Grievances Of Colonial Brethren.

is not " in duty bound to acquiesce m the A otes of the majority . " He may take the " opiuion ofhis Provincial Grand Lodge on the subject of any Masonic complaint or irregularity ; " but " with him alone the decision remains . " ( Constitutions ,

page 54 , Chapter 8 . ) He cannot , hoAvever , expel a Mason or erase a lodge . In colonies and foreign parts , the power to do these acts is vested , not in the Provincial Grand Master , but in the District Grand Lodge . Bro . Wadhain ' s argument

therefore , so - far as it rests upon the remark quoted from the proceedings of the District Grand Lodge of Bengal , is defective . And so long as the prerogatives of the Provincial Grand Master are not abolished or abridged by fresh legislation , he

would , in our opinion , be acting very weakly , and creating difficulties for his successor , if he were to surrender any of them to his Provincial Grand Lodge . We further do not see the force of Bro . Wadham ' s objection when he urges that , if a Pro-% incial Grand Master should wish to save from

punishment any brother guilty of a flagrant offence , he can do so by simply declining to summon his District Grand Lodge , which , if convened , would be sure to convict and ex ] 3 el the offender . It is true that a Provincial Grand Master can

" screen a culprit " so long as no meeting is held ; " but , by adopting such a course , he would prove himself to be a- bad politician . He would incur odium without effectually gaining his object , for , as by the Constitutions , he is obliged to call

a meeting " at least once in each year , " he could not defer the punishment beyond a few months . It Avould be a blunder . There may be some Provincial Grand Masters not so exalted in character as to always act on the principle that honesty is a

virtue ; but they might surely be expected to act on the principle that honesty is the best policy . There are , hoAvever , two very substantial grievances brought forward by Bro . Wadhara : the first of these relates to evils of a mixed jurisdiction

, Avhich , although carefully guarded against in England , Scotland , and Ireland , are very selfishly and unjustl y permitted to arise and grow up in the colonies and foreign parts . This is a most important question on which wc have frequently

expressed our opinion strongly . "While in England , " says Bro . Wrdham , " all the lodges are raider one constitution , the lodges in Australia are under no less than three . English , Irish and Scotch lodges are to be found in the same towns ;

and it is idle to conceal that there is some httio jealousy amongst them . Some sort of riA-alry cannot be helped so long as human nature is what it is ; and Ave English Masons are naturally desirous of maintaing onr position , and are jealous of Avhatever prevents our standing on the same vantage ground as our rivals . " We can form an idea of some of the elements

of discord by referring to the complaints noticed by us in the ** Indian Freemason's Friend " for 1857 , Avhich were preferred , through Lord Naas , the Irish representative in London , against the English Provincial Grand Master in Sydney , by

the Irish and Scotch Masons at that place . The Provincial Grand Master had cut off communication with the Scotch and Irish lodges ( excepting one lodge ) for initiating persons previously blackballed in English lodges , for ' receiving brethren

suspended by the Provincial Grand Lodge for un-Masonic conduct , and also for admitting into Masonry " men guilty of certain offences . " So long as the authorities of one jurisdiction do not respect the sentences of those of another

jurisdiction , so lono- as there is such a difference in ¦ J - O the laws that one lodge can confer the degrees of Masonry , and aclA ance its Wardens towards the rank of Past Master more rapidly than the other lodges working in the same toAvn with it , and can

eclipse the others in appearance hy greater splendour of costume , it is very unadvisable to depart from the rule , so strictly maintained in Europe and America , of respecting the boundaries of a different jurisdiction .

The second great grievance Avhich the Australian brethren have rejn-esented to the Grand Lodge of England , and which they share in common Avith all Colonial Masons , relates to the laAV by which a District Grand Lodge ceases to exist on the death

or resignation of the Provincial Grand Master . Before a successor can be appointed , " manymonths must elapse ; and during this period the lodges are left without any sort of control , the funds are left in the hands of a brother who has

ceased to be an officer , and provincial business is at a dead stand . " It is not certain that the Provincial Grand Treasurer " AA ill be an officer of the new District Grand Lodge , and it is doubtful whether the new lodge can compel the brother to

pay over to it the funds that belonged to a lodge which had ceased to exist some five or six months before the new lodge came into operation . " In England , no inconvenience is felt , as the Grand