The Increase Of Lodges.

THE INCREASE OF LODGES .

FREEMASONRY is extending on every side of us , under our genial English jurisdiction , and the question may fairly be asked , and as properly answered—is it for good ? In reply to such a query , we feel very sanguine and certain

that the increase of Lodges amongst us is both reasonable and advantageous , and even necessary for the Craft at large . There are those , we know , who take a comparatively contrary view of the matter . There are some

good brethren of ours , ( fault-finders , cavillers and cynics always exist ) , who deem the extension of our Lodge Roll , striking and rapid as it has been of late years , as matter for doubt and discussion . Indeed , we have heard such a

policy openly questioned , and even blamed . We confess that we entirely dissent from any such views or conclusions , arguments wo can hardly term them , as all such objectors base their criticism on most airy and impalpable reasons ,

and which , when tested or analysed , are found at once to be the veriest gossamer , both in texture , force and reality . Indeed , the objections to such Lodge increase are purely sentimental , and are met and confuted at once bv

numberless considerations , which demonstrate forcibly how safe , on the contrary , and how seasonable are such concessions to the wishes and wants of our Brotherhood , and how

rational and salutary is that well-ordered increase of our Lodges which is going on in our English jurisdiction , as we think for the benefit of Freemasonry , and the welfare of the Craft .

We have heard , for instance , from time to time , such asseverations as the following , hastily made , but weakly urged , which have always appeared to us to be , ( we say it in all deference to those who differ from us . ) the

Quintessence of sciolism , as regards the facts and conditions of the case , in respect of the needs and wishes of the Craft on the one hand , and the exigencies and position of Freemasonry generally on the other .

borne of our readers , like ourselves , may have heard it said : " Some of our Lodges are weak ; it is better to prop U P old and weakly Lodges than create new ones . "

It has been contended : " We are yielding to a special tendency , a vicious eagerness , to create new Lodges , to make office for particular and favoured personalities . "

We have listened to grave assertions , " that we are undermining existing Lodges by the competition of youngei

We have even heard it put forward , " that our Grand Lod ge system is becoming cumbrous and far too large , and that we are giving too great an extension to an already unmanageable jurisdiction . "

J- nese averments appear to us , when we carefully consider mem , to be after all nothing more , and nothing less , than nopeless platitudes . We have heard them over and over

gain , and tho results have proved them to be one and all utterl y pointless and groundless , while facts and figures ave shown them to be unreasonable in themselves , and . to Te st on no solid foundation at all .

ah ^ tlle y cor Be before us once and again as airy snadows , constituting that universal " output " of ff 0 r , ? l 0 CUti 0 D " aDd " tape ' " a ] lthe world over ; that ° Q old manly resistance to advance , improvement and evelopment which is so familiar to us all as in hn nlmnit

pla - ' Vpecl " iu form and substance > and which , out of 5 , lu a 11 things mundane , is essentially "bad form "in f reemason ry .

The Increase Of Lodges.

These often cherished fallacies , tS familiar " on some lips " as household words , " " slain , twice slain , " by the honest advance of right and civilization , still crop up again and again as fresh as ever , and as the warfare ia ever going on between crass ignorance and elevating education , between

error and truth , between darkness and light , between barbarism and civilization , so we , in Freemasonry , often have to meet the same resistant influence , to what the changes of time , and the requirements of the hour , imperatively demand . Yes , when we take all auch objections

as it were , one by one ; pull them to pieces , dissect them with logic's unfaltering and unfailing " scapula , " we find out at once how nebulous and flimsy they really are , hardly worth the labour of thought , certainly not deserving the

vivacity ot discussion , but simply demanding tranquil dismission and happy forgetfulness . Because a Lodge is weak , through some inherent fault of its own , we are therefore to refuse to form a new , strong ,

active energetic body , is a representation of sophistry so transparent as not to deserve a moment of mental toil in its confutation . When Lodges are so weak that they cannot keep up their income , or do the work of the Masonic Fraternity , we may assume , as an undoubted " factor " in

the respect of the actual realities of the case , that if Lodges pass out of active life and interested work because the Brethren are indifferent to their support , and care not to belong to them , there is something very wrong

somewhere , something very faulty and memcient in their administration , their organisation and their outcome ! Weak Lodges , failing Lodges , faltering Lodges , must , in the way of nature and Freemasonry , give place to hardier plants , to

real sappy offshoots from the Parent Tree . The supposition of Masonic nepotism is , we feel sure , unfounded and unfair ; cases no doubt there are , where from local circumstances , or special reasons , brethren desire a certain Brother , be he

who he may , to be placed at the head of some " new " venture . Has any one a right to blame them for so thinking and acting ? Surely they are the best judges of the matter ! If not they , who can better be ?

In all cases , as a general and safe rule , the Lodge has a good reason for its selection of Bro . A , B , or C , to rule over them ; and whether it strikes an outsider or not ; tbe

choice is not the question at all ; it is simply whether the selection so made , is for the harmony ofthe brethren and the welfare of the Lodge .

There is often , we beg to observe , from long experience , a great and seasonable necessity for a " swarm , " or emigration , from an old and numerous Lodge , to a new and promising body , especially when ,, owing to prosperity and numbers , all hopes of reasonable

preferment are very distant , and for years , to many young , active , zealous and well instructed Masons . As regards the competition between new and old

Lodges , we hold it in the nature of things to be both healthy and reasonable in Freemasonry as in due proportion in other matters . Brethren who do not get on in one Lodge may and probably do get on in another , and this wholesome and often absolutely necessary increase of Lodges

prevents anything like a Lodge " monopoly , " and that one danger the formation of a " ring" or " canons " within a Lodge , which mostly acts as a deterrent unavoidably to many candidates calculated in every way to make excellent Masons .

We do not think we need have any fear now as to the question of the possible comfortable management of the