-
Articles/Ads
Article MASONIC BENEVOLENCE IN 1882. Page 1 of 2 Article MASONIC BENEVOLENCE IN 1882. Page 1 of 2 Article Untitled Page 1 of 1
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Masonic Benevolence In 1882.
MASONIC BENEVOLENCE IN 1882 .
WE publish elsewhere a letter from " Q , " a frequent correspondent of ours , and his remarks on the subject of Masonic Benevolence , so far as they concern our Institutions , not so much in relation to the past and previous years , but with a view to the future , are well worthy of consideration . We know from our o-wn experience that
a large number of brethren are of the same opinion as he is as to the policy which should be adopted for some years to como , and that , having latterl y increased so enormously ttw liabilities of our said Institutions , we are in duty bound to proceed with caution , if only that we may be the better
assured of our ability to maintain them at their present strength . This view is at all events one which we cannot afford well to despise . We have no right to expect that brethren who have already given freely and frequently out ¦ of their means in order to provide for the education of our
boys and girls , and make comfortable the declining years of the old folks , will go on repeating their subscriptions regularly ; for it is not b y ^ any means apparent that the enthusiasm of the minority of the Craft , which has done this good work , has seriously affected the disposition of the majority to take their share of it . Brethren who are as accustomed as we
are to scan narrowly the lists of subscri ptions announced at successive Anniversary Festivals must be well aware that it invariably happens that the Lodges in London which ^ ave given towards one list , go on giving towards the next an d the next and the next , and that the appearance of a
new Lodge—new that is to say , in the sense of not having before appeared , or but seldom—is a matter of infrequent occurrence . Newly-created Lodges are proud of signalising the commencement of their career by giving liberally , but these are necessarily limited in numbers . Moreover , in a
few years they cease to be new , and the efforts they make to raise Lodge subscriptions become in time somewhat less enthusiastic , or more probably still , they feel it is necessary they should have a little breathing time before renewing their assistance to the Charities . As to the
Provinces , some make a point of giving regularly and liberally , and others , when they do contribute , do so handsomely , while there are yet others who , having local charity associations of their own , are only able to spare from time to time a modest donation to one or other of the
Central Institutions . There is also , we regret to say , a fourth category , in which are included the Provinces which rarely , if ever , contribute anything . To state the case summarily , it will be found that the duty of providing from year to year the wherewith to keep our Charities in
good working condition is m the mam discharged by the same Lodges in London and the same Provinces , and it is not going too far to suggest that a day may come when these Lodges and Provinces may grow tired of these selfimposed responsibilities , and the alternative be forced upon
ns , either of looking for help where hitherto we have looked in vain or but to little purpose , or of reducing the number of those who derive benefit from our Charities . We allow these are not the most agreeable suggestions to offer , bufc they are suggestions which it would be an act of foll y for us to ignore , and for this reason , ''Q . ' s" letter , which
Masonic Benevolence In 1882.
deals pretty exhaustively with the figure part of this question , is the more worthy of our consideration . Naturally enough he begins by speaking in laudatory terms of the results of last year ' s Masonic Benevolence .
Over £ 40 , 000 from subscriptions and donations is unquestionably a magnificent sum . What , however , he mostly directs his attention to is , the extent of the liabilities to which we stand committed and the extent to
which those liabilities are provided for out of permanent income . He estimates the average annual expenditure of the three Institutions as amounting to £ 33 , 500 namely , on account of the Benevolent £ 13 , 500 , of which £ 11 , 600 is for Annuities ; Girls' School , £ 10 , 000 ; Boys' School ,
£ 10 , 000 ; and those -who have seen the several reports must be well aware that this is by no means an excessive estimate . To meet this outlay there is , he points out , a permanent income amounting , in round figures to £ 5 , 900 , of which , some £ 3 , 590 belongs to fche Benevolent , £ 1 , 620
to the Girls' School , and £ 690 to the Boys' School . That is to say , the permanent liability in respect of the three Institutions taken all together is about five and twothirds as much as the permanent income they receive together , while , if we take them separately , the liability of the
Benevolent stands to its permanent income in the ratio of about three and three quarters to one ; the liability of the Girls' School to its permanent income in that of over six to one ; and the liability of the Boys' School to its permanent income in that of , as nearly as possible , thirteen and
a half to one . To put the case less technically ; the Benevolent Institution has £ 1 of fixed income to meet every £ 3 15 s of liability , the Girls' School £ 1 of fixed income to meet over £ 6 of liability , and the Boys' School £ 1 of fixed income to meet £ 13 10 s of liability , while if we take
all three together there is £ 1 of income to meet £ 5 13 s 4 d of liability . His contention is , that under these circumstances , which he states briefly , but we have stated more fully , before we think of extending the sphere of our operations , it is our bounden duty to reduce this
serious inequality between fixed income and liability . He argues , reasonably enough , that in the event of a war , a commercial crisis , or a succession of bad harvests , it would be useless to expect that the large sums which we have succeeded of late in raising
by voluntary subscriptions would continue to be received . He points out that we narrowly escaped a great war in 1878 , and suggests the possibility that the next time there is a serious difference among the Powers we may nofc be equally fortunate . He implies , if he does not particularly
state it , 'that if either , or more than one , of these unpleasant contingencies should overtake us , whatever deficiency might be caused through the loss of voluntary assistance would have to be made good out of our investments , and this would necessarily have the effect of reducing the
permanent income that is now available . We have spoken of his argument as being reasonable enough , and we will venture to emphasise this by adding that in the views to which he gives expression there is nothing of an
exaggerated character . He advocates caution in our proceedings , and having regard to what we have done in the way of increase during the Grand Mastership of the Prince of Wales , we cannot say he is wrong
Ar00101
| ? T ) T 3 Q'Ci / GRATEFUL X fiAHA A XU _ J : to io V COMFORT W IJUVV / A .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Masonic Benevolence In 1882.
MASONIC BENEVOLENCE IN 1882 .
WE publish elsewhere a letter from " Q , " a frequent correspondent of ours , and his remarks on the subject of Masonic Benevolence , so far as they concern our Institutions , not so much in relation to the past and previous years , but with a view to the future , are well worthy of consideration . We know from our o-wn experience that
a large number of brethren are of the same opinion as he is as to the policy which should be adopted for some years to como , and that , having latterl y increased so enormously ttw liabilities of our said Institutions , we are in duty bound to proceed with caution , if only that we may be the better
assured of our ability to maintain them at their present strength . This view is at all events one which we cannot afford well to despise . We have no right to expect that brethren who have already given freely and frequently out ¦ of their means in order to provide for the education of our
boys and girls , and make comfortable the declining years of the old folks , will go on repeating their subscriptions regularly ; for it is not b y ^ any means apparent that the enthusiasm of the minority of the Craft , which has done this good work , has seriously affected the disposition of the majority to take their share of it . Brethren who are as accustomed as we
are to scan narrowly the lists of subscri ptions announced at successive Anniversary Festivals must be well aware that it invariably happens that the Lodges in London which ^ ave given towards one list , go on giving towards the next an d the next and the next , and that the appearance of a
new Lodge—new that is to say , in the sense of not having before appeared , or but seldom—is a matter of infrequent occurrence . Newly-created Lodges are proud of signalising the commencement of their career by giving liberally , but these are necessarily limited in numbers . Moreover , in a
few years they cease to be new , and the efforts they make to raise Lodge subscriptions become in time somewhat less enthusiastic , or more probably still , they feel it is necessary they should have a little breathing time before renewing their assistance to the Charities . As to the
Provinces , some make a point of giving regularly and liberally , and others , when they do contribute , do so handsomely , while there are yet others who , having local charity associations of their own , are only able to spare from time to time a modest donation to one or other of the
Central Institutions . There is also , we regret to say , a fourth category , in which are included the Provinces which rarely , if ever , contribute anything . To state the case summarily , it will be found that the duty of providing from year to year the wherewith to keep our Charities in
good working condition is m the mam discharged by the same Lodges in London and the same Provinces , and it is not going too far to suggest that a day may come when these Lodges and Provinces may grow tired of these selfimposed responsibilities , and the alternative be forced upon
ns , either of looking for help where hitherto we have looked in vain or but to little purpose , or of reducing the number of those who derive benefit from our Charities . We allow these are not the most agreeable suggestions to offer , bufc they are suggestions which it would be an act of foll y for us to ignore , and for this reason , ''Q . ' s" letter , which
Masonic Benevolence In 1882.
deals pretty exhaustively with the figure part of this question , is the more worthy of our consideration . Naturally enough he begins by speaking in laudatory terms of the results of last year ' s Masonic Benevolence .
Over £ 40 , 000 from subscriptions and donations is unquestionably a magnificent sum . What , however , he mostly directs his attention to is , the extent of the liabilities to which we stand committed and the extent to
which those liabilities are provided for out of permanent income . He estimates the average annual expenditure of the three Institutions as amounting to £ 33 , 500 namely , on account of the Benevolent £ 13 , 500 , of which £ 11 , 600 is for Annuities ; Girls' School , £ 10 , 000 ; Boys' School ,
£ 10 , 000 ; and those -who have seen the several reports must be well aware that this is by no means an excessive estimate . To meet this outlay there is , he points out , a permanent income amounting , in round figures to £ 5 , 900 , of which , some £ 3 , 590 belongs to fche Benevolent , £ 1 , 620
to the Girls' School , and £ 690 to the Boys' School . That is to say , the permanent liability in respect of the three Institutions taken all together is about five and twothirds as much as the permanent income they receive together , while , if we take them separately , the liability of the
Benevolent stands to its permanent income in the ratio of about three and three quarters to one ; the liability of the Girls' School to its permanent income in that of over six to one ; and the liability of the Boys' School to its permanent income in that of , as nearly as possible , thirteen and
a half to one . To put the case less technically ; the Benevolent Institution has £ 1 of fixed income to meet every £ 3 15 s of liability , the Girls' School £ 1 of fixed income to meet over £ 6 of liability , and the Boys' School £ 1 of fixed income to meet £ 13 10 s of liability , while if we take
all three together there is £ 1 of income to meet £ 5 13 s 4 d of liability . His contention is , that under these circumstances , which he states briefly , but we have stated more fully , before we think of extending the sphere of our operations , it is our bounden duty to reduce this
serious inequality between fixed income and liability . He argues , reasonably enough , that in the event of a war , a commercial crisis , or a succession of bad harvests , it would be useless to expect that the large sums which we have succeeded of late in raising
by voluntary subscriptions would continue to be received . He points out that we narrowly escaped a great war in 1878 , and suggests the possibility that the next time there is a serious difference among the Powers we may nofc be equally fortunate . He implies , if he does not particularly
state it , 'that if either , or more than one , of these unpleasant contingencies should overtake us , whatever deficiency might be caused through the loss of voluntary assistance would have to be made good out of our investments , and this would necessarily have the effect of reducing the
permanent income that is now available . We have spoken of his argument as being reasonable enough , and we will venture to emphasise this by adding that in the views to which he gives expression there is nothing of an
exaggerated character . He advocates caution in our proceedings , and having regard to what we have done in the way of increase during the Grand Mastership of the Prince of Wales , we cannot say he is wrong
Ar00101
| ? T ) T 3 Q'Ci / GRATEFUL X fiAHA A XU _ J : to io V COMFORT W IJUVV / A .