tho system of audit , which wonld probably havo led business men to recommend the abolition of a cumbersome und costly Audit Committee aud the substitution of

independent professional auditors ; to consider how far plurality of offices conld be considered beneficial to tho Institutions ; aud finally to present a well considered report to tho General Cominitteo for disenssion , preliminary to the preparation by that body of notices of motion to be recommended foradoptiou by the General Court .

. In the place of this , what has been offered ? A—so-called—Joint Committee , il ' egally constituted ( or without auy constitution whatever ) , has wasted charity funds in printing a series of frivolous verbal alterations ; the only material suggestions have been refused by one or both of tho General Courts , which ( also illegally ) undertook their

reception ; and tho result is , as might have been expected , " confusion worse confounded . " I am , Dear Sir and Brother , Yours truly and fraternally , II .

The Approaching Elections.

THE APPROACHING ELECTIONS .

1 ' jiitnr oj HIE l < UEEMASON S UHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BKOTIIKK , —I trust that you will permit me , through the aid of your valuable columns , to appeal to the London brethren on behalf of two London candidates with their last application , viz .,

0 . F . Frost and F . A . Giles , in order that tbe same obloquy may not rest on the London subscribers ns at the last October election , when with three last applicants only ono was returned , and that a half Provincial case . Hoping I shall be in time to secure sufficient votes to eusnre their success ,

I remain , yours fraternally , CIIAKT . ES JOHN PERCEVAL 8 Thurloc-placo , S . W ., 29 th January 1879 .

Things One Would Like To Know.

THINGS ONE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW .

To the Editor of'Lun FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —With reference to tho last paragraph of "FORTE ' S" letter in your issue of the 11 th instant , 1 beg to point onfc that in respect or the two things therein mentioned respecting which he seeks information , there is no law , nor do I see how there possibly cau be any bearing npon the points raised . At least , it

would be ridiculous to expect that the laws of a large and important Society like ours should condescend to notice such trivial matters ; and , as a matter of fact , they do not notice them . All that Masons can do , therefore , is to fall back on usage or the prescription of those entitled to speak with authority . If these fail to supply us with the requisite information ou such questions , then , it strikes me

we have nothing left ns but to fall back on common sense . It is this last which , in my opinion , such guide us in attempting an answer to " FORTE ' S " first question , namely , "Whether a Muster can compel his Wardens to stand whenever he ( the Master ) rises to address the Lodge , whatever may bo tho occasion , or howsoever frequently he may do so . " We know there are occasions when , as a

matter ol fact , and very properly , the Wardens do stand when the Master nddres .--cs the Lodge , and common souse tolls ns there rnu-t be occasions when there is absolutely no reason why they should stand , ana when in fact they do not stand . I will give a ease in illustration . A Master may rise to address his Lodge , not in his capacity of Master , that is , officially , bat as a member of the Lod ° -e

on somo point of general interest , and having nothing wha'over ro do with tho conduct of tho Lodge . In such case it wou'd !»•» r « licnlous to suppose that a Wardan should rise from his seat . Tho roason why , in my humble judgment , the Wardens stand when the Master addresses tho Lodge , is that they and ho together govern it , and this triune government is illustrated by tho upstanding together of thoso three Officers .

As to " whether a P . M . or Officer of one Lodge when visit ing another Lodge is justified in wearing his collar of offico , " I say , on the authority of Oliver , decidedly not . He does not so lay it down absolutely , but ho speaks clearly and reasonably enough . At p 118 of his il / fisdiiie Jurispriuleitei ' , in speaking of the " Place . of Visitors , " he remarks in reference- to assigning visitors thoir proper places

and the embarrassment this sometimes causes , " it is scarcely en regie for any visitor , being an Officer of another Lodge , to wear his collar nnd jewel , as it might create somo dpgreo of confusion . " " FORTE ' " experience , and that , of many bret . hrec , confirms tho reasonableness of this view . In the caso of a Past Master , his apron sufficiently indicates his rank without tho collar and jewel , so that to wear the latter emblem is a needless display of fiuery . Fraternally yours , " Q . "

To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAI : SIR AND BROTHER , —In answer to "FORTE ' S" further query in last week ' s uninher of tho FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE , permit me to point out that the Constitutions aro tolerably explicit ns lo the clothing which Provincial Grand Officers , both Past and Present , may wear at Masonic meetings . At p 51 it is laid down " that they "

( the P . G . Officers ) " are wot by such appointment members of tho grand lodge , nor do they take any rank out of thoir district , though they are entitled to wear their clothing as provincial grand officers , or past provincial gv * wd officers , at all masonic meetings . " This , however , docs not apply t > provincial grand stewards , who are only " members of their own provincial grand lodgo ; but when out of

office they aro no longer members , or entitled to wear crimson aprons and collars , or jewels , nor are provincial grand stewards entitled to wear crimson aprons or collars out of their own province . " Thus , Past Provincial Grand Stewards wear no distinctive clothing . Provincial Grand Stewards may wear their crimson aprons nnd collars only in their own province , and other Provinei . il Grand

Officers , Past or Present , may wear their clothing as such ut " all Masonic meetings . " At p 121 it is stated that " past provincial grand officers , " as well as "past grand officers , " " may wear the jewel of their respective offices , on a blue enamelled oval medal . " The Provincial Grand Master is a member of Grand Lodgo according to Oliver , who , at p 282 of his ilfasontc Jurisprudence , in speaking of

the Deputy Provincial Grand Master , says , that , " unlike the . Pro . vincial Grand Master , he" ( tho Deputy Provincial Grand Master ) " is not a member of Grand Lodge . " Tho samo learned writer at pp 279-S 0 of the same work , with refereuce to the " clothing of Provincial Grand Officers , " remarks that the rest of the P . G . Officers —that is , with the exception of the P . G . Stewards— " are at liberty

to appear in their official costume when attending their own Lodgo or visiting any other ; a privilege which the Masters and vVardens of privato Lodges do not legally possess "— " FORTE " doubtless will note this in reference to oue of his former questions , and tho reasou assigned by Oliver—" because it is absolutely necessary to tho well , being of a Lodgo that its ruling Officers should bo broadly distin .

guished by their collars and jewels , which would be materially obstructed if other Masters aud Wardens were in attendance as visitors , decorated in tho same manner . The purple brethren have the further immunity of wearing their clothing at other Provincial Grand Lodges , although they cannot attend these ex officio , even though they be subscribing members to both provinces ; aud if thev

attend another Provincial Grand Lodge as qualified members by reason of being Past Masters within the Province , it would be more decorous to appear in the simple blue clothing of that office , because a provincial office in one district does not convey rank in another . " And a little further on they" —Provincial Grand Officers— " wear their clothing as a matter of courtesy only in the

Grand Lodge , because they attend there as Past Masters or VVardens , and consequently must exhibit the proper clothing of those offices over that of thoir Provincial Mark . They are competent , however , after their official term has expired , to wear their official clothing , so longns they continne thoir subscription to any Lo Ige , " though a ., to tho legality of this limitation , Dr . Oliver expresses himself as

uncertain , whilst he is " sure that it i . s expedient . " As to Past Provincial Grand Officers , whilo the Constitutions Siy they " may wear tin ] jewel of their respective offices on a blue enamelled oval medal "—as I have quoted before—thus leaving it optional , Olivur remarks that they " are not , howovor , allowed to wear the regular official jewel , but must substitute a blue enamelled ova ! medal , churned

with the emblem of iheir office . " For myself , [ do not see the reason for converting the optional " may" into the imperative " must . " Surely , if the Constitutions had intended the latter , they would h . ivo so stated it clearly and emphatically . While I am on these matters I may as well essay an answer to "A J . W . ' s" query , about which I do not think it is possible there

can be a moment ' s doubt . Tho Constitutions are clear upon the point . "No brother shall be admitted a member of a lodge without a regular proposition in open lodge , nor until his name , occupation , and pla . ee of abode , as well as thu name and number of the lodge of which hi : is or was last a member , or iu which he was

initiated , shall have , been sunt to all the members in the summons for the next regular lodgo meeting . " Hero them ia no question as between may and must , for the law lays it down absolutely that tin ; pro-requisite conditions enumerated mnst be complied with . " Xo brother shall be admitted" is as absolute a declaration as waa ever formulated , and it occurs ; to me that if any deviation from thi 3