Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Masonic Dispute In The Western District Of Scotland.
thing else , in the matter than instantly overruling the arbitrary proceedings of their subordinate official , of effectually guarding against the repetition of such unmitigated oppression as that attempted to be exercised on subordinate chapters by Dr . Arnott . " This document , your Committee would remind you , with its insinuations , accusations , and assertions of ambition , tyranny , unmitigated oppression ancl persecutionis levelled against a
com-, panion whom your Committee hesitate not to affirm , and that without fear of contradiction , has done more than any other companion connected with the Supreme Chapter , for upholding the laws , correcting abuses * where they existed ; and acting up to the true spirit , and for the good of Eoyal Arch Masonry . And this extraordinary document the Supreme Committee allowed to be laid before themwithout the slightest censure .
, The extract of deliverance of Supreme Committee , of date 28 th April , 1862 , your Committee would now call your special attention to , as the members of Supreme Committee were truly sitting in judgment on their own case . " Freemasons' Hall , 2 Sth April , 1862 . "Present : — -Alex . J . Stewart , Grand Treasurer , in the Chair ; Alex . Hay , G . Eecorder ; Dr . M'Cowan , Third G . Soj ., ancl Z .
Xo . S 3 ; W . Mann , G . Chancellor ; AVm . Belfrage , Z . JNo . 1 ; Col . H . D . Griffith , Z . No . 40 ; JN . Cannon ; Geo . Bryce Broivn ; Andrew Kerr ; L . Mackersy , Grand Scribe E . " The Committee , having resumed consideration of the petition and complaint of the Kilwinning Ayr Chapter ( JNo . SO ) against the Pr 6 v . Grand Chapter of the AVestern district , with answers thereto for Dr . AValker Arnott , Prov . G . Supt . of the AVestern
districts , minute for the petitioners , and letters from Dr . Walker Arnott , Major Thornton , ancl the Prov . Scribe E . of the AVestern District—Find that . the seizure of the books of Chapter JNo . 80 , in the way admitted hy the Prov . G . Supt ., as explained
in the letter of the Prov . G . Scribe E ., was a proceeding uncalled for in the circumstance , ancl unauthorised by the laws of the Supreme Chapter . But inasmuch as the books were returned within a feiv clays , find it unnecessary to proceed further under the petition . " Your Committee would again call your attention to the feet , that only mention is made of this minute , & c ., but bow the Supreme Committee considered itwithout also considering it
, required severe animadversion and reprehension , they cannot pretend to understand . A special meeting . of Supreme Chapter was held on 23 rd May , 1 S 62 , called at the instance of the Past Grand __ ., in virtue of powers , authorised in Supreme Chapter Laws , cap . 8 , sec . 2 nd ; -to which Comp . Dr . AValker Arnott gave in his report on the petition for the disjunction of Ayrshire , it was moved , that the
petition should he rejected , but the Supreme Chapter decided on sending the petition again to the Supreme Committee for reconsideration . The Supreme Chapter also decided , that any companion to whom a remit was made hy Supreme Chapter , had , by virtue of said remit for enquiry , the same poivers so far as the said enquiry ivas concerned , as the Supreme Chapter itself possessed . Yet in "the face of this decision , a motion was made and carried , that the
decision of the Supreme Committee regarding the first petition and complaint of date 1 st April , be approved of ; thus practically declaring , that although the Supreme Chapter , by their remit had clothed Comp . Dr . AValker Arnott for the time and in the cii'eumstances with all the powers of the Supreme Chapter , they lyould not allow him to exercise them , but merely made the remit fur consulting him ; a judgment as extraordinary in itself , as it is contrary to justice and common sense . The consequence of the above decisions was that Comp . Dr . AA ' alker Arnott felt that he could not with honour to himself
remain longer in connection with the Supreme Chapter , ancl thus be held to acquiese in its acts , he therefore resigned not only Ins offices of Prov . G . Superintendent of the AA ' estern district of Scotland ancl PastG . Z . of Scotland , but also all allegiance to the Supreme Chapter , and all the chapters holding her banner , with ivhieh he was connected . A course which not only your committee , but also all the Eoyal Arch Masons of the west , Present at the meeting held in Glasgow , 8 th July , 1862 , while
™ ey deeply regretted its necessity , not only approved of , but Unanimousl y declared was the only course in honour open to mm , and sincerely sympathised with him m the cause wliich led to his resignation , which causes your Committee consider a gross Msult to the Prov . Grand Chapter of the West and through it to the whole of the Eoyal Masons connected with the AVest of Scotland . And now having as far as practicable , fairly laid before you e whole facts in relation to this dispute , as well as the decision
The Masonic Dispute In The Western District Of Scotland.
of Supreme Committee and Supreme Chapter in reference thereto , your Committee would now lay before tbe Companions of the different chapters , the reason why they and a great number of the Companions of the AA ' estern District demur to , and differ from the findings above referred to . 1 st . Because , that hy Supreme Chapter Laws Cap . X . Sect . 4 th and 12 thas also the terms of commission to Prov . Grand
, Superintendent , a Provincial Chapter or Prov . Grand Superintendent have the same authority over the chapters under their jurisdiction , that the Supreme Chapter has over the whole body , which up to the present case has always heen held ancl acted on as the law . By virtue of said laws and commission Comp . AA' alker-Arnott was entitled to call for the books for examination of any chapter under the jurisdiction of the Prov . Grand Chapter
o £ -the AVest when he , or it thought fit , ancl that in the way most suitable , and this , because the Supreme Chapter can do so at any time and in any manner . 2 nd . That Comp . Dr . AValker-Arnott was acting under special remit sent him from Supreme Chapter to inquire into and report on the expediency of disjoining Ayrshire from the Western district , and that , after the Supreme Committee had reported in
favour of such disjunction , —By virtue of said remit he was invested with all the powers of Supreme Chapter independent of his being Prov . Grand Superintendent , and for this reason he was entitled to obtain such information as he deemed necessary , and in the manner he thought would best tend to the good of the Order . 3 rd . Because the Committee having already adjudicated on the petition for disjunction , ancl their decision not having been
sustained by the Supreme Chapter , it ought not , in common justice , to have entertained any petition and complaint against Comp . Dr . AA ' alker-Arnott until he had reported to Supreme Chapter on the petition for disjunction , or when such petition ancl complaint was presented , should have either dismissed it as incompetent , or delayed consideration till said report was given in , especially as Comp . Dr . AA ' alker-Arnott had stated to Supreme Committee , that he as the Companion to whom the remit of Supreme Chapter was made , considered it necessary , in order to give in a faithful report , to obtain and examine the books of Chapter JNo . 80 ; but in opposition to this declaration of Comp .
Dr . AA ' alker-Arnott's , the Supreme Committee not only , receive a petition and complaint , order him to give in answers to the same , but receive and entertain a second minute of petition and complaint , ancl decide thereon , ancl this although both petitions and complaints profess to be against the Prov . Grand Chapter of the AVestern District , which Prov . Grand Chapter was never called in the matter , a mode of proeeedure your Committee think somewhat novel .
4 th . Because as stated by Comp . Dr . AValker-Arnott in his answer to 1 st petition and complaint , the copy of extracts of minute of Supreme Committee is erroneously called " an extract from the minute of Supreme Grand Koyal Arch Chapter of Scotland , of date 7 th April , 1862 " no such meeting having been held on that date , and the same error is repeated in the certificate of servicean error which in any other court of indicature
, . would have sisted proceedings so far as the petition and complaint was concerned , but which informality and error the Supreme Committee wholly overlook ancl ignore , and in direct opposition to Comp . Dr . AValker-Arnott's protest , they gave judgment on the merits . 5 th . Because , in the finding of Supreme Committee , none of the prayers of the petition and complaint were found relevantthus
, no distinct redress was claimed , for the 1 st and 2 nd ancl part of 4 th articles of the said petition and complaint—which were all the Supreme Committee sustained—contained no petition for redress , therefore the Supreme Committee had no right to take them up , the law of Supreme Chapter , chap . XIII . sect . 1 st , not having been complied with . The petition and complaint ought to have been at once dismissed .
6 th . Because the Supreme Chapter decided in the matter wholly on the 12 lh sec . of cap . XIII ., overlooking the 4 th and Oth see . of same cap ., as also terms of a Prov . Grand Superintendent's Commission , all of which have an intimate bearing on , and should have regulated its decision on the question . Your committee regret exceedingly that they are forced to take this decided protest against the proceedings of the Supreme
Chapter and Supreme Committee , but they feel that in justice to themselves , to the Companions throughout Scotland , and to Eoyal Arch Masonry they could act in no other manner . A system of centralisation has been at work for sometime past , which seems to have no ear for any demands but its own ; no
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
The Masonic Dispute In The Western District Of Scotland.
thing else , in the matter than instantly overruling the arbitrary proceedings of their subordinate official , of effectually guarding against the repetition of such unmitigated oppression as that attempted to be exercised on subordinate chapters by Dr . Arnott . " This document , your Committee would remind you , with its insinuations , accusations , and assertions of ambition , tyranny , unmitigated oppression ancl persecutionis levelled against a
com-, panion whom your Committee hesitate not to affirm , and that without fear of contradiction , has done more than any other companion connected with the Supreme Chapter , for upholding the laws , correcting abuses * where they existed ; and acting up to the true spirit , and for the good of Eoyal Arch Masonry . And this extraordinary document the Supreme Committee allowed to be laid before themwithout the slightest censure .
, The extract of deliverance of Supreme Committee , of date 28 th April , 1862 , your Committee would now call your special attention to , as the members of Supreme Committee were truly sitting in judgment on their own case . " Freemasons' Hall , 2 Sth April , 1862 . "Present : — -Alex . J . Stewart , Grand Treasurer , in the Chair ; Alex . Hay , G . Eecorder ; Dr . M'Cowan , Third G . Soj ., ancl Z .
Xo . S 3 ; W . Mann , G . Chancellor ; AVm . Belfrage , Z . JNo . 1 ; Col . H . D . Griffith , Z . No . 40 ; JN . Cannon ; Geo . Bryce Broivn ; Andrew Kerr ; L . Mackersy , Grand Scribe E . " The Committee , having resumed consideration of the petition and complaint of the Kilwinning Ayr Chapter ( JNo . SO ) against the Pr 6 v . Grand Chapter of the AVestern district , with answers thereto for Dr . AValker Arnott , Prov . G . Supt . of the AVestern
districts , minute for the petitioners , and letters from Dr . Walker Arnott , Major Thornton , ancl the Prov . Scribe E . of the AVestern District—Find that . the seizure of the books of Chapter JNo . 80 , in the way admitted hy the Prov . G . Supt ., as explained
in the letter of the Prov . G . Scribe E ., was a proceeding uncalled for in the circumstance , ancl unauthorised by the laws of the Supreme Chapter . But inasmuch as the books were returned within a feiv clays , find it unnecessary to proceed further under the petition . " Your Committee would again call your attention to the feet , that only mention is made of this minute , & c ., but bow the Supreme Committee considered itwithout also considering it
, required severe animadversion and reprehension , they cannot pretend to understand . A special meeting . of Supreme Chapter was held on 23 rd May , 1 S 62 , called at the instance of the Past Grand __ ., in virtue of powers , authorised in Supreme Chapter Laws , cap . 8 , sec . 2 nd ; -to which Comp . Dr . AValker Arnott gave in his report on the petition for the disjunction of Ayrshire , it was moved , that the
petition should he rejected , but the Supreme Chapter decided on sending the petition again to the Supreme Committee for reconsideration . The Supreme Chapter also decided , that any companion to whom a remit was made hy Supreme Chapter , had , by virtue of said remit for enquiry , the same poivers so far as the said enquiry ivas concerned , as the Supreme Chapter itself possessed . Yet in "the face of this decision , a motion was made and carried , that the
decision of the Supreme Committee regarding the first petition and complaint of date 1 st April , be approved of ; thus practically declaring , that although the Supreme Chapter , by their remit had clothed Comp . Dr . AValker Arnott for the time and in the cii'eumstances with all the powers of the Supreme Chapter , they lyould not allow him to exercise them , but merely made the remit fur consulting him ; a judgment as extraordinary in itself , as it is contrary to justice and common sense . The consequence of the above decisions was that Comp . Dr . AA ' alker Arnott felt that he could not with honour to himself
remain longer in connection with the Supreme Chapter , ancl thus be held to acquiese in its acts , he therefore resigned not only Ins offices of Prov . G . Superintendent of the AA ' estern district of Scotland ancl PastG . Z . of Scotland , but also all allegiance to the Supreme Chapter , and all the chapters holding her banner , with ivhieh he was connected . A course which not only your committee , but also all the Eoyal Arch Masons of the west , Present at the meeting held in Glasgow , 8 th July , 1862 , while
™ ey deeply regretted its necessity , not only approved of , but Unanimousl y declared was the only course in honour open to mm , and sincerely sympathised with him m the cause wliich led to his resignation , which causes your Committee consider a gross Msult to the Prov . Grand Chapter of the West and through it to the whole of the Eoyal Masons connected with the AVest of Scotland . And now having as far as practicable , fairly laid before you e whole facts in relation to this dispute , as well as the decision
The Masonic Dispute In The Western District Of Scotland.
of Supreme Committee and Supreme Chapter in reference thereto , your Committee would now lay before tbe Companions of the different chapters , the reason why they and a great number of the Companions of the AA ' estern District demur to , and differ from the findings above referred to . 1 st . Because , that hy Supreme Chapter Laws Cap . X . Sect . 4 th and 12 thas also the terms of commission to Prov . Grand
, Superintendent , a Provincial Chapter or Prov . Grand Superintendent have the same authority over the chapters under their jurisdiction , that the Supreme Chapter has over the whole body , which up to the present case has always heen held ancl acted on as the law . By virtue of said laws and commission Comp . AA' alker-Arnott was entitled to call for the books for examination of any chapter under the jurisdiction of the Prov . Grand Chapter
o £ -the AVest when he , or it thought fit , ancl that in the way most suitable , and this , because the Supreme Chapter can do so at any time and in any manner . 2 nd . That Comp . Dr . AValker-Arnott was acting under special remit sent him from Supreme Chapter to inquire into and report on the expediency of disjoining Ayrshire from the Western district , and that , after the Supreme Committee had reported in
favour of such disjunction , —By virtue of said remit he was invested with all the powers of Supreme Chapter independent of his being Prov . Grand Superintendent , and for this reason he was entitled to obtain such information as he deemed necessary , and in the manner he thought would best tend to the good of the Order . 3 rd . Because the Committee having already adjudicated on the petition for disjunction , ancl their decision not having been
sustained by the Supreme Chapter , it ought not , in common justice , to have entertained any petition and complaint against Comp . Dr . AA ' alker-Arnott until he had reported to Supreme Chapter on the petition for disjunction , or when such petition ancl complaint was presented , should have either dismissed it as incompetent , or delayed consideration till said report was given in , especially as Comp . Dr . AA ' alker-Arnott had stated to Supreme Committee , that he as the Companion to whom the remit of Supreme Chapter was made , considered it necessary , in order to give in a faithful report , to obtain and examine the books of Chapter JNo . 80 ; but in opposition to this declaration of Comp .
Dr . AA ' alker-Arnott's , the Supreme Committee not only , receive a petition and complaint , order him to give in answers to the same , but receive and entertain a second minute of petition and complaint , ancl decide thereon , ancl this although both petitions and complaints profess to be against the Prov . Grand Chapter of the AVestern District , which Prov . Grand Chapter was never called in the matter , a mode of proeeedure your Committee think somewhat novel .
4 th . Because as stated by Comp . Dr . AValker-Arnott in his answer to 1 st petition and complaint , the copy of extracts of minute of Supreme Committee is erroneously called " an extract from the minute of Supreme Grand Koyal Arch Chapter of Scotland , of date 7 th April , 1862 " no such meeting having been held on that date , and the same error is repeated in the certificate of servicean error which in any other court of indicature
, . would have sisted proceedings so far as the petition and complaint was concerned , but which informality and error the Supreme Committee wholly overlook ancl ignore , and in direct opposition to Comp . Dr . AValker-Arnott's protest , they gave judgment on the merits . 5 th . Because , in the finding of Supreme Committee , none of the prayers of the petition and complaint were found relevantthus
, no distinct redress was claimed , for the 1 st and 2 nd ancl part of 4 th articles of the said petition and complaint—which were all the Supreme Committee sustained—contained no petition for redress , therefore the Supreme Committee had no right to take them up , the law of Supreme Chapter , chap . XIII . sect . 1 st , not having been complied with . The petition and complaint ought to have been at once dismissed .
6 th . Because the Supreme Chapter decided in the matter wholly on the 12 lh sec . of cap . XIII ., overlooking the 4 th and Oth see . of same cap ., as also terms of a Prov . Grand Superintendent's Commission , all of which have an intimate bearing on , and should have regulated its decision on the question . Your committee regret exceedingly that they are forced to take this decided protest against the proceedings of the Supreme
Chapter and Supreme Committee , but they feel that in justice to themselves , to the Companions throughout Scotland , and to Eoyal Arch Masonry they could act in no other manner . A system of centralisation has been at work for sometime past , which seems to have no ear for any demands but its own ; no