-
Articles/Ads
Article THE FREEMASONS' QUARTERLY REVIEW. ← Page 5 of 8 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Freemasons' Quarterly Review.
complisbed by a process less repugnant to my feelings—( loud cheers ) ; and particularly as ( being in doubt whether my acceptance of tbe office of chairman to Dr . Crucefix ' s dinner might be agreeable to him ) , I tendered my resignation after it ivas publicly known in the province that I had consented to preside on this occasion . The P . G . M . openly announced at the P . G . Meeting , at Boston , that I had thus tendered my resignationand as openldeclared that he had refused to accept it
; y ; and urgently requested the continuance of my services in that capacity . I had a right to consider—and I did consider—this concurrence as a tacit acquiescence in the measure which now forms the pretext for my dismissal —( cheers ) . Under these circumstances , I think the P . G . M . ought to have favoured me with some notice of his intentions , that I might have had an opportunity of taking leave of the officers whom I had myself appointed ; that I might have taken leave of the Brethren of
the Province , to whom 1 have been most affectionately attached ; and one and all of whom 1 have ever considered , not merely as my Brethren , but as my children —( great applause ) . Secondly—The P . G . M . has omitted to convene the Spring P . G . Lodge , in conformity with the by-laws of the Province , with his own recommendation , and a formal Resolution of the last P . G . Lodge . This is a breach -of discipline , to which it is not intention to demurbut shall leave it in the hands of those who
my , may consider themselves more particularly interested in the matter . Thirdly—He has dismissed me on an alleged charge of insubordination , an offence , if it be one , which was committed many months ago , and out of the limits of his jurisdiction . Fourthly—He has broadly asserted that the interests of Masonry demanded my removal . On these two last points , which are purely personal , I intend to offer a few observations . "
Gross and excessive as was the injustice of tbe case to our first perception of it , how manifoldl y it increases upon further detail and examination ! Knowing that Mr . D'Eyncourt " took a prominent part" in the attempted expulsion of Dr . Crucefix—knowing that he had delivered a very
violent , and equall y unsuccessful address in Gi * and Lodge on that occasion , an address that was frequentl y interrupted by the strongest expressions of disapprobation on the part of the Brethren assembled—and believing , no doubt , that the Provincial Grand Master mi ght still retain some unpleasant
recollections on the subject , Dr . Oliver , it appears , tendered his resignation of the office of Deputy Provincial Grand Master , after it ivas publicl y known in the province that he intended to preside at the Testimonial dinner , the acceptance of which -resignation was publicl y refused , and in a manner
seemingl y designed to do additional honour to the Doctor . But was it really so ? Looking at the result , may we not witli greater reason assume that tlie credit of a timelv
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Freemasons' Quarterly Review.
complisbed by a process less repugnant to my feelings—( loud cheers ) ; and particularly as ( being in doubt whether my acceptance of tbe office of chairman to Dr . Crucefix ' s dinner might be agreeable to him ) , I tendered my resignation after it ivas publicly known in the province that I had consented to preside on this occasion . The P . G . M . openly announced at the P . G . Meeting , at Boston , that I had thus tendered my resignationand as openldeclared that he had refused to accept it
; y ; and urgently requested the continuance of my services in that capacity . I had a right to consider—and I did consider—this concurrence as a tacit acquiescence in the measure which now forms the pretext for my dismissal —( cheers ) . Under these circumstances , I think the P . G . M . ought to have favoured me with some notice of his intentions , that I might have had an opportunity of taking leave of the officers whom I had myself appointed ; that I might have taken leave of the Brethren of
the Province , to whom 1 have been most affectionately attached ; and one and all of whom 1 have ever considered , not merely as my Brethren , but as my children —( great applause ) . Secondly—The P . G . M . has omitted to convene the Spring P . G . Lodge , in conformity with the by-laws of the Province , with his own recommendation , and a formal Resolution of the last P . G . Lodge . This is a breach -of discipline , to which it is not intention to demurbut shall leave it in the hands of those who
my , may consider themselves more particularly interested in the matter . Thirdly—He has dismissed me on an alleged charge of insubordination , an offence , if it be one , which was committed many months ago , and out of the limits of his jurisdiction . Fourthly—He has broadly asserted that the interests of Masonry demanded my removal . On these two last points , which are purely personal , I intend to offer a few observations . "
Gross and excessive as was the injustice of tbe case to our first perception of it , how manifoldl y it increases upon further detail and examination ! Knowing that Mr . D'Eyncourt " took a prominent part" in the attempted expulsion of Dr . Crucefix—knowing that he had delivered a very
violent , and equall y unsuccessful address in Gi * and Lodge on that occasion , an address that was frequentl y interrupted by the strongest expressions of disapprobation on the part of the Brethren assembled—and believing , no doubt , that the Provincial Grand Master mi ght still retain some unpleasant
recollections on the subject , Dr . Oliver , it appears , tendered his resignation of the office of Deputy Provincial Grand Master , after it ivas publicl y known in the province that he intended to preside at the Testimonial dinner , the acceptance of which -resignation was publicl y refused , and in a manner
seemingl y designed to do additional honour to the Doctor . But was it really so ? Looking at the result , may we not witli greater reason assume that tlie credit of a timelv