Contents.

CONTENTS .

L EADERS ••••¦ ' 93 Consecration of the Arrow Lodge , No . 3240 '' Consecration of the Montefiore Lodge , - 94

No IJ Provincial Grand Lodge of Shropshire ...... 19 S Provincial Grand Chapter of Norths and Hunts * 9 S Old Warrants . —VI 1 19 S Hand Lodge of Maryland , 1887 19 S

The History of the Roval Masonic Institution for Girls from its Origin , 178 S , to its Centenary , 1888- ( Continued ) 196 Presentation to Bro . W . H . Bullock 197 The Gold and Silver Wyre Drawers ' Company ' 9 ? Obituary ' 97 Theatres ' 97

C ORRESPONDENCEThe Royal Silver Wedding 199 The Appeal from Canterbury District Grand Lodge 199 Reviews 199

Notes and Queries 199 REPORTS OF MASONIO MEETINGSCraft Masonry 20 a Instruction 201 Royal Arch 201 Mark Masonry 202

Knights Templar ' . 203 Ancient and Accepted Rite 202 Royal Masonic Institution for Boys 202 Mark Grand Lodge Address of Silver Wedding Present to the Princess of Wales 203 Masonic and General Tidings 203 Lodge Meetings for Next Week iv .

Ar00101

The House A FURTHER stage in the MOTION controversy was concluded X ^ s ' hooi on Saturday last , when a Special Court of the Governors and and the boy Subscribers to the Royal Masonic Institution for Boys was Motion . _ - * .

held in the Crown Room of the Freemasons Tavern . More than 300 brethren were present , and after a patient hearing had been accorded to the speakers to both sides of the question , the motion for a Special Committee to inquire into the circumstances of the case was defeated by the very large majority of 199 votes to 118 votes , tellers included . If the partisans of the

boy are well advised , we shall hear no more of the matter . The controversy has already been carried beyond the limits of seemly argument , and if , unhappily , any further steps are taken to continue it in other forms or before other and less competent tribunals , it will be impossible to arrive at any other conclusion than that the object of the boy ' s friends is not so

much to reinstate him in his old position—which , seeing that his time for remaining in the School expired on the 13 th instant , is out of the question —as to inflict an injury , not , perhaps , on the Institution itself , but on the brethren who are most immediately concerned in administering its government . We say advisedly that the controversy has been already carried

beyond the limits of reasonable argument . Had the Special Court of Saturday last been weak enough to accede to the demand for a further inquiry , we should have witnessed the ridiculous spectacle of a Special Committee appointed to examine into circumstances which were already known and admitted as established facts , and demanding reasons

for the sentence awarded by the House Committtee , which it would be in the power of that body to decline to furnish . It is not necessary we should pay attention to the minor details of the case which were so elaborately set forth in the memorandum issued by the boy ' s friends , and on which so much stress was laid by the principal speakers in his behalf on

Saturday . It having been once admitted that young MOTION was guilty of the offence for which he was punished , it matters little whether he was or was not guilty of certain other acts of misconduct on certain other occasions , for which no punishment has been awarded . In the memorandum referred to , under the head of " Charges against the Boy , " that of "Absconding "

is " admitted , '' and though exception was taken by one of the speakers to the use of the word " abscond" as implying a greater or another offence than , that of "departing without leave , " it is clear that the intent and meaning of the admission thus made by the authors of the said memorandum was , that young MOTION had been guilty of the offence of "

departing without leave . " Hence it follows as a necessary consequence of this admission that he thereby rendered himself liable to the penalty of " expulsion " as prescribed in Law LXI . And as with Law XL . staring us in the face , it is impossible to deny that it is entrusted to the House Committee "y that Law to " reward , admonish , or punish" the boys " at discretion , "

" ° l'ows as a further necessary consequence , that the said Committee were acting well within their legal right in awarding the boy a lesser punishment "~ one carying with it no stigma into his after life—than that allowed by the Uw . Therefore , so far as this—the material—part of the case is concerned , , a Special Committee had been appointed , its duty would have

een to inquire into circumstances which , as we have before said , are al < "ead y known and admitted as established facts . But it was " £ ed with reference to the other charges laid against the boy , at in the case of some of them the evidence on which they rested had ailed either wholly or in partand in the case of others that it was ' . distinctly

, Proved that not MOTION , but another boy , was the real culprit * . and it was I rgued that , as these charges had been included in the inquiry instituted 0 MOTION ' conduct , the sentence passed upon him was unjust , as being . ed on wrongful evidence ; or , in other words , that the House Com-. had improperly exercised the discretionary powers with which under . —— » 'ujjiu | jeny exercised tne uiauieiiuiiaiy puvvcia w 11 . 11 wmwi urruci

" XL . triey are entruste ( j _ AS we have already pointed out , however , it ers . > as regards trie principal offence , of which it is admitted he inn gU '' anC * ^ w ' * cn ne nas ¦ 3 een punished , whether he was guilty or th c : nt ° ^ t * 1 ese ol , ler ana minor charges of killing bees , getting out of tio " c mar y window , setting bird traps , & c . Indeed , we have no objec-» or the purposes of our present line of argument , to give the boy the

Ar00102

benefit of the doubts raised by his friends and hold him innocent of them all . But whatever may have been the opinion of the members of the House Committee as to the boy ' s guilt or innocence of these charges—and it is not in the power of any man to interpret what was influencing the minds of others on a particular occasion which has long since passed away—it stands

out clear beyond the possibility of question , that the punishment inflicted is less , not greater , than the punishment prescribed for the single particular offence of absconding or departing without leave . Thus , the allegation that the House Committee improperly exercised their discretionary powers falls to the ground . But even if it had not so fallen , there is no

tribunal in Masonry , nor do we believe there is any tribunal in the United Kingdom , or , indeed , in any civilised community on the face of the earth , at which it would be possible to inquire into the "discretion " exercised in accordance with the law by an individual or body of individuals . It must be borne in mind that , in this and all similar cases , " discretion " is the

reasons which influence men to do or not to do certain things , of the justice or expediency of which they are careful to satisfy themsdves by the means and to the extent they think proper , under certain conditions , of the nature and value of which they are the sole judges . The law and the facts as regards the offence of absconding and the penalty attached to it having been

established , it would have been impossible for a Special Committee , had one been granted , to inquire into the House Committee ' s "discretion , " which is as sacred from the inquisition of the outer world , as are the secrets of the ballotbox under the constitutions of Masonry . Thus , with nothing to inquire into but what is already known and admitted , there was no need for any

Committee , and though we confess we are not over-sanguine in the matter , we trust that , for the sake of the boy MOTION himself , who will no doubt make his way in life if his family and friends will lend him a helping hand at starting , as well as for that of the Royal Masonic Institution for Boys , in whose welfare all of us are so deeply interested , we have heard the last * of any attempts to continue this unhappy controversy .

* # * The New Zealand WE congratulate our New Zealand contemporary on the "( ZZmvt success which thus far has attended its advocacy of Masonic jurisdiction . " interests in that remote colony . Its articles are instructive ,

its intelligence invariably interesting , and we trust its career may be prolonged for many years to the great benefit of the Craft , and its own advantage . But while we fully recognise the general merits of its articles , and the soundness of the opinions they express , it would be strange if we did

not occasionally find it necessary to take exception to some of its views . For instance , in an early issue of the current year , it falls foul of a former article of ours on " Concurrent Jurisdiction , " both as to its general tenour and in respect of sundry of its details . We will not now contest its utterances on

the former , but with all deference to our worthy contemporary , we venture to say there are one or two remarks as to the latter which had better have been left unsaid . Thus it is not in keeping with its usual regard for accuracy , to find fault with our illustration of Victoria as a favourable example of " Concurrent Jurisdiction , " seeing that it is

in Victoria that one and the same distinguished brother — Sir W . j . CLARKE , Bart ., —has been chosen head of all three jurisdictions . A better illustration than this of the thorough harmony of feeling which prevails among English , Irish , and Scotch Masons in this colony seems hardly possible . Again , " concurrent jurisdiction , " as we understand it ,

does not mean " the system by which the Grand Lodges of England , Ireland , and Scotland , and all other Grand Lodges , have full right to establish lodges at will , " the only Grand Lodges which have authority to do this being those of the mother country . A United States Grand Lodge , for instance , could not warrant a lodge in New Zealand or any other

English Colony , nor could the Grand Lodge of Canada grant warrants for lodges outside the limits of its own jurisdiction . Again , in the case of our Colonial lodges , there are no remittances of large sums to the United Kingdom , the moneys remitted being for warrants and registration , while

the brethren pay no quarterages as do the members of our Provincial and Metropolitan lodges . We trust our contemporary will enlighten itself as to these matters of every day information before it again essays to lecture us on the contents of our articles .

Consecration Of The Arrow Lodge, No. 2240.

CONSECRATION OF THE ARROW LODGE , No . 2240 .

An important and imposing gathering of the brethren took place at the Burton House Hotel , Kington , on Thursday afternoon , the 22 nd inst ., when the most skilful and leading members of the Provinces of Herefordshire , Monmouthshire , and Shropshire assembled for the consecration of

the above lodge . The Province of Herefordshire , of which Bro . Sir Joseph R . Bailey , Bart ., M . P ., is the M . W . Prov . Grand Master , is not , in a numerical point , the strongest in the Kingdom , yet there is plenty of evidence that during the past few years Masonry has made rapid strides in the

county , and Bromyard is now the only town which does not command the advantages of a duly consecrated lodge . The brethren resident in Kington have hitherto worked at Leominster , but their numbers having increased at a rapid rate , it was decided to form a new lodge in their own town . The happy title of Arrow , the name of the famous fishing stream