United Grand Lodge Of England.

great experience in colonial matters , in Masonic matters , and generally , he might say , he was the representative of nearly 20 Grand Lodges in different parts of the world to Grand Lodge of England . Bro . Brackstone Baker was a man well versed in Masonic law and literature , and the greatest Masonic jurist . The motion , which he would have liked Bro . Baker to bring ' , forward , he felt was one that lay at the root of thc Constitutions ol

the Masonic Order , of such depth and wide consideration that he was afraid he could not do his duty in laying it before the brethren . He considered that the Colonial Board were clearly wrong in the conclusion they had come to , and he did not stand alone in so thinking . The report was a very long one—it was the first report they had had from the Colonial Board for many years ; he did not know why they were favoured with it now ; the only fault

was they ought to have had it earlier . At all events , it was before the brethren , and it said that in 18 SS the brethren of the Cambrian Lodge , which was then working under the District Grand Lodge of New South Wales of the English jurisdiction , desired still to work under the English jurisdiction , and they sent the request to the Grand Secretary for the purpose of being laid before Grand Lodge . That was received in December ,

1888 , but it was too late by a day to be laid before Grand Lodge at the December meeting . It , however , was received in very good time to be laid before Grand Lodge in March , 1889 , which , he contended , it ought to have been . It was not , and it was not answered by the Grand Secretary until three months after he had received the letter , whicli they now heard was not to be considered an appeal . The

present motion lay at the root of the Masonic Constitution , tor if they were not going to protect Masonry he did not know where they would be , and he did not know what would become of the Constitutions if they were not to be attended to by Grand Lodge . ( Hear , hear . ) He did not wish to go into the details , but from the way this was received by Grand Lodge he thought they agreed with him . He would take them to Clause 15 of the

report , in which the Board said it adhered to the view it took of the scope of Article 219 of the Book of Constitutions , when the ruling of the Grand Registrar was protested against , " and is of opinion that its provisions are not intended to deal with cases where the lodge contemplates joining a new Masonic allegiance . " He entirely disagreed with that conclusion , and he believed the majority of the brethren of Grand Lodge , even without

hearing the facts of the Cambrian Lodge of New South Wales when they were laid before Grand Lodge would come to the conclusion that the brethren—the minority—but he believed the majority—had been treated with very great cruelty and disregard by the Colonial Board and the officers of Grand Lodge . At all events , in the month of November they sent an appeal or letter to Grand Lodge , which was not answered , but he would go

now to the question of constitution . Let them fight it out there as a constitutional question before they entered into details . He was not appearing for any one person , but for the body of Masons , and he asked the brethren to take a cool , hard , constitutional view of the constitutions of Masonry which had been authorised and acted on for seven or eight years . Rule 219 , it was said , did not apply to a question

of the minority of a lodge which had taken upon itself to join another jurisdiction . Let them look at the rule . It said " should the majority of any lodge determine to retire from it , power of assembling remains with the rest of the members , but should the number of members remaining at any time be less than three the warrant become extinct . " Could anything be clearer than that ? It was contended by some of the Grand Officers that that did not apply , that it only applied to domestic arrangements .

The Grand Registrar said it did not apply where members had retired by death and by resignation . Now how could a man determine to retire by death ? The majority were those who were actually members of the lodge , and those were the only members . It is necessary to tell the brethren that the Constitutions were now practically what they were 100 years ago . In the early part of the 18 th century four or five lodges agreed to form a Grand Lodge .

Among those was the Lodge of Antiquity . A quarrel arose in the Lodge of Antiquity , and some of the members agreed that they would leave the Grand Lodge in London and join the Grand Lodge of York . The London brethren said " We look upon the others as seceders , and we treat them as such . " On the 29 th January , 1779 , a resolution was come to by a Committee of the Charity , which stood in the same position as the present Board of

General Purposes , that a private lodge derived its authority from Grand Lodge , and if some of the brethren retired , the power of assembling rested in the remainder . The resolution was adopted b y Grand Lodge in the following month , and it was acted upon . Various alterations had taken place since , and in Williams' Constitutions of 1815 it was enunciated in nearly the same words , the principle being that

every warranted lodge was a constituent part of Grand Lodge . 1 he Constitutions as altered in 18 73 stated that should the majority of any lodge determine to retire from it , the power of assembling rested with the remainder who adhered to their allegiance , and it also said that if the number of members were less than three the warrant became extinct . The Constitutions of 1884 , which were settled when the principles were very well

known and understood by Masons , laid down the same principle . But who were the majority' ! Anybody who had been guilty of a wrong to Masonry was not one of the majority . Article 204 said— " A brother who has been concerned in making Masons clandestinely , or at a lodge which is not a regular lodge , or for small and unworthy considerations , or who may assist in forming a new lodge without the Grand Master's authority , shall not be

admitted as a member , or even as a visitor , into any regular lodge , nor shall be entitled to relief from the Fund of Benevolence , nor to any other Masonic privilege till he make due submission to obtain grace . " Now , reading the report and fitting all things together , were all the supposed majority going over to the lodge of New South Wales under that rule ? No , they were not the majority at all . If the lodge remained

in those who were the loyalists on the occasion and not in the seceders they had the case of Canada behind this . In the year 1857 it was proposed that the Masonic body in Canada should join a Constitution of their own . There was a great objection on the part of the Grand Lodge and the proposition was made when the Earl of Zetland was Grand Master . His lordship then said that it was plain that the Grand Lodge had not the right and title to absolve from their allegiance the brethren who were anxious to preserve it .

It was equally clear that it was the duty , the sacred duty ol the Grand Master and of the Grand Lodge to support them in maintaining their allegiance . In 1858 the Grand Lodge of Canada had been formed by some of the lodges of the English Constitution but not by all . It was again that Lord Zetland said in recognising the Grand Lodge of Canada that they must guard the interests of these lodges which had not gone over and did not desire to withdraw their allegiance from Grand I . odge . Could anything be clearer ? In June , 1885 , an application was made from Grand

United Grand Lodge Of England.

Lodge of Australia for recognition by Grand Lodge , and in that year Grand Lodge recognised it . He would read the words of Bro . Philbrick , G . Reo * ., used in June , 1 S 85 , when an application was made by the Grand Lod ge of South Australia for recognition by Grand Lodge of England . The Grand I . odge was recognised , and it was a peculiar thing that on the same day an appeal was beard from a brother of a lodsje in New South Wales against a

decision of the District Grand Master of New South Wales , who had ruled that it was incompetent to take into consideration a resolution for throwing over allegiance to the English Constitution and joining the new Grand Lodge of New South Wales . Bro . Philbrick said— " It may be desirable that Grand Lodge should understand what really is the law of Masonry on this head . So far as the W . M . of a lodge which holds under the English

Constitution is concerned , he undertakes , and he solemnly binds himself to observe among the charges which are read to him , and which he adopts upon being put into the chair , an admission that no new lod ^ e can be formed without the permission of the Grand Master or his Deputy , and that no countenance ought to be given to an irregular lodge or any person initiated therein , and , with regard to the obligation of a Mason , the 204 th

Article of our Book of Constitution provides—' That a brother who has been concerned in making Masons clandestinely , or at a lodge which is not a regular lodge , or for small and unwortrry considerations , or who may assist in forming a new lodge without the Grand Master ' s authority , shall not be admitted as a member , or even as a visitor , into any regular lodge , nor shall hebeentitled to relief from the Fundof Benevolence , nor to any other Masonic

privilege till he makes submission and obtains grace . ' That is the undoubted law of the Craft and while the allegiance of an individual Mason to his lodge can be broken by him if he so chooses to deal with his obligation and ignore the extent to which it may be binding on himself , that affects the individual brother only ; but the lodge is a body which is authorised to act b y its warrant andowesits Masonicexistence thereto . VVe know from the moment

we enter Freemasonry that the majority of brethren in a lodge bind the minority and the minority have to submit to the will of the majority ; yet in the matter of continuing to hold the warrant no matter what the majority , if any three brethren of the lodge continue the majority cannot surrender it . And , therefore , to protect the rights of the minority and of those who choose to adhere to their allegiance there is that very distinct rule made in

the Book of Constitutions . " He had heard of some persons blowing hot and cold , but what was this but forcing blasts of winter upon those who recognise the Constitutions of English Freemasonry . Bro . Fenn , not quite so eloquent as the Grand Registrar , but quite as expressive , said in seconding the proposition of the Grand Registrar , that he thought that if the Grand Lodge did not uphold this ruling of the District

Grand Master , there would be an end to all loyalty to the Grand Master and to the authority of his representatives . " While the District Grand Master holds his patent from the Most Worshipful Grand Master of England , he is bound to discountenance every act which has a tendency to connect itself with irregular lodges , and also to discountenance any discussion in a lodge which may tend to promote a breach of allegiance to

the authorities under which he acts . " He quite agreed with those brethren . Bro . Eve proceeded to quote from Lord Carnarvon , who on the 15 th December , 188 S , when he moved that the lodge of New South Wales should be recognised , stated that it was in accordance with all the practice of Grand Lodge up to this time that they should recognise the full right of any who might chance to dissent from the vote of the majority , and Bro .

Philbrick seconded the proposition . Proceeding to deal with the facts of Cambrian Lodge , Bro . Eve contended that there was not a majority in favour of joining the Grand Lodge of New South Wales . At the meeting where the subject was discussed there were 23 brethren present . Ten voted one way and 10 the other , three did not vote at all , and the Worshipful

Master gave a casting vote in favour of joining thc lodge of New South Wales . The lodge , it was said , consisted of 7 6 members . He contended that the Cambrian Lodge had been unfairly dealt with , and he asked the brethren of Grand Lodge to put those men in the position in which they stood in 1888 . He left the matter in the hands of Grand Lodge , knowing that they would be able to decide it properly . ( Applause . )

Bro . J . E . LB FEUVRE seconded Bro . Eve ' s motion . The enunciations from Lord Zetland , Lord Carnarvon , Bro . Philbrick , Bro . Fenn and others , on this subject that a loyal minority on Ncw South Wales brethren ought to be supported , and should be supported , by Grand Lodge , seemed to him to make it quite clear . But there was one quotation which had been omitted by Bro . Eve , which was that in official reports of Grand Lodge , of 2 nd

December , 1889 , Bro . Beach , who was in the chair , stated in his remarks with regard to the subject then under discussion , that a provision was made that —in recognising the Grand Lodge of Quebec—if any lodge wished to continue its allegiance to the Grand Lodge of England , it would be permitted to do so . Thc consequence was that several brethren of Quebec continued their allegiance . From time immemorial it had rested in the hands of a minority holding under the Grand Lodge ol

England to retain their svarraiu and to claim their right to hold allegiance to the Grand Lodge of England . Too much stress could not be laid on the fact that when Lord Carnarvon in 1888 proposed t * e recognition of New South Wales he distinctly reserved the right of any two or three lodges which might not have given in their answers that they should preserve the rights of those who dissented from the vote of the majority . He held under those circumstances and under those circumstances alone was the

Grand Lodge of New South Wales recognised . Lord Carnarvon had then recently visited Australia , and had pointed out to the brethren that he had made a personal examination of the facts of the case and he specially reserved the rights of these posssibly dissenting lodges . Grand Lodge of England met on thc 5 th December , 1888 , and passed the resolutions recognising the Grand Lodge of New South Wales . On thc 18111 of November , 1 S 88 , on

meeting a month before the meeting of Grand Lodge the letter was written from the Cambrian Lodge protesting against their being not allowed to adhere to their allegiance to the English Grand Lodge . This letter arrived on the 12 th December . Hc contended that the Cambrian Lodge had been visited with the worst punishment which was known in Masonry—erasure . And for what crime ? For the crime that it was retaining attachment to thc

English Constitution . No Colonial Board , no Grand Officer , not even the Grand Master himself , and he said it with deliberation , had the right or the power to erase a lodge from the roll . It could only be done by resolution of the Grand Lodge . The Cambrian Lodge wished to be loyal to Grand Lodge of Kngland and Grand Lodge of England should draw the ; egis of its protection before it . ( Loud applause ) . . ,

Bro . PHILBRICK , after regretting some of the remarks of Bro . Eve wit " respect to himself , and which he thought he should have apologised for , said the matter of the Cambrian Lodge had been before the authorities for some