-
Articles/Ads
Article Original Correspondence. ← Page 2 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 2 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 2 of 2 Article Multum in Parbo,or Masonic Notes and Queries. Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Original Correspondence.
amounting to two pounds or upwards , is acknowledged or expressed to have been received , or deposited , or paid ; or ( b ) " Whereby any debt or demand of the amount of t » vo pounds or upwards is acknowledged to have been setlied , satisfied , or discharged , or which signifies or imports » ny such acknowledgment , and whether the same is or is not signed with the name of any person . " *
If the reader has kindly attended to the division I have above attempted to render obvious , he will see that the legislature apparently intended to provide for two descriptions of payment , or deposit , of money , ( a ) voluntary disbursements , ( b ) satisfaction of legal obligations , and to attach , with certain limits , payment of a revenue duty to both .
Now , I suppose , it will be conceded—at all events , I must assume—that with the second class (/¦) we have nothing at present to do . Lest , however , it should be thought that I seek , by a mere cursory reference , to evade the examination of the question , whether a debt due for dues payable to a Masonic lodge constitutes a legal obligation , I may as well warn the reader that at a later period of this letter ,
I propose , as an inevitable corollary to my general argument , to bestow a little consideration upon this very delicate subject . At present I have to ascertain whether , assuming payment of lodge dues to bc wholly voluntary , a duty to the revenue attaches when the amount paid is above forty shillings . Now , to clear the ground as we go on , I presume that
every brother , certainly every legal brother , will agree with me that the duty is not chargeable upon the payment per se , i . e ., upon the act or fact of disbursement . It is clearly only payable upon the written voucher , and , if I read the first part of the above section correctly , payable upon that documentary evidence of the amount having been paid , without reference , to the object for which the
payment is made . Concede that the payment of dues to a lodge is wholly for the purposes of charity—a large concession by the way—prima facie there is no intrinsic necessity for taking written receipts at all for money disbursed for the purposes of charitable relief -, there is obviously no obligation to give a documentary voucher for the payment unless the donor requires one , but , the recipient electing
as an evidence of his good faith to give , rather than to refrain from giving , a written receipt , or , the donor requiring for his own purposes the delivery of such a document , or , putting the case in other words , making his donation conditional on a written voucher being furnished to him , the transaction would appear by the delivery of the instrument to be brought within the provisions of the
statute , and the duty therefore to attach . The Act of Parliament , however , imposing the duty definitively , provides certain exemptions from liability . Starting from my point of view , that the charge is upon the document evidencing , and not upon the manual act evidenced , a claim to exemption must be expressly brought within the category thus specially detailed , or within the
general exemptions from liability to stamp duty . The former ' will be found in Tillsley ' s Treatise on the Stamp Laws ( 3 rd edition , 1871 ) , page 523 ; the latter in the same work , page 531 . And before I allude further to these exemptions—reminding my readers that the legal practitioner is trained to make every word of a statute speak , i . e ., to give to each
expression a meaning—to attribute to the employment of every phrase a well considered and earnest intention , either to enact directly , or by illustration , or analogy , to remove doubes as to the general object of the legislation essayed—I would call attention to the use of ihe word " deposited " in the section 1 have quoted above . It is obvious from that word that a voluntary bailment of money—a
detmsitnni to the bailor ' s own use—will come within the liability to duty unless that liability be displaced by an express pioviso or the general law oi exemption ; and this is proved by the statute , in its schedule , in the very first exemption ( No . 1 ) under the heading " Receipt , " exempting from liability to the duty moneys deposited with a banker ; 7 . e . d ., all other voluntary deposits and « fortiori voluntary payments
exceeding the statutory amount are liable . I readily admit a certain amount of plausibility in the letter in your last impression of W . M ., No . 766 , but of course no amount of plausible argument will prevail against the express words of a statute . His inference from the exemption of building societies fails , because , as I shall proceed to show , those institutions enjoy a specific statutory
exemption , while his argument as to the non-liability of a receipt for a deposit seems to have been specifically answered by anticipation , by the employment of the word "deposited " in the first paragraph of the section cited above . Parparcnlhi ' se , 1 mny observe that there is a widely spread delusion that inasmuch as a cheque bears a penny stamp the receipt for a payment of more than 40 s . made by
checjuc is exempt from receipt stamp duty , the penny having been already paid . There was formerly some colour for this impression , for before 1870 an exemption statutorily relieved " Receipts or discharges written upon promissory notes , bills of exchange , drafts , or orders for the payment of money duly stamped according to the laws in force at the date thereof , or upon bills of exchange drawn out of , but payable in , Great Britain or Ireland respectively . " But
by the act of 1870 , cited above , the exemption , by what 1 venture to think must be regarded as an explanatory or declaratory rather than a restricting or amending enactment , is defined to extend only to a " receipt written upon a bill of exchange or promissory note duly stamped . " The exposition thus hazarded may not be without its use to those lodges where considerable payments are usually made by cheques or drafts payable to order or bearer .
* Of course the italic initials , and the other italics , are my own , and for the punctuation the Parliamentary printer is responsible , acts not being punctuated in their engrossment on the Parliamentary roll any more than the printed pleadings delivered in legal actions , or other legal instruments .
Original Correspondence.
To return to the exemptions . No other class interests us , or can be even remotely suggested as being anologous to Freemasons , than provident or friendly societies ; but I need not occupy your space by a laboured endeavour to prove that Freemasons do not come within a category so strictly defined by statute as these voluntary associations . Some doubt is expressed in the editorial postcript to the letter of
Bro . Richard Brown in your impression of the 31 st ult . as to the exemption of friendly , provident , and building societies , and you courteously request information on the point . The Friendly Societies' Act ( England ) , 18 and 19 Vict ., cap . 63 , sec . 37 , ( and see also sees . 2 and 3 ) ; the Industrial and Provident Societies'Act , 30 and 31 Vict ., cap . 117 , sec . 3 , and the various acts relating to building
societies , too numerous to be cited here , specifically provide these exemptions . I conclude , then , that even were the dues entirely devoted to purposes of relief a written acknowledgment of their payment to an amount exceeding 40 s . would , in each case , be liable , ijua depositum , to the penny duty . But are all the moneys so received devoted to the relief
of distress ? Of course , if my construction be correct , this is an immaterial question ; but when Bro . Snowden quotes a view of the law which I , as I have said , believe to be erroneous , as held by a P . M ., and goes on to say , " I am at a loss to understand upon what grounds such an opinion could be for one moment entertained by a P . M ., " I am constrained to give some reasons why I do not share his
expressed astonishment . Now , a P . M . had two very plausible , very popular , and , as 1 have tried to prove , two very inaccurate views to rely upon in justification of his contention : — Firstly . That documents purporting to be receipts for money given in charity were not liable to stamp duty . Secondly . That documents purporting to be receipts for
money not legally recoverable were not so liable . I have , I think , almost conclusively dealt with the first view , but I must for a moment , in connection with this , hark back to my query—Are all the moneys received as dues devoted to the relief of distress ? Roughly—mentally —analyse , say , an annual subscription of five guineas paid to a lodge , the brethren of which like to enjoy themselves ,
deduct from the sum the propoition payable for the brother as his share of the working and the convivial disbursements of the lodge , would not the charity-devoted residuum in the vast majority of cases be a sum over which no controversy could arise , inasmuch as it would be considerably beneath the statutorily chargeable forty shillings ? And here let me protest that I intend no sneer at the
propensities to social enjoyment credited or debited to the members of the Craft . God forbid ! The proportion of the revenue of an ordinary lodge devoted to charity must necessarily , in the vast majority of instances , be considerably less than the amount directly allotted to ordinary lodge expenses—the very nature of the organisation to render the body , as a philanthropic association , a
machine equal to the performance of its duties , necessitates this result ; but every one of my brethren will , I presume , readily endorse my view , that the direct amount contributed in each year out of the regular revenue of a lodge to our noble Charities bears but a small proportion to the stream of benevolence its influence evokes from the individual bounty of its members .
Well , then , if 1 am right , in the vast majority of instances , an immensely preponderating per centage of payments of lodge dues could not claim exemption from stamp duty on the ground of being devoted to objects of charity , even if that formed a legal ground of exemption , which , in my opinion , it does not ; but try this by an extreme illustration . The very converse is the case with Grand Lodge .
There the proportion of receipts applied to office and general expenses is conspicuously small , the amount devoted to relief overwhelmingly large ; yet the authorities at Grand Lodge , with , what of course I consider to be , a sound view of their legal obligations , invariably affix a receipt stamp when they acknowledge payment of a sum above forty shillings .
I have , I am afraid , very nearly exhausted the whole of the space 1 can in decency ask you to allow me , and I have still greater fear than I have of your individual indulgence of having exhausted the patience cf my wearied readers . However , I must just touch upon the above " secondly , " the assumed non-liability to stamp duty of receipts for the payment of money not legally recoverable .
* In a case cited in Tillsley ' s work , referred to above , at pages 119 and 435 , and the same reference given in the note at each page , the learned author states a judicial decision , that a receipt stamp was not required on a document which did not purport to be an acknowledgment of the payment of " an antecedent debt . " It is , however , never safe to adopt the conclusion from any case of an
author , however learned , without referring to the report itself , and as in this instance I have spent many hours in vainly trying to find " Carey * v . Eccleston " from the unknown and inexplicable reference " 1 C . & D ., " I am compelled to pass by this authority , which , if it says all the author maintains it affirms , and if—a very large "if "—it has been decided since the statute of 1870 , might
render necessary a reconsideration of much that I have written above . Familiar as I am , however , with most of our reports , as they must necessarily be in use with me every day , and industriously as I have searched ; those learned reporters " C . te . D . " yet remain to me alphabetical characters " ct preterea nihil , " and the judicial wisdom of " Carey v . Eccleston" is , notwithstanding the digests ,
hidden from my prying eyes . If I come across it hereafter I will inflict upon your readers , if necessary , my view of how much , if at all , it qualifies tbe position I have attempted to take up . As at present but partially enlightened , however , we must , 1 fear , face the vexatio i / iimstio : Is the initiation fee , is the subscription to a lodge , a debt legally recoverable ? This point was argued out before the learned judge of
Original Correspondence.
the Westminster County Court , than whom a sounder lawyer does not adorn the minor judicial bench , on the 10 th of October last , and the report , reprinted from thg Sunday Times , appeared in your impression of the 28 th of that month . The able judge ( Bayly , Q . C . ) decided that a member of a Masonic lodge did not by being initiated and joining ( a fortiori by joining only ) contract any legal
obligation for fees and dues , and I confess I think that he was right . My learned friend , Mr . Stone , ably endeavoured to make use of the Judicature Act , 1875 , Order XVI ,, rule 9 , and the analagous provisions of the Consolidated County Court Orders , Order V ., rule 8 , but these would only technically have helped him , by enabling him to substitute a personal entitv for an abstract oartv .
whereas I think that upon the merits he had no case , that is to say , no contract with any party could be proved , and that the real cause of the defeat of the plaintiff was , therefore , the exact converse of that stated in the letter of the Master of the Hervey Lodge , appearing in your columns of the 1 ith November last . I have looked into my learned friend ' s authority , "Pollock on Contracts , " and , so far as I
have had time to examine that author's views , taking it fairly and with the context , it appears to me to be rather against Mr . Stone ' s contention . And here let me , I think justifiably , complain of the slovenly reporting of the original reporter ( you , of course , are blameless , as , as you are aware , you merely transcribed from a contemporary ) . The case cited as " Ruget v . Bishop , " with such a
preposterous reference as "Law Reports 733 , " should be '' Raggett v . Bishop , " and the correct reference is 2 Car and Payne 343 , while the reference to Pollock , printed 795 , I find should be 595 . In the admirable work of the latter author , however , the whole subject of the liability of members of voluntary associations is exhaustively treated at pages 195 to 210 .
I lie matter is of importance , because it might bethought , though , for the reasons above urged , I do not well see how it can be , that receipt stamp duty only attaches to payments made in discharge of a legal liability , in which case it becomes , of course , an indispensable preliminary to enquire whether payments of Masonic dues are legally compulsory or not .
In conclusion , I readily own that my interpretation of the law may be unsound . When a much greater lawyer than ever I can hope to be was gravely informed that he had committed an error of construction , he composedly replied , " And I trust I may be spared to commit many more errors . " I can only say that I shall be truly thankful to any brother who , differintr from mv view , will kindlv
through your columns set me , and those who think with me , right if we are wrong ; and as this is not a case where a professional man should , under the veil of a nam . da plume , however transparent , affect to conceal his identity , or seem to shrink from the consequences of his deliberately formed opinions , I do not write anonymously , but beg to subscribe myself ,
Dear Sir and Brother , yours faithfully and fraternally , SAMUEL POYNTER , P . M . and Treas . Burgoyne , No . 902 P . M . Athenamm , No . 1491 ; Member of the Board of General Purposes , Colonial Board , and Lodge of Benevolence .
THE INSTALLATION AT ABERDARE . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Will you permit mc to call your attention to an omission in your report last week of the above important
event . All the officers chosen by Sir George Elliot were mentioned , with the exception of Bro . John Jones , 833 , who was re-elected Treasurer of Prov . Grand Lodge . I am , yours fraternally , J . F . H .
Multum In Parbo,Or Masonic Notes And Queries.
Multum in Parbo , or Masonic Notes and Queries .
ORGANIZATION OK CHAFT MASONRY IN ENGLAND . The Craftsman quotes the following passage from that very interesting work , " Fort's Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry " : — According to Findel , Freemasons were first organized as a Craft in England in the year 1202 , at the building of Winchester Cathedral ; but according to Fort , the
English Craft was organized nearly a century earlier , in A . D . 1136 , at the building of Melrose Abbey , by John Moreau . Forty years later William of Sens reconstructed Canterbury Cathedral in A . D . 1176 . From the inscribed tablets on Melrose Abbey , it appears that J ohn Moreau , or Morow , was the Master , perhaps the Grand Master , of all the Masonic work or lodges , at St . Andrew ' s , around the
Cathedral of Glasgow , and at the churches of Paisley , Niddisdale and Galway . But it is to be observed , first , that the " Winchester Guild " was only incorporated by Bishop Lucy , to aid in the work of Winchester Cathedral , and that the operative Masonic Guilds themselves were of earlier orig in undoubtedly . Secondly , it would , I think-, be more correct
to say that Bishop Lucy ' s organization , mentioned by Milner , but of which the original charter has not been printed , though it may still exist in the muniment room of Winchester Cathedral , is first alluded to in " The Annales Wintonienses , " published by Henry Wharton in the first volume of - 'Anglia Sacra , " 1691 .
The " Annales Wintonienses" are said to have been written by a monk of Winchester about 1454 . He g ives then , in 1454 , the account of the formation in 1202 of a Winchester building fraternity or guild , a " confratriam pro reparatione ccclesias Winton , " which was only to continue " duraturam usque ad quinque annos completes ' —five years .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Original Correspondence.
amounting to two pounds or upwards , is acknowledged or expressed to have been received , or deposited , or paid ; or ( b ) " Whereby any debt or demand of the amount of t » vo pounds or upwards is acknowledged to have been setlied , satisfied , or discharged , or which signifies or imports » ny such acknowledgment , and whether the same is or is not signed with the name of any person . " *
If the reader has kindly attended to the division I have above attempted to render obvious , he will see that the legislature apparently intended to provide for two descriptions of payment , or deposit , of money , ( a ) voluntary disbursements , ( b ) satisfaction of legal obligations , and to attach , with certain limits , payment of a revenue duty to both .
Now , I suppose , it will be conceded—at all events , I must assume—that with the second class (/¦) we have nothing at present to do . Lest , however , it should be thought that I seek , by a mere cursory reference , to evade the examination of the question , whether a debt due for dues payable to a Masonic lodge constitutes a legal obligation , I may as well warn the reader that at a later period of this letter ,
I propose , as an inevitable corollary to my general argument , to bestow a little consideration upon this very delicate subject . At present I have to ascertain whether , assuming payment of lodge dues to bc wholly voluntary , a duty to the revenue attaches when the amount paid is above forty shillings . Now , to clear the ground as we go on , I presume that
every brother , certainly every legal brother , will agree with me that the duty is not chargeable upon the payment per se , i . e ., upon the act or fact of disbursement . It is clearly only payable upon the written voucher , and , if I read the first part of the above section correctly , payable upon that documentary evidence of the amount having been paid , without reference , to the object for which the
payment is made . Concede that the payment of dues to a lodge is wholly for the purposes of charity—a large concession by the way—prima facie there is no intrinsic necessity for taking written receipts at all for money disbursed for the purposes of charitable relief -, there is obviously no obligation to give a documentary voucher for the payment unless the donor requires one , but , the recipient electing
as an evidence of his good faith to give , rather than to refrain from giving , a written receipt , or , the donor requiring for his own purposes the delivery of such a document , or , putting the case in other words , making his donation conditional on a written voucher being furnished to him , the transaction would appear by the delivery of the instrument to be brought within the provisions of the
statute , and the duty therefore to attach . The Act of Parliament , however , imposing the duty definitively , provides certain exemptions from liability . Starting from my point of view , that the charge is upon the document evidencing , and not upon the manual act evidenced , a claim to exemption must be expressly brought within the category thus specially detailed , or within the
general exemptions from liability to stamp duty . The former ' will be found in Tillsley ' s Treatise on the Stamp Laws ( 3 rd edition , 1871 ) , page 523 ; the latter in the same work , page 531 . And before I allude further to these exemptions—reminding my readers that the legal practitioner is trained to make every word of a statute speak , i . e ., to give to each
expression a meaning—to attribute to the employment of every phrase a well considered and earnest intention , either to enact directly , or by illustration , or analogy , to remove doubes as to the general object of the legislation essayed—I would call attention to the use of ihe word " deposited " in the section 1 have quoted above . It is obvious from that word that a voluntary bailment of money—a
detmsitnni to the bailor ' s own use—will come within the liability to duty unless that liability be displaced by an express pioviso or the general law oi exemption ; and this is proved by the statute , in its schedule , in the very first exemption ( No . 1 ) under the heading " Receipt , " exempting from liability to the duty moneys deposited with a banker ; 7 . e . d ., all other voluntary deposits and « fortiori voluntary payments
exceeding the statutory amount are liable . I readily admit a certain amount of plausibility in the letter in your last impression of W . M ., No . 766 , but of course no amount of plausible argument will prevail against the express words of a statute . His inference from the exemption of building societies fails , because , as I shall proceed to show , those institutions enjoy a specific statutory
exemption , while his argument as to the non-liability of a receipt for a deposit seems to have been specifically answered by anticipation , by the employment of the word "deposited " in the first paragraph of the section cited above . Parparcnlhi ' se , 1 mny observe that there is a widely spread delusion that inasmuch as a cheque bears a penny stamp the receipt for a payment of more than 40 s . made by
checjuc is exempt from receipt stamp duty , the penny having been already paid . There was formerly some colour for this impression , for before 1870 an exemption statutorily relieved " Receipts or discharges written upon promissory notes , bills of exchange , drafts , or orders for the payment of money duly stamped according to the laws in force at the date thereof , or upon bills of exchange drawn out of , but payable in , Great Britain or Ireland respectively . " But
by the act of 1870 , cited above , the exemption , by what 1 venture to think must be regarded as an explanatory or declaratory rather than a restricting or amending enactment , is defined to extend only to a " receipt written upon a bill of exchange or promissory note duly stamped . " The exposition thus hazarded may not be without its use to those lodges where considerable payments are usually made by cheques or drafts payable to order or bearer .
* Of course the italic initials , and the other italics , are my own , and for the punctuation the Parliamentary printer is responsible , acts not being punctuated in their engrossment on the Parliamentary roll any more than the printed pleadings delivered in legal actions , or other legal instruments .
Original Correspondence.
To return to the exemptions . No other class interests us , or can be even remotely suggested as being anologous to Freemasons , than provident or friendly societies ; but I need not occupy your space by a laboured endeavour to prove that Freemasons do not come within a category so strictly defined by statute as these voluntary associations . Some doubt is expressed in the editorial postcript to the letter of
Bro . Richard Brown in your impression of the 31 st ult . as to the exemption of friendly , provident , and building societies , and you courteously request information on the point . The Friendly Societies' Act ( England ) , 18 and 19 Vict ., cap . 63 , sec . 37 , ( and see also sees . 2 and 3 ) ; the Industrial and Provident Societies'Act , 30 and 31 Vict ., cap . 117 , sec . 3 , and the various acts relating to building
societies , too numerous to be cited here , specifically provide these exemptions . I conclude , then , that even were the dues entirely devoted to purposes of relief a written acknowledgment of their payment to an amount exceeding 40 s . would , in each case , be liable , ijua depositum , to the penny duty . But are all the moneys so received devoted to the relief
of distress ? Of course , if my construction be correct , this is an immaterial question ; but when Bro . Snowden quotes a view of the law which I , as I have said , believe to be erroneous , as held by a P . M ., and goes on to say , " I am at a loss to understand upon what grounds such an opinion could be for one moment entertained by a P . M ., " I am constrained to give some reasons why I do not share his
expressed astonishment . Now , a P . M . had two very plausible , very popular , and , as 1 have tried to prove , two very inaccurate views to rely upon in justification of his contention : — Firstly . That documents purporting to be receipts for money given in charity were not liable to stamp duty . Secondly . That documents purporting to be receipts for
money not legally recoverable were not so liable . I have , I think , almost conclusively dealt with the first view , but I must for a moment , in connection with this , hark back to my query—Are all the moneys received as dues devoted to the relief of distress ? Roughly—mentally —analyse , say , an annual subscription of five guineas paid to a lodge , the brethren of which like to enjoy themselves ,
deduct from the sum the propoition payable for the brother as his share of the working and the convivial disbursements of the lodge , would not the charity-devoted residuum in the vast majority of cases be a sum over which no controversy could arise , inasmuch as it would be considerably beneath the statutorily chargeable forty shillings ? And here let me protest that I intend no sneer at the
propensities to social enjoyment credited or debited to the members of the Craft . God forbid ! The proportion of the revenue of an ordinary lodge devoted to charity must necessarily , in the vast majority of instances , be considerably less than the amount directly allotted to ordinary lodge expenses—the very nature of the organisation to render the body , as a philanthropic association , a
machine equal to the performance of its duties , necessitates this result ; but every one of my brethren will , I presume , readily endorse my view , that the direct amount contributed in each year out of the regular revenue of a lodge to our noble Charities bears but a small proportion to the stream of benevolence its influence evokes from the individual bounty of its members .
Well , then , if 1 am right , in the vast majority of instances , an immensely preponderating per centage of payments of lodge dues could not claim exemption from stamp duty on the ground of being devoted to objects of charity , even if that formed a legal ground of exemption , which , in my opinion , it does not ; but try this by an extreme illustration . The very converse is the case with Grand Lodge .
There the proportion of receipts applied to office and general expenses is conspicuously small , the amount devoted to relief overwhelmingly large ; yet the authorities at Grand Lodge , with , what of course I consider to be , a sound view of their legal obligations , invariably affix a receipt stamp when they acknowledge payment of a sum above forty shillings .
I have , I am afraid , very nearly exhausted the whole of the space 1 can in decency ask you to allow me , and I have still greater fear than I have of your individual indulgence of having exhausted the patience cf my wearied readers . However , I must just touch upon the above " secondly , " the assumed non-liability to stamp duty of receipts for the payment of money not legally recoverable .
* In a case cited in Tillsley ' s work , referred to above , at pages 119 and 435 , and the same reference given in the note at each page , the learned author states a judicial decision , that a receipt stamp was not required on a document which did not purport to be an acknowledgment of the payment of " an antecedent debt . " It is , however , never safe to adopt the conclusion from any case of an
author , however learned , without referring to the report itself , and as in this instance I have spent many hours in vainly trying to find " Carey * v . Eccleston " from the unknown and inexplicable reference " 1 C . & D ., " I am compelled to pass by this authority , which , if it says all the author maintains it affirms , and if—a very large "if "—it has been decided since the statute of 1870 , might
render necessary a reconsideration of much that I have written above . Familiar as I am , however , with most of our reports , as they must necessarily be in use with me every day , and industriously as I have searched ; those learned reporters " C . te . D . " yet remain to me alphabetical characters " ct preterea nihil , " and the judicial wisdom of " Carey v . Eccleston" is , notwithstanding the digests ,
hidden from my prying eyes . If I come across it hereafter I will inflict upon your readers , if necessary , my view of how much , if at all , it qualifies tbe position I have attempted to take up . As at present but partially enlightened , however , we must , 1 fear , face the vexatio i / iimstio : Is the initiation fee , is the subscription to a lodge , a debt legally recoverable ? This point was argued out before the learned judge of
Original Correspondence.
the Westminster County Court , than whom a sounder lawyer does not adorn the minor judicial bench , on the 10 th of October last , and the report , reprinted from thg Sunday Times , appeared in your impression of the 28 th of that month . The able judge ( Bayly , Q . C . ) decided that a member of a Masonic lodge did not by being initiated and joining ( a fortiori by joining only ) contract any legal
obligation for fees and dues , and I confess I think that he was right . My learned friend , Mr . Stone , ably endeavoured to make use of the Judicature Act , 1875 , Order XVI ,, rule 9 , and the analagous provisions of the Consolidated County Court Orders , Order V ., rule 8 , but these would only technically have helped him , by enabling him to substitute a personal entitv for an abstract oartv .
whereas I think that upon the merits he had no case , that is to say , no contract with any party could be proved , and that the real cause of the defeat of the plaintiff was , therefore , the exact converse of that stated in the letter of the Master of the Hervey Lodge , appearing in your columns of the 1 ith November last . I have looked into my learned friend ' s authority , "Pollock on Contracts , " and , so far as I
have had time to examine that author's views , taking it fairly and with the context , it appears to me to be rather against Mr . Stone ' s contention . And here let me , I think justifiably , complain of the slovenly reporting of the original reporter ( you , of course , are blameless , as , as you are aware , you merely transcribed from a contemporary ) . The case cited as " Ruget v . Bishop , " with such a
preposterous reference as "Law Reports 733 , " should be '' Raggett v . Bishop , " and the correct reference is 2 Car and Payne 343 , while the reference to Pollock , printed 795 , I find should be 595 . In the admirable work of the latter author , however , the whole subject of the liability of members of voluntary associations is exhaustively treated at pages 195 to 210 .
I lie matter is of importance , because it might bethought , though , for the reasons above urged , I do not well see how it can be , that receipt stamp duty only attaches to payments made in discharge of a legal liability , in which case it becomes , of course , an indispensable preliminary to enquire whether payments of Masonic dues are legally compulsory or not .
In conclusion , I readily own that my interpretation of the law may be unsound . When a much greater lawyer than ever I can hope to be was gravely informed that he had committed an error of construction , he composedly replied , " And I trust I may be spared to commit many more errors . " I can only say that I shall be truly thankful to any brother who , differintr from mv view , will kindlv
through your columns set me , and those who think with me , right if we are wrong ; and as this is not a case where a professional man should , under the veil of a nam . da plume , however transparent , affect to conceal his identity , or seem to shrink from the consequences of his deliberately formed opinions , I do not write anonymously , but beg to subscribe myself ,
Dear Sir and Brother , yours faithfully and fraternally , SAMUEL POYNTER , P . M . and Treas . Burgoyne , No . 902 P . M . Athenamm , No . 1491 ; Member of the Board of General Purposes , Colonial Board , and Lodge of Benevolence .
THE INSTALLATION AT ABERDARE . To the Editor of the " Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Will you permit mc to call your attention to an omission in your report last week of the above important
event . All the officers chosen by Sir George Elliot were mentioned , with the exception of Bro . John Jones , 833 , who was re-elected Treasurer of Prov . Grand Lodge . I am , yours fraternally , J . F . H .
Multum In Parbo,Or Masonic Notes And Queries.
Multum in Parbo , or Masonic Notes and Queries .
ORGANIZATION OK CHAFT MASONRY IN ENGLAND . The Craftsman quotes the following passage from that very interesting work , " Fort's Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry " : — According to Findel , Freemasons were first organized as a Craft in England in the year 1202 , at the building of Winchester Cathedral ; but according to Fort , the
English Craft was organized nearly a century earlier , in A . D . 1136 , at the building of Melrose Abbey , by John Moreau . Forty years later William of Sens reconstructed Canterbury Cathedral in A . D . 1176 . From the inscribed tablets on Melrose Abbey , it appears that J ohn Moreau , or Morow , was the Master , perhaps the Grand Master , of all the Masonic work or lodges , at St . Andrew ' s , around the
Cathedral of Glasgow , and at the churches of Paisley , Niddisdale and Galway . But it is to be observed , first , that the " Winchester Guild " was only incorporated by Bishop Lucy , to aid in the work of Winchester Cathedral , and that the operative Masonic Guilds themselves were of earlier orig in undoubtedly . Secondly , it would , I think-, be more correct
to say that Bishop Lucy ' s organization , mentioned by Milner , but of which the original charter has not been printed , though it may still exist in the muniment room of Winchester Cathedral , is first alluded to in " The Annales Wintonienses , " published by Henry Wharton in the first volume of - 'Anglia Sacra , " 1691 .
The " Annales Wintonienses" are said to have been written by a monk of Winchester about 1454 . He g ives then , in 1454 , the account of the formation in 1202 of a Winchester building fraternity or guild , a " confratriam pro reparatione ccclesias Winton , " which was only to continue " duraturam usque ad quinque annos completes ' —five years .