Obstructionists.

OBSTRUCTIONISTS .

WERE ifc possible to compile a true and impartial history of the decline of the numerous Institutions which , established in the interests of humanity , have from one ^ cause or another ceased to exist , some strange ancl varied revelations would have to be recorded . . Here an association , to all' outward appearance in a most prosperous

condition , has suddenly been overtaken , as it were , by a storm , and has emerged either a complete wreck , or so far disabled as to require entire , re-organisation . There a society or club , enjoying the respect and approval of the outer world , has , through an apparently insignificant

defect , suddenly found itself in a position from which there was no possibility of escape , and , as a result , ruin has followed . In how many instances disasters of this character could be traced to the action of a small minority , aye , of even a single individual , no one can say , but there can

be iio doubt that many of the most prosperous associations have been brought to an untimely end by the action of one of their number , who , either by making himself obnoxious to the others , or by opposing everything that mi ght be brought forward , has been the means of

driving away those who love peace and harmony . It not unfrequently happens that this obnoxious element shields itself under the guise of desiring to benefit others ; but the experience of the past should be sufficient to disabuse the majority on this point . The man who really acts for the good of his fellows is he who bows to the decision of the

majority , and not only gives way to them in theory , but in thought and action also . It is useless for a man to preach that he has the interests of the whole body of members of a society at heart , and afc the same time to act in such a way as to offend one-half of the number , and

disgust the majority of the remainder * yet there are some who do so act , and whenever a proposition is brought forward to amend or expunge a rule , which , in the opinion of the bulk of those interested , requires alteration , make it their business to impede the endeavours of the others to the utmost of their power . What to do with these obstructionists

is a question that has exercised the minds of all classes , and as ifc seems impossible to define the limits of actual criticism , we imagine it will everremainan unsolved problem . It would be no very difficult task to gather particulars which would conclusively prove how often an obnoxious

member of a club or society has caused the breaking up of the organisation ; indeed , it is well known in club circles that in many instances a dissolution has been forced upon the majority of the -members by the action of one man , there being no other means of excluding him or reducing

him to reason . In most instances these objectionable members of society take particular care to become acquainted with every device , likely to annoy their fellows , without rendering themselves amenable to the penalties provided b y the rules ; ancl , from the frequency with

which they quote the bye-laws , and demand the exercise of this or that privilege , it is very evident they do nofc err from a want of knowledge of their subject . To what , then , can we attribute their continued opposition ? In some cases , no doubt , the individual is naturally of a

quarrelsome disposition , and , were Ave inclined to allow that a man is not master of his passions , we should have to say that he could not help thus annoying others ; but we imagine there are few who would agree with us were we to do so , or who would allow him , under that pretext , to continue his annoy-

Obstructionists.

ance . Others there are who , feeling aggrieved with an individual , act in opposition to all , in tho hope thafc , by so doing , they are causing * pain to tlio particular person with whom they are at variance ; whilo others , again , render themselves obnoxious in consequence of claims they

havo made on fcheir fellows having boon disregarded—their demands , as is most frequently the case , being of snch a nature as to preclude all possibility of their being allowed by men of independent opinion , lint the most dangerous of all is , perhaps , tho man who adopts this means ns tho

stepping-stone to notoriety ; he stands at nothing , and , in pursuance of his object , spares neither friend nor foe . All he aims at is self-glorification , and if thafc . sometimes comes in a form that most men would shrink from , ho appears to glorify himself the more . All he desires is to

create a sensation , and his greatest delight appears to be to justify the unscrupulous means he has adopted to attain the end he had in view , and to rejoice over tho unhappiness or desolation his conduct has caused .

Have we any snch men in Freemasonry ? is a question we should like to have answered in the negative , but were wc to do so wo should not only bo misrepresenting tho case , but should likewise screen a few members of the Order , who should be shunned and avoided throuehout the Craft .

Happily , there are not many men to bo found who disregard the injunction given to every newly initiated brother to settle all differences of opinion outside the doors of the Lodge ; and instances of open revolt are so seldom that when we do unfortunately witness an outbreak , we are the

more impressed with tho idea that tho evil should be rooted out without the least delay . We shall not here detail the various pretexts used by brethren who make themselves obnoxious , or the means thoy adopt , when things assume the worst phase , to annoy their brethren

and disturb the harmony of a Lodge . Doubtless those who have experienced , in fcheir own circle , the evil effects of such un-Masonic behaviour are far too well acquainted with the subject to need any reminders from us , while those with whom nothing has occurred to mar the

harmony that should characterise our assemblies are best left unacquainted with any details beyond those their own imagination can supply . Our object now is to point out the means for remedying tho evil . With this object in view , a brother would natnrally refer us to the Book of

Constitutions for advice , and accordingly we have consulted that authority . Wo there find that a private Lodge has the power to punish , by censure , fine , or exclusion ,

according to its bye-laws , any brother whose behaviour is of such a nature as to disturb the harmony of the Lodge , provided he shall have been thrice formally admonished by the Master without the desired effect havinir been attained .

The power given to the members of a Lodge by this law would appear to be sufficient to meet tho case , were it not for the proviso compelling tho Master to thrice formally

admonish the offender , a condition , the fulfilment of which the very members it is meant to operate nyainsfc conld contrive to render impossible . The remedy hen-by afforded is , however , worthy of trial in any Lodge where there is

a brother who venders himself liable to ['<*> ]; . es \ : ' . lfcics , and , in the event of its failure , and the repetition of tho offence , we have no doubt that a c ' lamuuiieufcion to Grancl Lodge would speedily have the desired " ( feet . The

Master who allows the harmony of his F JO : ' - ; 0 ' IO bo disturbed on more than one occasion by I lie -in' member , in the face of an overwhelming majority , and for no apparent reason , is guilty of a crime , not only to tho Lodge over which he for the time being presides , but to the Craffc afc large . All