Masonic Notes.

maintained what we consider is the only possible interpretation , and Grand Lodge by its resolution of Wednesday has publicly endorsed our views . * * * We must remind our readers that Thursday , the

17 th inst ., is the last day on which petitions for the admission of candidates into the Royal Masonic Institution for Girls are receivable if it is desired that their names should be entered in the list of approved

candidates for the election in April , 1892 . At the same time , we would urge on those who may have petitions to bring forward to send them in as early as possible between now and the date specified , so that the Petitions and General Committees may have ample time to make further inquiries should any be deemed necessary .

* * * The letter which " Latomus " addressed to us last week—the second he has written on the " Future of Freemasonry "—is a well-reasoned document , containing suggestions which are by no means undeserving

our attention . But he does not appear to us to have come much nearer to the main point at issue , namely , that the " Future of Freemasonry " depends upon the class and character of the men we accept as candidates , and that at this present time there are lodges willing to accept

any class of men provided they are able to pay fees , and members of lodges who are not sufficiently alive to the responsibility which attaches to those who propose persons for initiation . It is by no means improbable that a more frequent supervision of the lodges

under their charge by the Provincial authorities would result in the said lodges being brought into a greater state of efficiency , but we confess we do not see how it would prevent objectionable persons being introduced into the Craft . * * *

He certainly suggests the case of an existing lodge , in which , in consequence of differences of opinion having arisen among the members , two factions are formed , one of which leaves the parent lodge and sets up a new lodge for itself . In time this new lodge begins to

find that new members are required in order to keep the lodge on its legs , and the practice of touting for candidates is at once adopted . But as regards the Provinces , will a more extended system of supervision than is now adopted by the authorities , have the effect of

preventing this ; or how will it prevent it ? If such a case as this—if the members of a lodge forming themselves into two rival factions were brought under their notice , we think it extremely probable that , if the question of a new lodge beingformed by one of the factions

were proposed to them as the only or the best mode of putting an end to the disturbance , they would gladly aid in promoting the scheme , provided , of course , they were satisfied that the intended seceders were in

their estimation worthy to found a new lodge , and that the lodge , when founded , would stand a reasonable chance of establishing itself permanently . * * +

But let us suppose they came to the conclusion that the intending seceders were not worthy to found a new lodge ; or that for other sufficient reasons they considered the establishment of a new lodge undesirable , they could do no more than has recently been done in

Sussex , where no less than three petitions for the establishment of new lodges have been rejected . But would their refusal to recommend such a petition to the favourable consideration of the M . W . Grand Master have the effect of putting a stop to touting for , and the

proposal of objectionable persons as , candidates in lodges already existing ? We think not . The evils of which Bro . Whytehead and others so justly complain can only be cured by the exercise of greater care in the election of candidates .

There is much to be said in favour of the suggestion " Latomus " offers in his more recent letter for the subdivision of some of our larger provinces . But we must not lose si g ht of the fact that the appointment of Provincial Grand Masters is the prerogative of the

Grand Master , who will be guided in the exercise of this , as off his other prerogatives , by what he considers is demanded by the true interests of the Craft . Nor must we overlook this other fact—that the larger provinces may not themselves desire sub-division even if

the question of sub-division rested with them . We do not desire to see our English Freemasonry mapped out , geometrically , into a number of squares , triangles , or circles , of which each shall contain only a certain

number of lodges . On the whole , we think there should be the least possible disturbance of existing arrangements . Let lodges and the members of lodges do their duty in the matter of accepting candidates , and the evils referred to will cease to exist .

Correspondence.

Correspondence .

f We do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions expressed \ y our correspondents , but we wish in a spirit of fair play to all to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ] THE FUTURE OF FREEMASONRY .

To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , I have read the letter of " Latomus " with much interest . As a Mason of nearly 30 years' standing I may perhaps be allowed to say a word on the above interesting subject . I agree with " Latomus" that a

great many men are admitted to our ancient and honourable Fraternity who would make excellent Oddfellows , Foresters , or Antediluvian Buffaloes , but who are not the men to do honour to Freemasonry . It is quite true that in many country lodges both here and I fancy in the colonies many join for what they can get

out of the Order , and there has been , and is , I fear , a great deal too much touting for members . A very near relative of mine in America once wrote to ask my advice as to whether he should join the Craft , and 1 replied that I could not advise , he must judge and'act for himself . He has since become a

Knight Templar , and I know not what else in the States , and I believe has never seen cause to regret he became a member of the Universal Brotherhood . He was in the Army , and I know on one occasion he was stationed at Rhodes Island and was suddenly ordered off to Texas . At New Orleans he was taken ill with yellow fever , and having managed

( 1 suppose through his wife , who was with him ) to make himself known to the Masons there , he was nursed through his illness , comforted and sustained b y their Charity , and sent on his way rejoicing , and I know that he attributed his recovery ( under God ) to the kindly ministrations and succour of the Freemasons of New Orleans .

With regard to the character and position of the men introduced into Masonry , I well remember some years since the Provincial Grand Master where I was then residing speaking very strongly on the subject at one of our annual Provincial Grand Lodge meetings ; and were a caution given at every provincial meeting

by the Prov . Grand Master , 1 think it would have a good effect . Lodges are multiplying too fast in England , and the result is in many towns that two or three lodges are starving , whilst the odd one which receives every one with open arms is alone successful from a pecuniary

point of view . But in the end it will mostl y be found , judging from my own experience , that the lodge which receives all and sundry simply for the sake of fees , and without due regard to the character and status of its candidates , sooner or later comes utterly to grief . My advice to all lodges , especially the

newly-consecrated lodges , is—festina tenle . Be cautious who you receive ; admit only men in reputable circumstances and of the hig hest character ; interest the brethren in all good works in the locality of a charitable or elevated character , such as giving assistance to local hospitals or

in the restoration of churches , and what not , and in course of time you will reap your reward . The name of Freemason will be an honoured name , and the Craft will gain in public estimation , and adherents of the best sort will flock to our standard . — -Yours fraternally , EMRA HOLMES , 31 ° K . C . T .

To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , In your leader of the 21 st ult . you said that this correspondence was taking a wider range than you anticipated , and I feel sure that our estimable Bro . Whytehead never contemplated its

running to such extreme limits . To follow out the suggestion made by " Latomus" and others , would simply mean an alteration in the Book of Constitutions , and I have an idea that the officials of Grand Lodge would strongly oppose any such alteration . Now , if I read Bro . Whytehead ' s letter correctly I

think he meant to convey the tact that owing to the indiscriminate and public manner in which our Masonic Charities are heralded forth to the outside world , numbers of men who are really in pecuniary difficulties at the time , are induced thereby to join our Order as a means of procuring hel p in

order to tide them over their embarrassments , and when this cannot be done such men become a charge upon our Charity funds . I think hundreds of such cases can be quoted , and the blowing of the Charity trumpet at the street-corners and from the house-tops , as is done at present , has much to answer for in this

respect , by bringing amongst us those who want helping instead of being able to help others who have entered our Order in reputable circumstances , and who from unforeseen and unavoidable circumstances have been reduced to poverty and distress . —I am , yours fraternally , ANOTHER P . P . G . OFFICER .

November 30 . RULE No . 219 . To the Editor 0 / the "Freemason . ' '

Dear Sir and Brother , I send you the comparison between Article 34 private lodges in Williams' Constitution with the corresponding article in Northouck ' s Constitutions of

Correspondence.

1784 ( not 17 86 ) . They are nearly identical and show at any rate , that the promise of protection to a loyal minority is over a century old . —Yours fraternally , j . E . LE FEUVRE .

WILLIAMS' CONSTITUTIONS , 1815 . Private Lodges , Art . 34 ( " Corrected Edition " of 1819 ) . "As every warranted lodge is a constituent part of the Grand Lodge , in which assembly all the power of the Fraternity resides , it is clear that no other authority can destroy the power granted by a warrant ; if ,

therefore , the majority of any lodge determine to quit the Society , the constitution , or power of assembling , remains with the rest of the members who adhere to their allegiance . If all the members of a lodge withdraw themselves , their constitution ceases and becomes extinct , and all the authority thereby granted or enjoyed reverts to the Grand Lodge . "

NORTHOUCK ' S CONSTITUTIONS OF 1784 . " Regular private " lodge , instead of " warranted " lodge ; " Society , " instead of " Fraternity ; " " withdraw that power , " instead of " destroy the power granted by a warrant ; " " allegiance and if , " instead of " allegiance . If . "

To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , A recent ruling or interpretation of Rule 219 , Book of Constitutions , has been promulgated through the District Grand Lodges in New Zealand , and thence it has reached Queensland . In the former

it has been productive of very grave results , and in Queensland , where the ruling ih-. ty become effective , it is causing great alarm and anxiety to the Masonic Craft under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of England . The Rule 219 reads as follows : "Should the majority of any lodge determine to retire from it , the power of

assembling remains with the rest ; but should the number of members remaining at any time be less than three , the warrant becomes extinct . " It is very short , and in such very plain English that it is difficult to understand how it will admit of any interpretation beyond that of the very clear and

unmistakable words in which it is written . That this was the opinion of the District Grand Lodge of Queensland is evident from the fact that some time before this latest interpretation was known here , the Queensland lodges were officially informed that so long as three members remained with the lodge they could retain the warrant ,

and this body is still , I understand , of the opinion that no other consistent interpretation is possible , and after many enquiries I believe that this opinion is held b y every intelligent member of the English Constitution . As to the "' retirement " of a majority of any lodge , there is no antecedent condition either given or

implied ; therefore , whether the members retire singly or collectively , simply to terminate their connection with the lodge , or whether it be for the purpose of joining or forming another lodge , or of joining or forming another Grand Lodge , whether legal or illegal , is quite immaterial , so long as they " retire " and

leave " not less than three . " 1 repeat that the cause or reason for the retirement has nothing to do with the matter . The " three " or more can hold the warrant . Nor is there any other rule , or clause of a rule , in the Constitutions which can deprive this minority of its rights neither would it be consistent

with the principle of justice if it could . To transfer the allegiance of a lodge , which it is said may be done by a majority , is virtually to transter its warrant . It is only "a lodge" by virtue of its warrant . Take away its warrant , and it is no longer a lodge . But Rule 221 provides that " no warrant can be

transferred under any circumstances . " To transfer the allegiance is , therefore , to extinguish the lodge , and b y the Constitutions no majority can do that , provided the minority be " not less than three , " and that minority determine to hold the warrant and continue the lodge . Of course , the continuation depends upon the ability

of the minority . Three members , therefore , can prevent the extinction of the lodge and hold the warrant no matter how great the majority may be . Rule 182 , as to the vote of a majority , does not apply , because it is diametrically opposed to Rules No . 219 and 221 , the former of which—the one principally in dispute—provides for special cases , namely •. " that

when a majority determine to retire , " & c , & c . Therefore , the majority , with or without the casting vote of the Master , cannot transfer the allegiance of a lodge . Rule 181 is impotent for similar reasons , and especially as it is effective only in cases which are consistent with the general laws and regulations of the Craft .

As to the application of this alleged new ruling , take a case , and by no means an unlikely one , of a lodge of say 51 members , with a majority of 26 for the transferrence of the lodge ' s allegiance to some other body , legal , or illegal . Is it consistent with justice that the minority of 25 ( possibly an equality if the

casting vote have been used ) should be , so far as their connection with Freemasonry is concerned , practically annihilated ? Are 25 staunch and loyal Freemasons in a lodge to be made disloyal , with the alternative of being deprived of all their cherished privileges at the

will of a majority of one ? Such a conclusion is contrary to all our ideas of Freemasonry . This majority , bear in mind , voluntarily " determine to retire . " They can join any body they please " , they are free agents if not Freemasons . Therefore there is no hardship to the majority .