Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Grand Lodge Jurisdiction And New South Wales.
GRAND LODGE JURISDICTION AND NEW SOUTH WALES .
THE Canadian Craftsman writes somewhat angrily respecting our recent article on the New South Wales question , and we confess we are unable to congratulate it either on its logic or the tone in which it writes . We stated clearly and emphatically , and , we believe , to the
satisfaction of all who understand the question , that the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland and Scotland , have concurrent jurisdiction in the colonies and dependencies of the Crown , the exceptions , of course , being understood to be those colonies and dependencies which have independent
Masonic jurisdictions of their own , as iu the case of Canada , Quebec , British Columbia , and the like . We do not know , nor do we care , who will trouble themselves to controvert this statement , for it is not a statement of opinion , but a statement of fact , which is often exactly the reverse . All the Masonic world knows that from time to
time the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland , and Scotland accede to the petitions submitted to them severally for the grant of warrants for new Lodges , and all that portion of the Masonic world which retains a modicum of common sense must be perfectly well aware that , where the
petitions are granted , the Lodges which result therefrom must necessarily hold under the several jurisdictions which organise them . This appears to us to be so clear a propo sition , that we feel almost ashamed of having laid any sort or kind of stress upon it .
It is in this wise that the District and Provincial Grand Lodges established by the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland , and Scotland have come into being , and considering the fact , that the Lodges on the roll of these District and Provincial Grand Lodges have sought , and obtained the
warrants of the several constitutions from the said three Grand Lodges , it seems to us , to put the case in the mildest possible form , a little out of place to demand of the latter that they should summarily forego their rights at the
demand of certain Colonial brethren , merely because a small , and we cannot refrain from saying , a comparatively insignificant section of the latter are desirous of establishing themselves as an independent and sovereign body . Surely those who claim for themselves freedom of action in a
matter of this kind will accord to others the same freedom . If A and twenty other brethren say they wish to be independent , they cannot , in conscience , deny to B and a hundred other brethren the opposite right . We look upon it as a matter of common sense that if a half score Lodges resolve
among themselves that they will establish a Grand Lodge ot their own , the formidable majority which yet remains , and musters some seventy Lodges has , at least , some voice in * ne matter . All of them derived their origin from the same sovereign bodies . All of them , for a number of years J ^ ore or less considerable , have worked contentedly under
e respective jurisdictions of the same bodies ; and , conse-^ ° % > 'I have an equal voice in the important question 7 ™" or not a change of jurisdiction shall be made . the Canadian Craftsman is pleased to allow , " for the ake of argument , " but not on the grounds we have stated .
g ^ at the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland , and cot / and exercise concurrent Masonic jurisdiction over the WV Co , oaie 3 / ' ^> at when a " Grand Lodge has been ( t gitimatel y formed in any one of these colonies , " then 18 authorit y therein ceases to exist , except through
Grand Lodge Jurisdiction And New South Wales.
courtesy , as in the case of the three English Lodges now existing in Montreal , within the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Quebec . " Passing over , for the moment , the fact thafc these three Lodges exercised their undoubted right of holding aloof from the movement which led to the
establishment of tho Grand Lodge of Canada over a quarter of a century since , and that the said G . Lodge of Canada acquiesced , honourably and courteously , in the resolution adopted by the said three Montreal Lodges ; passing over the further important fact , that our Grand Lodge is only
awaiting the adoption of a similar resolution by the Grand Lodge of Quebec in respect of the said three Lodges in order to recognise the independence of tho latter Grand Body ; we repeat that , passing over , momentarily , these facts , we utterly fail to see what bearing any legitimate
argument , or the argument of our contemporary , has upon the case of the self-styled Grand Lodge of New South Wales . In tbe case of the Grand Lodge of Canada and other originally Provincial Grand Lodges which ai'e now independent Grand Lodges , the movement in favour of
independence was general ; the exceptions to snch movement being few in number . The newly-elected independent bodies , which thus arose , most loyally respected the right of the minority to retain their old allegiance , to England , Ireland , or Scotland as the case may have been , just on
the same principle as they claimed to exercise their undoubted right to separate , if they felt so disposed . But what has this to do with the case of New South Wales , where , to put the matter in the most favourable light for the aggressive Grand Body , it only consists of about
thirteen out of some eighty regularly-constituted Lodges holding under England , Ireland , and Scotland ? It is news to ns that a paltry minority—paltry , be it understood , in the sense of numerical inferiority—is to be at
liberty to overset the wishes of a vast majority , and dpclare a colony unoccupied , when there were already established within its limits between four and five times as many Lodges which arc desirous of retaining their allegiance as there are Lodges seeking to establish their independence .
Our contemporary complains that the District Grand Master of England " and the Provincial Grand Master of Scotland for New South Wales " threatened suspension to , and did illegally suspend brethren who participated in tbe formation of the Grand Lodge of New South Wales , nvd .
thus deterred many at that time from joining m the movement , which has since accomplished so much to advance the interests of Freemasonry in that colony . " But would not the Provincial authorities in question have been strangely and discreditably neglectful of the welfare of
their subordinates had they not adopted such a step ? It has never been shown that the great majority , or anything like even a nominal majority , of the English , Irish , and Scotch Lodges were in favour of the new movement , and until that can be clone , wo hold that the Provincial Grand
Masters acted justly and discreetly . What would the Grand Master of Quebec say if half a score of its subordinate Lodges—to use a vulgar phrase— " set up shop " for themselves , and laughed at the Grand Lodge of Quebec for its attempted snporession of their doings ? Had the
close on seventy Lodges which yet retain their allegiance elected to throw it off , while the small minority which has revolted had chosen to remain , the position would have been altered , and we doubt not our Grand Lodge authorities , and those of Ireland and Scotland , would have done all in their power , in this as in former instances , to promote
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Grand Lodge Jurisdiction And New South Wales.
GRAND LODGE JURISDICTION AND NEW SOUTH WALES .
THE Canadian Craftsman writes somewhat angrily respecting our recent article on the New South Wales question , and we confess we are unable to congratulate it either on its logic or the tone in which it writes . We stated clearly and emphatically , and , we believe , to the
satisfaction of all who understand the question , that the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland and Scotland , have concurrent jurisdiction in the colonies and dependencies of the Crown , the exceptions , of course , being understood to be those colonies and dependencies which have independent
Masonic jurisdictions of their own , as iu the case of Canada , Quebec , British Columbia , and the like . We do not know , nor do we care , who will trouble themselves to controvert this statement , for it is not a statement of opinion , but a statement of fact , which is often exactly the reverse . All the Masonic world knows that from time to
time the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland , and Scotland accede to the petitions submitted to them severally for the grant of warrants for new Lodges , and all that portion of the Masonic world which retains a modicum of common sense must be perfectly well aware that , where the
petitions are granted , the Lodges which result therefrom must necessarily hold under the several jurisdictions which organise them . This appears to us to be so clear a propo sition , that we feel almost ashamed of having laid any sort or kind of stress upon it .
It is in this wise that the District and Provincial Grand Lodges established by the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland , and Scotland have come into being , and considering the fact , that the Lodges on the roll of these District and Provincial Grand Lodges have sought , and obtained the
warrants of the several constitutions from the said three Grand Lodges , it seems to us , to put the case in the mildest possible form , a little out of place to demand of the latter that they should summarily forego their rights at the
demand of certain Colonial brethren , merely because a small , and we cannot refrain from saying , a comparatively insignificant section of the latter are desirous of establishing themselves as an independent and sovereign body . Surely those who claim for themselves freedom of action in a
matter of this kind will accord to others the same freedom . If A and twenty other brethren say they wish to be independent , they cannot , in conscience , deny to B and a hundred other brethren the opposite right . We look upon it as a matter of common sense that if a half score Lodges resolve
among themselves that they will establish a Grand Lodge ot their own , the formidable majority which yet remains , and musters some seventy Lodges has , at least , some voice in * ne matter . All of them derived their origin from the same sovereign bodies . All of them , for a number of years J ^ ore or less considerable , have worked contentedly under
e respective jurisdictions of the same bodies ; and , conse-^ ° % > 'I have an equal voice in the important question 7 ™" or not a change of jurisdiction shall be made . the Canadian Craftsman is pleased to allow , " for the ake of argument , " but not on the grounds we have stated .
g ^ at the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland , and cot / and exercise concurrent Masonic jurisdiction over the WV Co , oaie 3 / ' ^> at when a " Grand Lodge has been ( t gitimatel y formed in any one of these colonies , " then 18 authorit y therein ceases to exist , except through
Grand Lodge Jurisdiction And New South Wales.
courtesy , as in the case of the three English Lodges now existing in Montreal , within the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Quebec . " Passing over , for the moment , the fact thafc these three Lodges exercised their undoubted right of holding aloof from the movement which led to the
establishment of tho Grand Lodge of Canada over a quarter of a century since , and that the said G . Lodge of Canada acquiesced , honourably and courteously , in the resolution adopted by the said three Montreal Lodges ; passing over the further important fact , that our Grand Lodge is only
awaiting the adoption of a similar resolution by the Grand Lodge of Quebec in respect of the said three Lodges in order to recognise the independence of tho latter Grand Body ; we repeat that , passing over , momentarily , these facts , we utterly fail to see what bearing any legitimate
argument , or the argument of our contemporary , has upon the case of the self-styled Grand Lodge of New South Wales . In tbe case of the Grand Lodge of Canada and other originally Provincial Grand Lodges which ai'e now independent Grand Lodges , the movement in favour of
independence was general ; the exceptions to snch movement being few in number . The newly-elected independent bodies , which thus arose , most loyally respected the right of the minority to retain their old allegiance , to England , Ireland , or Scotland as the case may have been , just on
the same principle as they claimed to exercise their undoubted right to separate , if they felt so disposed . But what has this to do with the case of New South Wales , where , to put the matter in the most favourable light for the aggressive Grand Body , it only consists of about
thirteen out of some eighty regularly-constituted Lodges holding under England , Ireland , and Scotland ? It is news to ns that a paltry minority—paltry , be it understood , in the sense of numerical inferiority—is to be at
liberty to overset the wishes of a vast majority , and dpclare a colony unoccupied , when there were already established within its limits between four and five times as many Lodges which arc desirous of retaining their allegiance as there are Lodges seeking to establish their independence .
Our contemporary complains that the District Grand Master of England " and the Provincial Grand Master of Scotland for New South Wales " threatened suspension to , and did illegally suspend brethren who participated in tbe formation of the Grand Lodge of New South Wales , nvd .
thus deterred many at that time from joining m the movement , which has since accomplished so much to advance the interests of Freemasonry in that colony . " But would not the Provincial authorities in question have been strangely and discreditably neglectful of the welfare of
their subordinates had they not adopted such a step ? It has never been shown that the great majority , or anything like even a nominal majority , of the English , Irish , and Scotch Lodges were in favour of the new movement , and until that can be clone , wo hold that the Provincial Grand
Masters acted justly and discreetly . What would the Grand Master of Quebec say if half a score of its subordinate Lodges—to use a vulgar phrase— " set up shop " for themselves , and laughed at the Grand Lodge of Quebec for its attempted snporession of their doings ? Had the
close on seventy Lodges which yet retain their allegiance elected to throw it off , while the small minority which has revolted had chosen to remain , the position would have been altered , and we doubt not our Grand Lodge authorities , and those of Ireland and Scotland , would have done all in their power , in this as in former instances , to promote