Modern Writers Upon Freemasonry.—Ii.

MODERN WRITERS UPON FREEMASONRY . —II .

DR . OLIVERS MASONIC JURISPKUDENCE ( CONTINUED ) . WE now come to the eig hth chapter of the first part , on the appointment , ' duties , & c , of officers , which appears to be well and sensibly written , especially the remarks on plurality of offices , and on the disqualification of landlords of taverns to hold . office . The reasons for both are clearly stated , as for instance ,

that" The Wardens of a Lodge are ex officio members of Grand Lodge , and it would therefore be inexpedient , though not absolutely illegal , for a brother to hold either of these offices in duplicate , because by so doing , the Lodge would lose a vote in Grand Lodge ; for as two votes cannot centre in one person , so if the Worshipful Master of one Lodge be a Warden in another , one of the two votes must necessarily be sunk , and the Lodge which had a title to it , be so far unrepresented . Besides , as the members

of a Lodge possess the privileges of giving instructions to their representatives before the meeting of every Grand Lodge , it is exceedingly probable that the two Lodges in which a brother holds a superior office , might entertain hostile opinions on any particular subject to be discussed there , and thus their representatives would be directed to vote on both sides of the question . In which case—how is the unfortunate brother to proceed ? Should he vote according to the instructions of one Lod lie necessaril

ge , y betrays the interests of the other ; and if he withholds his vote altogether , he compromises the instructions of both . To avoid this dilemma , which is double-edged , and cuts each way , we would advise a brother to decline holding a principal office in more than one Lodge ; and if he be ambitious ' of an office in both , to be content , if a principal officer in one , to hold a subordinate situation in the other . "

Again , after giving reasons against the tenure of office by a landlord , Dr . Oliver says" A well-disposed landlord , however , will studiously avoid office altogether , and be extremely fastidious about intermeddling with the affairs of the Lodges ; because self-interest would be suspected as the moving principle of his actions , and his motives would be questioned , even if they sprang from the purest sources of truth and rectitude . "

On the former of these points we quite agree with Dr . Oliver that it is a mistake for a man to hold two superior offices at the same time ; and as to holding a subordinate office in one Lodge in conjunction with a superior office in another , our own feeling is , that we should be inclined to leave the subordinate office for our juniors , in order that they may have the same gratificationand feel the spur of the same

encour-, agement which we experienced on receiving our first bit of preferment in the Craft . We even think that it is generally , on the same principle laid down b y Dr . Oliver , a pity for the same brother to occupy the chair of a Lodge twice , or indeed for a Past Master again to take the