The Masonic Mirror.

served that office in the lodge under the Irish Constitution . It was urged that this was a restriction that ought to be removed , as it was an interference with tbe rights of the brethren , and restricted their -choice of a brother to preside over them . The communication , written at the command of the Grand Master , was to the effect that the Book of Constitutions defined upon what conditions a member could be elected to the Master's chair ; and that was by having served the office of

Warden for one year in a warranted lodge , that being a lodge held under the English Constitution . The G . MASTER said in the letter he had ordered to be written he had explained his opinions as thoroughly as lie could , which he would repeat over and over again , ancl he hoped that Grand Lodge would concur in the view he had taken . Bro . STEBBING said it was painful to him to differ with his lordshipbut he should like to state his reasonsand appeal to

, , Grand Lodge even against his lordship . This was a grave resolution , as it affected the loyalty of the colonies to them as Masons . It set forth that although a man had served as Warden in a Scotch or Irish Lodge , he was not to be elected as Master of an English lodge , which he considered was not in

accordance with their Masonic principles . They admitted members of Irish and Scotch lodges to English lodges , and gave them all the privileges of Masonry by allowing them to be present at their ceremonies , ancl sometimes taking part in them . Where the officers have been late , he had seen the visitors take part in the proceedings of the lodge and help the working . "They had heard from the letter of the G . M . that they allowed P . M . ' s of Irish lodges to be presentancl gave them the same

, privileges as their own members , but when they wanted to bo elected as W . M . they were told that they could not be elected until they had served as Warden for twelve months in an English lodge . He did not read the Book of Constitutions as it had been read by the G . M . It said that the person to be elected as Master must have served the office of Warden for twelve months in a regular warranted lodgebut it did not say that it

, should be an Irish warranted lodge , a Scotch warranted lodge , or English warranted lodge . It did not say a word that it should be under the Grand Lodge of England , but that had been put in by the G . M . Masonry had two characters—universal and national—the national being the making of rules like those they were making that night , but universal Masonry was very different . He contended that as these members assisted

at their installations , they were fit to be elected as Masters , for there was nothing in the Book of Constitutions to prevent it . Such unmasonic interpretations would make a rebellion in the colonies , for , by taking such a restrictive reading of it , it would so embarrass the colonies that they would get rid of the Grand Lodge of England anel join a Grand Lodge in which such difficulties did not exist . If a Scotch Mason was worthy to be a member of the loelgeand entitled to be present at the

installa-, tions , having served the office of Warden , he was entitled to be elected as W . M . Such restrictions were most unwise , as he ¦ wished to keep the colonies loyal to the throne of English Masonry . He proposed , in conclusion , that the subject bo deferred to the next quarterly communication , to allow his lordship to reconsider his opinion , which he believed to be as unwise as it

was . The G . MASTER said he took no offence at the observations of Bro . Stebbing , but his opinion remained unaltered by them . A BROTHER wished to put a question . He wanted to know if Wardens of lodges under the Irish Constitution were not elected for six months only , for , if that were so , it would destroy all reciprocity . Colonel BROWNRIGG P . G . W . said he could answer the

-_ , , ques tion . Wardens of Irish lodges were only elected for six months . He was invited to become Master of an Irish lodge , but at the same time he was informed that he coulcl not become W . M . until he had served the effice of Warden . He had served the oflice of S . G . D . in the English Grand Lodge , and not wishing to stand in the way of other aspirants , ho declined the invitation ; but had lie wished to have served the oflice of Master , it

was clearly understood that he must first have served the oilice of Warden iu an Irish lodge . Bro . MASON opposed the view taken by Bro . Stebbing . Bro . JONES made some observations , but they were irrelevant to the question . The G . REGISTRAR hoped that the Grand Lod ge would express its opinion to this effect : — " That in reference to the letter written to the Grand Lodge of Ireland , this Grand Lodge agrees with the Most Worshipful Grand Master , that no brother

can be elected to the Master ' s chair unless he has served the office of Warden for one year , under the constitution of the Grand Lodge of England . " With regard to the observations of Bro . Stebbing that Masonry was universal , he said there was in Masonry , like other things , the law of nations , and their law was that every lodge should annually elect a Master by ballot who bad served as Warden of a warranted lodge for one year ; ancl the words " warranted lodge" were never used to express

any lodge but that holding its power under the constitution of England . If they wanted to know if a lodge was a warranted lodge , they went to the Grand Secretary ' s office to ascertain whether it was so or not , but they would have no power to ascertain whether it was so of lodges under the constitution of Scotland or Ireland . As regarded universal Masonry , they gave Irish and Scotch members every privilege , and only required

them to conform to the laws they had laid down for their government . It seemed to him that the Book of Constitutions entirely supported the view taken by the G . M ., and that it would be undesirable that any change should take place in elevating a brother to the Master's chair . Bro . STEEBING replied , ancl said that the restriction proposed would be destructive to the colonies , and subversive of the

universality of Freemasonry . The G . MASTER put the question , when an affirmation of the principles contained in his letter was agreed to by a large majority .

THE BOARD OE BENEVOLENCE . The report of tho Board of Benevolence was received , and ordered to be entered on the minutes . THE BOARD OP GENERAL PURPOSES . This report was also received ancl adopted . THE COLONIAL BOAED .

This report having been taken as read , Bro . HOPWOOD , in moving that it be entered on the minutes , alluded to the paiugraph in it referring to the St . George ' s Lodge ( No 110 , late G 13 ) , Montreal , and thought there must be some mistake in excluding it from tlie Masonic body of Canada .. There had been a mistake in respect to another lodge , on a former occasion , but after investigation the lodge was restored to all its Masonic privileges , and he hoped there would be the same , result in this case . The motion was agreed to .

THE GRAND LODGE PROPERTY . Bro . HAVERS , in moving that the report of the Committee onthe Grand Lodge Property be adopted , said it was desirable tho number of trustees should be increased to the original number , which was ten . There were six vacancies occasioned by death , ancl the four who remained were upwards of 70 years of age . He moved that the following brethren be elected such additional trusteesviz . Brosthe Earl de Grey and RiponD . G . M . ;

, , , , John Havers , P . G . W ., Chairman of the Committee on Grand Lodge Property ; Samuel Tomkins , G . Treas . ; iEneas J . M'lntyre , G . Reg . ; John Llewellyn Evans , President of the Board of General Purposes , and John S . S . Hopwood , P . G . D ., President of tho Colonial Board . He said he wished it to bo understood that the oflice of trustee conferred no power whateverthat resting solelin Grand Lodgewho could alone sell

, y , or transfer property anel grant leases . They were mere ciphers , and only held the property in their names so long as they were required . Bro . STEBBING seconded the motion , which was carried unanimously .

SOUTH YARRA LODGE , MELBOURNE . The next business was an appeal by Bro . H . Lowry , of the South Yarra Lodge ( No . 930 , late 1232 ) , Melbourne , against the ruling of the Provincial Grand Master of Victoria . This case appeared to have arisen out of an unseemly squabble in the lodge . Bro . Lowry was the W . M . of the lodge , and on the election of a successor the J . W . was appointed , but the

minutes not being confirmed , a fresh election took place , which terminated in favour of the S . W ., and at the subsequent meeting the minutes were confirmed . On the day of installation Bro . Lowry occupied the chair , and was proceeding with the ceremony , when the W . M . elect declined to be presented , stating that the D . Prov . G . M . was in attendance at his invitation to perform tho ceremony of installation . Bro . Lowry declined to surrender the gavel to the D . Prov . G . M ., stating that as he had begun the work he ought to complete it , and that it was his