Resignation Of Membership.

RESIGNATION OF MEMBERSHIP .

THE decision arrived at by the brethren assembled at the last Quarterly Communication of United Grand Lodge , coupled with the opinions expressed by the Grand Registrar and others , on the subject of resignation , will set at rest a point which has been a subject of contention among a section of the Craft for some time past . Strange ideas exist in regard to

a Mason ' s right of withdrawal from his Lodge , but it seems to us the ruling of the late Bro . Mclntyre is in every respect the correct method of settling the question . This ruling , which the present Grand Registrar tells the Craft has always been held as accepted law , is to the effect that Masonry , being a voluntary Society , the moment a brother announces

his resignation and communicates it to his Lodge , he ceases to be a member thereof . There is no option open to any one in the matter . If a brother resigns , the Lodge mnst accept his resignation , and he , on his part , must abide by his act , even though he may regret it a few moments afterwards . The whole subject has been raised in Grand Lodge on an appeal from a Past Master of the Yictoria in Burmah Lodge , No . 832 , Rangoon , who lodged a

complaint against his Lodge for permitting one of its Past Masters to withdraw his resignation of membership after it had been regularly announced in writing to the Secretary . The complaint was , in the first instance , submitted to the Grand Master of the District , and he took upon himself to dismiss the complaint—an error of judgment on his part , as has

now been decided by Grand Lodge . The complaint was justifiable , and the Lodge was in error in allowing the withdrawal of a regularly communicated resignation ; which , it must be understood , requires no formal acceptance by a Lodge , and is not at any time a discussable subject , for if a brother once tenders his resignation his membership thereupon

ceases , although it is customary for the Lodge to formally accept it—a practice which the recent discussion in Grand Lodge has shown to be wholly unnecessary . This rendering of Masonic law may have some peculiar effects , as we think it is not an uncommon practice for resignations to be tendered , and subsequently withdrawn , although we suppose that in

such cases , when they are withdrawn , with the sanction of the members , the matter settles itself , all concerned being parties to the agreement . On the other hand , last week ' s decision shows that an individual member of the Lodge may upset the wish of the remaining members in this respect , and can

compel the resignation to be carried into effect if he chooses to assert himself , for such is the outcome of the whole subject , as decided by Grand Lodge . We do not think the full effect of this ruling has been generally appreciated in the past , and it will be well if some of those who are likely to tender their resignation , if everything does not proceed just as

they wish it in their Lodge , will bear m mind for the future that it is not a question of the resignation being accepted or otherwise , by the entire Lodge , but rather the possibility of its being enforced by one particular member . We will not go so far as to say that it is a common practice for members to threaten

resignation if they do not get all they desire , but such a course often occurs—it is even carried into effect up to a certain point , the resigning brother flattering himself that the Lodge will not agree to the resignation being accepted , or even if they do so at first there is the possibility of matters being

patched up afterwards . But we do not believe tins class of brethren ever thought it was in the power of one member , of the Lodge to enforce their resignation , neither do we think the general body of the Craft were aware of the full effect of the particular law which governs the matter . It is certainly putting tremendous power in the hands of the minority , of a single member in fact , and appears to forcibly

impress on the Craft the need for caution and thorough determination before expressing a desire to withdraw from a Lodge . We have known instances where brethren have resigned immediately on the announcement of an adverse vote , or -on some unexpected proposition being brought forward and carried , and they have regretted their action almost before they had time to leave the Lodge . Some of their friends have

persuaded them to come back , withdraw their hasty resignation , and go on as before . But did it ever strike the members that any one among them could have compelled the completion of the resignation , and the expulsion from the Lodge of the brother concerned ? In many cases we may say , decidedly not , and we are convinced that only a small minority of Craftsmen ever recognised the full power they

possessed in this respect . We have even known a proposal to allow the withdrawal of a resignation to go to the vote , and to be opposed—though unsuccessfully , when it now appears that all that was necessary was for one of the objectors to enforce the resignation , which , as we have said , is not an optional subject , to be settled one way or the other , according to the vote of the Lodge , but a matter

governed by the laws of the Craft , and that too in a most definite way . The discussion of this appeal case led to other considerations in regard to retirement , Bro . J . S . Cumberland , for . instance , asking if it was to be understood that once a brother sent in his resignation it was final , and whether , although between the sending in of the resignation and the meeting of his Lodge , an opportunity might occur for doing so ,

he had no power to withdraw it ? This , as Bro . Philbrick said , was asking for a statement of Masonic law outside of that required by the case in hand , but he recognised the importance of the subject by answering the questions addressed to the Grand Lodge . " From the moment amember said , ' I resign , '