-
Articles/Ads
Article CORRESPONDENCE. ← Page 2 of 8 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Correspondence.
receivetl , might be learnt hy calling at the Grand Clerk ' s office , which is the only way by which correct information can he obtained ! One item of this amount is pretty well known , and the rest may very safely be averaged , especially as it will look at least a little better to do so . The item alluded to is TEN POUNDS !! ! given to one of the TWENTY SEVEN Brethren , who , report says , is the holder of a government situation , worth 300 / . a year . I give the report in this case as it litis been circulated
, hut 1 do not vouch for its truth , although , from circumstances , it seems to have " an evil complexion ; " and to say the least of it , it is passing strange that one Brother should obtain 10 / ., when the other FIFTY SEVEN recipients only received , on an average , eight shillings each , —or , if we even suppose that the tl . Os . 2 rf ., from Grand Lodge account , was divided amongst them , that their miserable pittance was increased b y about 2 . 9 . "d . But this is taking a favourable view of the case , for there
is nothing whatever to show how either one or other of these sums have been applied ;—we presume that one Brother received 10 / ., but we do not know how many may have only got TEN PENCE ! Now , why are there two funds for benevolence or charity , and why are not all the sums paid away noted ? We do not require the names of the Brethren who receivetl relief ; the number of the Lotlges they belong to would be a sufficient correct mark against the sum paid , be that sum TEN PENCE or TEN pouNns ; and it is only due to the Craft that this sliould be done . But why has the fund of benevolence been so sparingly doled out to the applicants ?—is it that they did not require more assistance than the EIOIIT SHILLINGS ?
—would none of them have taken a little more , hud it been urged upon them , when their cases were allowed ? TWENTY petitions were rejected or delayed ; would it have been too much to have given these twenty shillings apiece ? We think not , even if that sum had been twice told . But how does the fund stand ? In November 1 S-19 , there were 253 / . in the bank ; the subscriptions for 1850 , were 132 / ., the interest 7 / ., making a total of 394- / . Thus there is certainly nothing to prevent a much larger sum being given every year to proper objects of- Masonic
benevolence . But this is not what is aimed at . The object seems to be to form a large fund , which will , snow-ball like , increase by its own weight , with the yearly addition of a vast amount of present Masonic destitution , and which will be faithfully placed to the credit of the suffering indigent Brethren of this generation , in the balance sheet of the next . We are pinching and starving our poor Brethren just now , that those who come after them may get something better . I am not singular in this opinion
, it is the Grand Clerk ' s no less than my own . Read his own words , p . 13 , Reporter No . 3 . — Cl The more cordially it ( the fund ) is supported by the contributions ofthe Brethren , the more it will increase in efficiency , and he better able to extend its donations beyond what is warranted by the present capital and revenue ; " which is , in effect , to say , " We have money , but we want to keep it for those who come after us , or else we have no proper objects of Masonic benevolence , ( always excepting the 10 / . Brother ) . "
Either of these reasons , it seems , must thus be the rule laid down for the management of this fund . What was paid to the poor Brethren out of it in former years , there is no exact means of ascertaining from the annual statements .
But why is the revenue of this fund so small ? It ought to he larger ; and it is only fair to those who contribute to it , that a statement of payments should be published , to show where , the defaulters are . We know how many Grand Lodge office bearers there are , and that
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Correspondence.
receivetl , might be learnt hy calling at the Grand Clerk ' s office , which is the only way by which correct information can he obtained ! One item of this amount is pretty well known , and the rest may very safely be averaged , especially as it will look at least a little better to do so . The item alluded to is TEN POUNDS !! ! given to one of the TWENTY SEVEN Brethren , who , report says , is the holder of a government situation , worth 300 / . a year . I give the report in this case as it litis been circulated
, hut 1 do not vouch for its truth , although , from circumstances , it seems to have " an evil complexion ; " and to say the least of it , it is passing strange that one Brother should obtain 10 / ., when the other FIFTY SEVEN recipients only received , on an average , eight shillings each , —or , if we even suppose that the tl . Os . 2 rf ., from Grand Lodge account , was divided amongst them , that their miserable pittance was increased b y about 2 . 9 . "d . But this is taking a favourable view of the case , for there
is nothing whatever to show how either one or other of these sums have been applied ;—we presume that one Brother received 10 / ., but we do not know how many may have only got TEN PENCE ! Now , why are there two funds for benevolence or charity , and why are not all the sums paid away noted ? We do not require the names of the Brethren who receivetl relief ; the number of the Lotlges they belong to would be a sufficient correct mark against the sum paid , be that sum TEN PENCE or TEN pouNns ; and it is only due to the Craft that this sliould be done . But why has the fund of benevolence been so sparingly doled out to the applicants ?—is it that they did not require more assistance than the EIOIIT SHILLINGS ?
—would none of them have taken a little more , hud it been urged upon them , when their cases were allowed ? TWENTY petitions were rejected or delayed ; would it have been too much to have given these twenty shillings apiece ? We think not , even if that sum had been twice told . But how does the fund stand ? In November 1 S-19 , there were 253 / . in the bank ; the subscriptions for 1850 , were 132 / ., the interest 7 / ., making a total of 394- / . Thus there is certainly nothing to prevent a much larger sum being given every year to proper objects of- Masonic
benevolence . But this is not what is aimed at . The object seems to be to form a large fund , which will , snow-ball like , increase by its own weight , with the yearly addition of a vast amount of present Masonic destitution , and which will be faithfully placed to the credit of the suffering indigent Brethren of this generation , in the balance sheet of the next . We are pinching and starving our poor Brethren just now , that those who come after them may get something better . I am not singular in this opinion
, it is the Grand Clerk ' s no less than my own . Read his own words , p . 13 , Reporter No . 3 . — Cl The more cordially it ( the fund ) is supported by the contributions ofthe Brethren , the more it will increase in efficiency , and he better able to extend its donations beyond what is warranted by the present capital and revenue ; " which is , in effect , to say , " We have money , but we want to keep it for those who come after us , or else we have no proper objects of Masonic benevolence , ( always excepting the 10 / . Brother ) . "
Either of these reasons , it seems , must thus be the rule laid down for the management of this fund . What was paid to the poor Brethren out of it in former years , there is no exact means of ascertaining from the annual statements .
But why is the revenue of this fund so small ? It ought to he larger ; and it is only fair to those who contribute to it , that a statement of payments should be published , to show where , the defaulters are . We know how many Grand Lodge office bearers there are , and that