-
Articles/Ads
Article THE TOAST OF THE "GRAND OFFICERS," &c. ← Page 2 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 Article Original Correspondence. Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Toast Of The "Grand Officers," &C.
from the fact that they arc appointed or removed entirely by the Grand Alaster , the Grand Lodge in no way being consulted or allowed a voice in the matter . In thc case of the Grand Officers , as "Bayard" and others have pointed out , they cannot be removed without the consent of ihe Grand- Lodge . 1 am quite willing to admit that
Provincial Grand Alasters may be styled officers in the Grand Lodge , but not of the Grand Lodge , as " Bayard " suggests . The real fact is , their position in the Grand Lod " "e is due to a desire to honour such useful and noble brethren as much as possible . The '" Grand Officers" are invested by the Grand
Master ( or acting Grand Master ) , and without such ceremony are really but Grand Officers , nominate or elect . Provincial Grand Masters are in like manner but Provincial Grand Masters nominate until invested and obligated , only the latter do not require to be invested in Grand Lodec , whereas the Grand Officers must always be . Is
not this a proof of the difference between these two classes of officers , and evidence that the " Book of Constitutions " refers to Grand Officers ns such , and not to Provincial Grand Alasters in thc various clauses noted by " Bayard ?" There is more involved in the enquiry than appears on the surface , and certainly if the learned Editor of the
Freemason and those who think with him are correct , the " Book of Constitutions" requires in many parts to be altered . It occurs to mc that thc Provincial Grand Alasters in thc Grand Lodge , and joining Past Alasters in lodges , are in somewhat the same position . To thc toast of the
" Grand Officers , the officers of , not in , the Grand Lodge should respond , and to that of the "Past Alasters , " the Past Alasters of , not in , the lodge should respond , fs not this fair reasoning ? If the Grand Officers invested annually by the Alost Worshipful Grand Alaster are not to respond to the toast of the "Grand Officers , " because
Provincial Grand Alasters are present , the toast had better be altered in thc future , so as to ensure their so doing . Say " Grand Officers of the year . " If the toast were given in full , would it not be "The D . G . AI ., Grand Wardens , Chaplains , Treasurer , Registrar , Pres . B . of G . P ., Secretary , Deacons , S . of Works , Dir . of
Ceremonies , tec ? Would it include the Provincial Grand Masters ? " I say positively no , and never has , whenever it has been given in full , or alluded to at length by thc presiding officer . True , thc Provincial Grand Alasters often preside in Grand Lotlge , and no one objects thereto , but what may be considered a privilege is not a right , and their presiding cannot override the Book of Constitutions . REV 1 RESCO .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ We do not hold ourselves responsible for , or even approving of , the opinions expressed by our correspondents , but we wisii in a spirit of fair play to all to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ]
GRAND LODGE OFFICERS . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — With all deference to "Bayard , " I fully understood his argument , such as it was , but he must allow me to add that the theory of an essential difference as between "Grand Officers" and " Officers of Giand Lodge , " though
very ingenious , was an " after thought , " and I do not remember , though I may bc wrong , that he has used the argument before , whatever he may have meant . The Book of Constitutions apparently makes no difference or distinction . It uses the words "Officers Grand , " sec "Grantl Officers ; " and , as far as the terminology of the Book of Constitutions is concerned , they arc " convertible
terms . '' We all know that there is a difference between l ' rov . and District Grand Masters antl the actual " Grand Ollieers" of the year in that thc former areinvested under ' patent " in theirown Provincial antl District Grand Lodge , and the latter in Grand Lodge itself . . But though this be so , and the sections and laws applying to the invested officers of Grand Lodge are many and
precise , yet this fact does not do away with another factmat , under the Book of Constitutions , Prov . and District y / and Masters are assigned a place of precedence and dignity in Grand Lodge , form part of Grand Lodge , arc Grantl Officers , in thc sense and limits of the Book of Constitutions , in Grand Lodge , and as such , as " Bayard ' s " learned brother truly tells him , which is just what I have contended for from the first , "entitled to preside over Grand tl
ge . " tl u ' - 'lcre , v '" ' ' lert'ie forceof argument has driven f le ! . nasty innovations on a thirty years' practice and habit . ' -nglish Freemasonry . Having previously asserted thc '" propriety of a Prov . and District Grand Alaster respond'" S legally for the toast of the Grantl Officers in the presence of Grand Officers invested in Grand Lodge , they are "I ™ compelled to contend , to be consistent , ( as I pointed ™ t that they must do ) , that a Prov . and District Grand nc t > cannot legally preside over Grand Lodge . What
for ' S oany further let me respectfully ask " Bayard " a , , any competent authority for such startling statements thr , v ' ee , 1 , in S changes . 1 hear a good deal of . " high aucan | who say t ,, isanJ sa > ' that , but 1 know of none . 1 ticn f 7 , 2 . ? ainst this stately dogmatism the positive p racial lou , r Grand Alasters , and the fact that no such theory •" ever been stated openly since 1 S 13 . _ , ttiC Only Orccodpnr which Urn . " R _ i , ^_ . rT " ,.. ¦„(¦_ , _ ,:,. n . n (
lhe nd " V rand Kestival > but that is only the exception to vals 1 ' - ' 1 , ave alrcady admitted , that at Grand Festiitiv . il-,. 1 ' L PI ) cars to me for obvious reasons ) , the senior If I ! , j ? r rctl " ' thanks , but at no other time . " CW ? " ,. Uaya » l" will look back to the records of thc spont i , I , f tlva 's . " for instance , he will find lhat the rensehas always been made , as a rule , by thc senior Grand
Original Correspondence.
Officer present , mostly a Prov . or District Grand Alaster . Personally , 1 do not myself care which way the matter is decided ; but this system of " bowling people over " by such sudden reversions of a long established practice is really among the things a " fcllar can't understand . " Perhaps " Bayard" and I having said our say , had
better take off our hats , make a respectful bow , and ' give way to our " ciders and betters . " Yours fraternally , _ NOT INFALLIBLE . P . S . —At thebanquetto the Prince of Wales on Alonday at the Afansion House , H . R . H . the Duke of Connaught naturally returned thanks for " The Grand Officers , " as a Prince of the Blood Royal .
THE ANCIENT AND PRIMITIVE RITE . To the Editor ofthe "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — To correct any erroneous impression conveyed by your leader in thc Freemason of this date , anent the conflicting claims of the Ancient and Accepted and Ancient and Primitive Rites , and which appears to me to have been
written , not only under a considerable amount of pressure from without , but also under a total misapprehension of the true histories of the two bodies , permit me to remark that whilst , with yourself , I have the most profound respect , individually , for those prominent members of Grand Lodge who are connected with the High Grades , still I cannot but express my regret that the Supreme Council of thc Ancient
and Accepted Rite should , in their official capacity , think it consistent with what you have well called "the true principles and rightful feelings of Alasonic comity and goodwill , " to covertly attack , from time to time , a Rite which , to say the least of it , has as good a title to a sovereign jurisdiction over its members as itself . Before , however , entering upon any discussion as to the relative authenticity of the two Rites , I should be glad to
knowist . Upon what authority you consider " thc Ancient and Accepted Rite , as established at Golden-square , " to possess a Sovereign jurisdiction overall "so-called Scotch Alasonry ?" 2 ndly . Upon what authority do you assume the Rite of Alemphis to be " all but extinct ?" 3 rdly . What date do you assign as that of the probable compilation of the Ancient and Accepted Rite , as it now stands ?
4 thly . Again , ' upon what authority do you state that the Ancient and Primitive Rite has " no claim whatever to that name ? " If you will kindly favour me with a reply on these points , I hope to be able to satisfy yourself , and your readers , that the Ancient and Primitive Rite is not of so very hazy an origin as you have been hitherto persuaded to believe .
I may add that I have not responded to the enquiries made , for several weeks , in your columns as to the "Goss " Rite , and the connection of that distinguished (?) brother with the High Grade system in England , simply because I desired to avoid entering upon a controversy which mi g ht possibly give offence , and could afford but little satisfaction to those most interested . I feel , however , that to longer remain silent under the unjust assertions cast by
implication upon the Rite of which I have the honour to be an officer would amount to a positive dereliction of duty , as it would be most unfair to thc brethren , who , like myself , arc proud to own their allegiance tojthe Ancient and Primitive Rite ; and I trust to your well-known love of fair play to afford me due opportunity of defence . I am , dear Sir and Brother , yours very truly , JAMES HILL , 33 ° , G . Sec . Gen . A . and P . Kite . October iCth .
[ We willingly publish this letter , taking out one or two personal remarks . —KD . F . AL ]
DRILL . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Though 1 am a great advocate for " drill" in our schools , I yet admit that it may be carried too far , for we do not want our people to bc a " nation of soldiers . " There is a possibility of " over-doing " it , and , therefore , we must
always be on our guard against such a contingency . There isan amusingstory in "Convict Life , " by a "Ticket of Leave Alan , " which touches upon this obvious hazard of " Red Tape " with great force and amusing pathos . I give it in the words of a contemporary quoting the work , which , as I have not read myself , I can only accept the quotation in faith , and take " on herasay . "
He gives us _ the following incident in "breaking bad news " to convicts , as a proof that it is not well always to be " too military . " — " One morning , I think it was in September , 1 S 73 , the poor fellow was summoned into the presence of the governor . 1 will describe thc interview , because it portrays the character of the governor . I know that he had many rough characters to control , who require rough treatment . At
times , no doubt , he did well to be stern ; but there are times when even the governor of a prison should unbend . This governor was a militia or volunteer officer , and so , of course , stood severely on his military dignity ; he insisted on a salute from everybody , officers and prisoners , whenever he made his appearance . On this September morning my sorrowing neighbour had been greatly disappointed
at getting no news ot his wife through the warder . At noon he was ushered into the awful presence of the governor . He was in a nervous state , and not thinking much of military tactics when the stern ( voice of the chief warder called out , ' 'Ands by your side I Hies to the front !' Governor : 'Do you know a Airs . Warner ? ' Prisoner :
'Yes , sir . ' Governor : 'Who is she ? a relative ? ' Prisoner : ' She is a friend with whom my wife is staying , and she is kindly nurs ' Governor : 'That will do . There is bad news for you . Your wife is dead I' Chief Warder : ' Right about face I Ouick march I' " A " word to thc wise " is sufficient . Yours fraternally , EAIERITUS .
FREEMASONRY IN DURHAM . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — It is always pleasing to read about one ' s mother lodge , especially when that lodge is an old one , and to which there is attached an abundance of old lore and historical facts . The perusal of the two articles on " Durham Freemasonry , " in your issues dated the 16 th and 23 rd inst ., showed that thc writer had evidently given
Original Correspondence.
much consideration to the subject and was able to give us some useful information relating to the ancient lodges . But I take exception to some of his remarks respecting the place of origin of the Lodge of Industry , No . 4 S . I know something of its early history and vicissitudes , but I never heard that it was "an alien " to Durham at any time , nor yet that it ever had a home out of the province . The lodge
was an operative one before the close of the 17 th century , and is said to have been established and held at Swalwell , a village four miles from this town , prior to the year 1717 . The ancient minute book , which goes back as far as tho year 1723 , gives , in the year 1733 , the names of its officers . It is also mentioned under date of 29 th Sept . 1725 , that " Alathew Armstrong and Arthur Douglass , Alasons ,
appeared to have their names registered as Entered Apprentices . " We are also informed in the same book , under dato 24 th June , 1735 , that the lodge was held at Bro . Thompson ' s , Swalwell , when it was constituted ( query ^ -constituted ) by Bro . Jos . Laycock , P . G . AL , the first known P . G . M . of Durham . We are also told that on December 17 th , 1737-S , Wm . Burton ,
of Whickham ( an adjoining village ) , " his indenture was read over as apprentice to Alathew Armstrong , of Swalwell . " This Alathew Armstrong is probably the sama mentioned as being registered in 1725 . We have in a continuous line the names of the several Alasters , from which it appears that from 1733 to 1 S 44 the lodge was regularly held at Swalwell , and from 1 S 45 to the present time it has been located at Gateshead . This evidence clearly disoroves thc theory of vour corres-r
pondent that the lodge was ever held out of the province , and 1 shall be glad to hear from what authority the writer obtained his information . I may , perhaps , be permitted lo state that the minute hook containing the record of the union between the old Union and the Borough lodges exists , and is in the possession of Bro . Dr . R . Fi Cook , P . AL of No . 48 . Yours fraternally , ROBT . WHITFIELD , October 26 th . I . P . AI . Lodge of Industry , No . 48 .
ROYAL ARCH A 1 ASONRY . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — As an energetic Arch Alason I should be pleased to see the regulations as to formation of chapters altered ; in my own experience I could give many instances of the three years' delay , and a chapter started with only one or two members of thc mother lodge , the others having joined
other bodies directly the lapse of a year enabled them to do so . Let new lodges'be few and far between ; the number formed seems to be decreasing in London . Alay the Prov . Grand Masters be equally careful , and chapters be formed . I cannot agree with your remarks as to the chapters and the charities , as brethren cannot lind money for Stewards ' lists in both lodges and chapters . Yours fraternally , I . P . AI .
LODGE SUPPORT TO THE CHARITIES To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Referring to the letter of your Correspondent " Charity "in your last week ' s number , on the above subject , I believe my experience may be of some value . About six years since I loincd a lodge in the country
town where I now reside , and was surprised to find that , with the exception of two brethren who resided out of the province , I was the only life subscriber or governor of the Alasonic Schools , and that the practice of the lodge was to give a guinea a year to each of the Charities and obtain annual votes . VVe had at that time one of our old brethren in thc Benevolent Institution , thc son of a deceased brother
in the School , and the son of another brother a candidate for admission ; the number of members was about twentyfive , our subscription one and a half-guineas a year , and we had a balance of from £ 20 to £ 23 . Under these circumstances I undertook the advocacy of the Charities ; formed a Lodge Charit y Association , and advocated the support out of lodge funds to any brother going up as
Steward . My efforts were much more successful than I anticipated—the Charity Association has increased the number of individual life subscribers in the province connected with this lodge from one to ten ( including three ladies ) , and will shortly increase that number to eighteen , whilst the support given by thelodge in supportingbrethien going up as Stewards , and by subscribing to the Lodge
Charity Association , has placed it in possession of four votes in perpetuity . This in six years from a small country lodge of only twenty-five members is , I consider , very good , in fact too good ; and I find by experience that I have ridden a willing horse too hard , and he ' s a little weak now , but I hope by judicious management , with regular gentle exercise , to soon put him all right again .
At the last audit there was a balance due to the Treasurer , a circumstance that has not happened for some years , and this year it appears that , although our numbers have slightly increased , wc shall still be in debt at the audit in Alarch next , unless in the mean time we have a few initiations . On the occasion of the last audit thc blame for this state of affairs was laid at my door , but not in a spirit of
complaint , for all the brethren knew the cause of our beingin deht , and sympathised with the object ; hut they felt , and none more so than myself , that it is the duty of every lodge , as well as individual , to "be just before they are generous , " and therefore they justly complained . Having to some extent been the part y to lead the lodge into this mess , 1 began to consider the best means of
extricating it , without sacrificing the benevolent feelings that had been aroused . Some of the brethren said , stop the charity vote for a few years ; others advocated a return to the old system of a guinea a year , but I am glad to say thc majority concurred in the opinion that a lodge having subscriptions amounting to nearly £ 40 a year , whilst it could not continually bc supporting sStewards with
donations of ten guineas , could , or * ought at least , to subscribe four guineas a year to the Charities ; it was , therefore , proposed , and unanimously resolved , "That thelodge , instead of subscribing direct to the Charities , be a subscriber of four guineas a year to the
Lodge Charity Association , for the purpose of providing the lodge with votes in perpetuity , " and the result now is that , without distressing the lodge , the Lodge Charity Association can always place ten guineas on the list of any brother going up to represent the lodge as a Steward . I have never heard it urged , either in my present lodges o elsewhere , that because a brother was 311 individual tu
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Toast Of The "Grand Officers," &C.
from the fact that they arc appointed or removed entirely by the Grand Alaster , the Grand Lodge in no way being consulted or allowed a voice in the matter . In thc case of the Grand Officers , as "Bayard" and others have pointed out , they cannot be removed without the consent of ihe Grand- Lodge . 1 am quite willing to admit that
Provincial Grand Alasters may be styled officers in the Grand Lodge , but not of the Grand Lodge , as " Bayard " suggests . The real fact is , their position in the Grand Lod " "e is due to a desire to honour such useful and noble brethren as much as possible . The '" Grand Officers" are invested by the Grand
Master ( or acting Grand Master ) , and without such ceremony are really but Grand Officers , nominate or elect . Provincial Grand Masters are in like manner but Provincial Grand Masters nominate until invested and obligated , only the latter do not require to be invested in Grand Lodec , whereas the Grand Officers must always be . Is
not this a proof of the difference between these two classes of officers , and evidence that the " Book of Constitutions " refers to Grand Officers ns such , and not to Provincial Grand Alasters in thc various clauses noted by " Bayard ?" There is more involved in the enquiry than appears on the surface , and certainly if the learned Editor of the
Freemason and those who think with him are correct , the " Book of Constitutions" requires in many parts to be altered . It occurs to mc that thc Provincial Grand Alasters in thc Grand Lodge , and joining Past Alasters in lodges , are in somewhat the same position . To thc toast of the
" Grand Officers , the officers of , not in , the Grand Lodge should respond , and to that of the "Past Alasters , " the Past Alasters of , not in , the lodge should respond , fs not this fair reasoning ? If the Grand Officers invested annually by the Alost Worshipful Grand Alaster are not to respond to the toast of the "Grand Officers , " because
Provincial Grand Alasters are present , the toast had better be altered in thc future , so as to ensure their so doing . Say " Grand Officers of the year . " If the toast were given in full , would it not be "The D . G . AI ., Grand Wardens , Chaplains , Treasurer , Registrar , Pres . B . of G . P ., Secretary , Deacons , S . of Works , Dir . of
Ceremonies , tec ? Would it include the Provincial Grand Masters ? " I say positively no , and never has , whenever it has been given in full , or alluded to at length by thc presiding officer . True , thc Provincial Grand Alasters often preside in Grand Lotlge , and no one objects thereto , but what may be considered a privilege is not a right , and their presiding cannot override the Book of Constitutions . REV 1 RESCO .
Original Correspondence.
Original Correspondence .
[ We do not hold ourselves responsible for , or even approving of , the opinions expressed by our correspondents , but we wisii in a spirit of fair play to all to permit—within certain necessary limits—free discussion . ]
GRAND LODGE OFFICERS . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — With all deference to "Bayard , " I fully understood his argument , such as it was , but he must allow me to add that the theory of an essential difference as between "Grand Officers" and " Officers of Giand Lodge , " though
very ingenious , was an " after thought , " and I do not remember , though I may bc wrong , that he has used the argument before , whatever he may have meant . The Book of Constitutions apparently makes no difference or distinction . It uses the words "Officers Grand , " sec "Grantl Officers ; " and , as far as the terminology of the Book of Constitutions is concerned , they arc " convertible
terms . '' We all know that there is a difference between l ' rov . and District Grand Masters antl the actual " Grand Ollieers" of the year in that thc former areinvested under ' patent " in theirown Provincial antl District Grand Lodge , and the latter in Grand Lodge itself . . But though this be so , and the sections and laws applying to the invested officers of Grand Lodge are many and
precise , yet this fact does not do away with another factmat , under the Book of Constitutions , Prov . and District y / and Masters are assigned a place of precedence and dignity in Grand Lodge , form part of Grand Lodge , arc Grantl Officers , in thc sense and limits of the Book of Constitutions , in Grand Lodge , and as such , as " Bayard ' s " learned brother truly tells him , which is just what I have contended for from the first , "entitled to preside over Grand tl
ge . " tl u ' - 'lcre , v '" ' ' lert'ie forceof argument has driven f le ! . nasty innovations on a thirty years' practice and habit . ' -nglish Freemasonry . Having previously asserted thc '" propriety of a Prov . and District Grand Alaster respond'" S legally for the toast of the Grantl Officers in the presence of Grand Officers invested in Grand Lodge , they are "I ™ compelled to contend , to be consistent , ( as I pointed ™ t that they must do ) , that a Prov . and District Grand nc t > cannot legally preside over Grand Lodge . What
for ' S oany further let me respectfully ask " Bayard " a , , any competent authority for such startling statements thr , v ' ee , 1 , in S changes . 1 hear a good deal of . " high aucan | who say t ,, isanJ sa > ' that , but 1 know of none . 1 ticn f 7 , 2 . ? ainst this stately dogmatism the positive p racial lou , r Grand Alasters , and the fact that no such theory •" ever been stated openly since 1 S 13 . _ , ttiC Only Orccodpnr which Urn . " R _ i , ^_ . rT " ,.. ¦„(¦_ , _ ,:,. n . n (
lhe nd " V rand Kestival > but that is only the exception to vals 1 ' - ' 1 , ave alrcady admitted , that at Grand Festiitiv . il-,. 1 ' L PI ) cars to me for obvious reasons ) , the senior If I ! , j ? r rctl " ' thanks , but at no other time . " CW ? " ,. Uaya » l" will look back to the records of thc spont i , I , f tlva 's . " for instance , he will find lhat the rensehas always been made , as a rule , by thc senior Grand
Original Correspondence.
Officer present , mostly a Prov . or District Grand Alaster . Personally , 1 do not myself care which way the matter is decided ; but this system of " bowling people over " by such sudden reversions of a long established practice is really among the things a " fcllar can't understand . " Perhaps " Bayard" and I having said our say , had
better take off our hats , make a respectful bow , and ' give way to our " ciders and betters . " Yours fraternally , _ NOT INFALLIBLE . P . S . —At thebanquetto the Prince of Wales on Alonday at the Afansion House , H . R . H . the Duke of Connaught naturally returned thanks for " The Grand Officers , " as a Prince of the Blood Royal .
THE ANCIENT AND PRIMITIVE RITE . To the Editor ofthe "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — To correct any erroneous impression conveyed by your leader in thc Freemason of this date , anent the conflicting claims of the Ancient and Accepted and Ancient and Primitive Rites , and which appears to me to have been
written , not only under a considerable amount of pressure from without , but also under a total misapprehension of the true histories of the two bodies , permit me to remark that whilst , with yourself , I have the most profound respect , individually , for those prominent members of Grand Lodge who are connected with the High Grades , still I cannot but express my regret that the Supreme Council of thc Ancient
and Accepted Rite should , in their official capacity , think it consistent with what you have well called "the true principles and rightful feelings of Alasonic comity and goodwill , " to covertly attack , from time to time , a Rite which , to say the least of it , has as good a title to a sovereign jurisdiction over its members as itself . Before , however , entering upon any discussion as to the relative authenticity of the two Rites , I should be glad to
knowist . Upon what authority you consider " thc Ancient and Accepted Rite , as established at Golden-square , " to possess a Sovereign jurisdiction overall "so-called Scotch Alasonry ?" 2 ndly . Upon what authority do you assume the Rite of Alemphis to be " all but extinct ?" 3 rdly . What date do you assign as that of the probable compilation of the Ancient and Accepted Rite , as it now stands ?
4 thly . Again , ' upon what authority do you state that the Ancient and Primitive Rite has " no claim whatever to that name ? " If you will kindly favour me with a reply on these points , I hope to be able to satisfy yourself , and your readers , that the Ancient and Primitive Rite is not of so very hazy an origin as you have been hitherto persuaded to believe .
I may add that I have not responded to the enquiries made , for several weeks , in your columns as to the "Goss " Rite , and the connection of that distinguished (?) brother with the High Grade system in England , simply because I desired to avoid entering upon a controversy which mi g ht possibly give offence , and could afford but little satisfaction to those most interested . I feel , however , that to longer remain silent under the unjust assertions cast by
implication upon the Rite of which I have the honour to be an officer would amount to a positive dereliction of duty , as it would be most unfair to thc brethren , who , like myself , arc proud to own their allegiance tojthe Ancient and Primitive Rite ; and I trust to your well-known love of fair play to afford me due opportunity of defence . I am , dear Sir and Brother , yours very truly , JAMES HILL , 33 ° , G . Sec . Gen . A . and P . Kite . October iCth .
[ We willingly publish this letter , taking out one or two personal remarks . —KD . F . AL ]
DRILL . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Though 1 am a great advocate for " drill" in our schools , I yet admit that it may be carried too far , for we do not want our people to bc a " nation of soldiers . " There is a possibility of " over-doing " it , and , therefore , we must
always be on our guard against such a contingency . There isan amusingstory in "Convict Life , " by a "Ticket of Leave Alan , " which touches upon this obvious hazard of " Red Tape " with great force and amusing pathos . I give it in the words of a contemporary quoting the work , which , as I have not read myself , I can only accept the quotation in faith , and take " on herasay . "
He gives us _ the following incident in "breaking bad news " to convicts , as a proof that it is not well always to be " too military . " — " One morning , I think it was in September , 1 S 73 , the poor fellow was summoned into the presence of the governor . 1 will describe thc interview , because it portrays the character of the governor . I know that he had many rough characters to control , who require rough treatment . At
times , no doubt , he did well to be stern ; but there are times when even the governor of a prison should unbend . This governor was a militia or volunteer officer , and so , of course , stood severely on his military dignity ; he insisted on a salute from everybody , officers and prisoners , whenever he made his appearance . On this September morning my sorrowing neighbour had been greatly disappointed
at getting no news ot his wife through the warder . At noon he was ushered into the awful presence of the governor . He was in a nervous state , and not thinking much of military tactics when the stern ( voice of the chief warder called out , ' 'Ands by your side I Hies to the front !' Governor : 'Do you know a Airs . Warner ? ' Prisoner :
'Yes , sir . ' Governor : 'Who is she ? a relative ? ' Prisoner : ' She is a friend with whom my wife is staying , and she is kindly nurs ' Governor : 'That will do . There is bad news for you . Your wife is dead I' Chief Warder : ' Right about face I Ouick march I' " A " word to thc wise " is sufficient . Yours fraternally , EAIERITUS .
FREEMASONRY IN DURHAM . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — It is always pleasing to read about one ' s mother lodge , especially when that lodge is an old one , and to which there is attached an abundance of old lore and historical facts . The perusal of the two articles on " Durham Freemasonry , " in your issues dated the 16 th and 23 rd inst ., showed that thc writer had evidently given
Original Correspondence.
much consideration to the subject and was able to give us some useful information relating to the ancient lodges . But I take exception to some of his remarks respecting the place of origin of the Lodge of Industry , No . 4 S . I know something of its early history and vicissitudes , but I never heard that it was "an alien " to Durham at any time , nor yet that it ever had a home out of the province . The lodge
was an operative one before the close of the 17 th century , and is said to have been established and held at Swalwell , a village four miles from this town , prior to the year 1717 . The ancient minute book , which goes back as far as tho year 1723 , gives , in the year 1733 , the names of its officers . It is also mentioned under date of 29 th Sept . 1725 , that " Alathew Armstrong and Arthur Douglass , Alasons ,
appeared to have their names registered as Entered Apprentices . " We are also informed in the same book , under dato 24 th June , 1735 , that the lodge was held at Bro . Thompson ' s , Swalwell , when it was constituted ( query ^ -constituted ) by Bro . Jos . Laycock , P . G . AL , the first known P . G . M . of Durham . We are also told that on December 17 th , 1737-S , Wm . Burton ,
of Whickham ( an adjoining village ) , " his indenture was read over as apprentice to Alathew Armstrong , of Swalwell . " This Alathew Armstrong is probably the sama mentioned as being registered in 1725 . We have in a continuous line the names of the several Alasters , from which it appears that from 1733 to 1 S 44 the lodge was regularly held at Swalwell , and from 1 S 45 to the present time it has been located at Gateshead . This evidence clearly disoroves thc theory of vour corres-r
pondent that the lodge was ever held out of the province , and 1 shall be glad to hear from what authority the writer obtained his information . I may , perhaps , be permitted lo state that the minute hook containing the record of the union between the old Union and the Borough lodges exists , and is in the possession of Bro . Dr . R . Fi Cook , P . AL of No . 48 . Yours fraternally , ROBT . WHITFIELD , October 26 th . I . P . AI . Lodge of Industry , No . 48 .
ROYAL ARCH A 1 ASONRY . To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — As an energetic Arch Alason I should be pleased to see the regulations as to formation of chapters altered ; in my own experience I could give many instances of the three years' delay , and a chapter started with only one or two members of thc mother lodge , the others having joined
other bodies directly the lapse of a year enabled them to do so . Let new lodges'be few and far between ; the number formed seems to be decreasing in London . Alay the Prov . Grand Masters be equally careful , and chapters be formed . I cannot agree with your remarks as to the chapters and the charities , as brethren cannot lind money for Stewards ' lists in both lodges and chapters . Yours fraternally , I . P . AI .
LODGE SUPPORT TO THE CHARITIES To the Editor of the "Freemason . " Dear Sir and Brother , — Referring to the letter of your Correspondent " Charity "in your last week ' s number , on the above subject , I believe my experience may be of some value . About six years since I loincd a lodge in the country
town where I now reside , and was surprised to find that , with the exception of two brethren who resided out of the province , I was the only life subscriber or governor of the Alasonic Schools , and that the practice of the lodge was to give a guinea a year to each of the Charities and obtain annual votes . VVe had at that time one of our old brethren in thc Benevolent Institution , thc son of a deceased brother
in the School , and the son of another brother a candidate for admission ; the number of members was about twentyfive , our subscription one and a half-guineas a year , and we had a balance of from £ 20 to £ 23 . Under these circumstances I undertook the advocacy of the Charities ; formed a Lodge Charit y Association , and advocated the support out of lodge funds to any brother going up as
Steward . My efforts were much more successful than I anticipated—the Charity Association has increased the number of individual life subscribers in the province connected with this lodge from one to ten ( including three ladies ) , and will shortly increase that number to eighteen , whilst the support given by thelodge in supportingbrethien going up as Stewards , and by subscribing to the Lodge
Charity Association , has placed it in possession of four votes in perpetuity . This in six years from a small country lodge of only twenty-five members is , I consider , very good , in fact too good ; and I find by experience that I have ridden a willing horse too hard , and he ' s a little weak now , but I hope by judicious management , with regular gentle exercise , to soon put him all right again .
At the last audit there was a balance due to the Treasurer , a circumstance that has not happened for some years , and this year it appears that , although our numbers have slightly increased , wc shall still be in debt at the audit in Alarch next , unless in the mean time we have a few initiations . On the occasion of the last audit thc blame for this state of affairs was laid at my door , but not in a spirit of
complaint , for all the brethren knew the cause of our beingin deht , and sympathised with the object ; hut they felt , and none more so than myself , that it is the duty of every lodge , as well as individual , to "be just before they are generous , " and therefore they justly complained . Having to some extent been the part y to lead the lodge into this mess , 1 began to consider the best means of
extricating it , without sacrificing the benevolent feelings that had been aroused . Some of the brethren said , stop the charity vote for a few years ; others advocated a return to the old system of a guinea a year , but I am glad to say thc majority concurred in the opinion that a lodge having subscriptions amounting to nearly £ 40 a year , whilst it could not continually bc supporting sStewards with
donations of ten guineas , could , or * ought at least , to subscribe four guineas a year to the Charities ; it was , therefore , proposed , and unanimously resolved , "That thelodge , instead of subscribing direct to the Charities , be a subscriber of four guineas a year to the
Lodge Charity Association , for the purpose of providing the lodge with votes in perpetuity , " and the result now is that , without distressing the lodge , the Lodge Charity Association can always place ten guineas on the list of any brother going up to represent the lodge as a Steward . I have never heard it urged , either in my present lodges o elsewhere , that because a brother was 311 individual tu