Correspondence.

in the affirmative , not at all aware that they were to bo judged , without any chance of a defence—only called upon by the R . AV . Prov . G . M . for the monosyllable yes or no , to his questions . You will , Mr . Editor , allow that this was perfectly unconstitutional on the part of the R . AV . ProA * . G . M . ; that in every court of laiv and in every country the defendants are told who are the laintiff or plaintiffsthe

p , form of complaint , and allowed to make use of advisers or defenders , and judgment is afterwards given ; but not tyrannical nor absolute poAver employed to gain their ends . This was de facto the case , they not being aware , up to this moment , who was or Avere their accusers . The other charges were not brought against other members , if I except that upon ivhich our P . M . AVUS condemned to pay a fine of

£ 5—the circumstances attached to which fine I cannot refrain from explaining : —On the 3 rd November 1859 , the majority of the members addressed a requisition to the AV . M . Bro . P . C . Vessuup , requesting him to open the Loclge and hold its regular meetings , notifying at tho same time that should he refuse , it would be done . At an appointed hour the AV . M . was entreated to meet a committee ofthe members ,

to which he acceded , They come appointed by the others , and verbally communicated with the AV . M . as ' to the expediency of opening the Lodge ; that he was acting in contravention to constitutional laws , and that it was not in the power of the AV . M . to close the Lodge at his option . The committee Avas treated in a most contemptuous manner hy the AV . M ., Avho did not deign to answer any furtherthan

, that the communication would be forwarded to the M . AV . G . M . The P . M . as proprietor of the house in which the Lodge was helcl , being informed that there were leakages which ought to be attended to , then requested the AV . M . to open that part of the premises ( not ivhere the Lodgo was held ) , so that he mi ght repair the damages complained of , to

which he received a flat denial . The P . M ., then assumed a poAver in his OAVII ri ght as proprietor , and had the door opened by a tradesman , for which he Avas condemned to pay the fine aboA * e mentioned . The Colonial Board , in their report , appear to consider the R . AV . Brother irreproachable , and deserving of the best thanks of the Grand Lodge , for tho arduous task he

undertook , and the satisfactory manner ho performed the duties entrusted to him , " and that all differences had been happily settled , and peace and harmony restored . " The R . AV . Prov . G . M . Bro . Hart , appeared to have possessed the powers of magnetism , for at the time , a member of the Loclge , filling the situation . of Junr . AVarden , rose and proposed that a petition be addressed to the M . AV . G . M . that Bro .

Hart be appointed Prov . Grand Master for the Island ; the Brethren judging from foregoing report , and the truly Masonic manner in ivhich the R . AV . Brother had addressed the Brethren , rose as one body , and seconded the proposition of tho Junr . AVarden ( which proposition , I must observe , was cut and dry for the occasion , having been well considered beforehand ) , the Junr . Warden reading the same from a paper prepared for the occasion ; moreover , ifc is to be

observed , that the Junr . AVarden Avho made the proposition , was one of number of the aggressors , ivho supported and advised the W . M . in all his illegal acts , and afterwards demanded his resignation . As regards the resolution ivhich the Brethren agreed to , to abide by the decision of the _ R . AV . Brother , this was also proposed by tho same brother , prepared in the same way ,

ancl carried unanimously , the Brethren looking at the time which would elapse before any decision could be received ¦ from the authorities at home , and the utter impossibility , that said authorities could enter into all tho differences without a viva voce , explanation , inducing them to do so . They were further induced to take that course by a desire as men and Masons to be consistent in their actions , ( they

having applied to the M . AV . G . M . that the matter bo referred to the arbitration of the Prov . G . M . Br . Hart ) , having confidence in his judgment and Masonic knowledge , and being desirous that the ivorking of the Lodge should not remain longer suspended , but not in any way submitting implicitly to the sentence of tho R . AV . Prov . G . M . Having arrived at this point , it appears to me necessary to discuss the opinion which the Colonial Board , as Avell as you , Mr . Editor , have thought proper to enunciate as regards

tho power which was yielded pcrmissfvely by the R . AV . Prov . G . M . You appear to be at a loss to perceive how Grand Loclge can interfere in the matter , ( as regards the appeal made by the suspended members ) . Let us take the question in a legal point of view : a suit is instituted , judgment is given , and the plaintiff or defendant cast—the one party not satisfied with the view ivhich the judge has

taken of the case , appeals to a hig her tribunal , and continues his appeal ( if not content ) , to the highest court in Her Majesty ' s dominion ; he or they have not been bound to abide by the decision of any particular judge or court , until necessity obliges liim or them to conform in the end to the highest . You , Mr . Editor , further remark that , certain decisions of Brother Hart , cannot be allowed to

stand , being contrary to the constitutional laws and other received authority . AVhy then should the one , ivhich materially affects many Masons , be considered unchangeable and binding ? As Masons , we are bound to respect the superior authorities , their decisions , & c . ; but , we are not debarred the privileges laid clown in tho " Book of Constitution , " page 21 , section 16 . — "The Grand Lodge alone has the inherent right , " & c , and "the poiver of investigating , regulating , and deciding all matters relative to the Craffc , or to particular Lodges , or to individual Brothers , which it

may exercise either of itself or by such delegated authority as in its wisdom and discretion , it may appoint ; " and again of appeal . — "The Grand Loclge . possesses supreme superintending authority , and the poiA'er . of finally deciding on every case which concerns the interest of the Craft , & c . " Now Sh' , and Brother , if we , as Masons , are bound to respect the constitutional laws and abide by them , AA'hy

shall they not bo acted upon in every case ? As E . A . ' s we promise and sivear to obey the constitutional laws of the Grand Lodge of England ; if said laws are put aside in individual cases , then they become a dead letter and no reference must be made to them , nor can they be looked upon as the basis of Masonic jurisprudence . Again the Colonial Board , in their report to be laid before

Grand Lodge , on AVednesday , 6 fch June say , that Br . Hart in his communications to them , accompanied the same ivith copies of the - resolutions , duly entered on the minutes and unanimously confirmed at the next meeting ; it is natural that the members ivould confirm what they had resolved , and all that had taken place at that meeting , ivhich is customary , as without confirmation , the minutes could not bo binding ; but , at the same time , it does not make it obligatory on the members to be silent and not seek those rights which the constitutional laws accord them . In another

paragraph , the Colonial Board , have considered that the decisions of Bro . Hart must bo taken in the nature of an " award based upon the submission to his arbitration , ancl binding on the Brethren who submitted to ifc ; " and states that the three Brethren sentenced to suspension , made no objection thereto , on the ground of want of jurisdiction on the part of the R . AV . Brother . Let us noiv analyse

these paragraphs in a moral sense . AVhere arbitration is agreed to , two persons , are in general , appointed to arbitrate , one for each party , and a third as umpire in case of non-agreement . AA o ivill noiv look upon Br . Hart as the one party , and the suspended members and others as the other party ; and who may I ask , according to Masonic laivs , authorities , and usages , is the umpire in all cases ? Those

possessing tho greatest poiver , in whom alone the inherent rig ht reside—the Grand Lodge . How could the Colonial Board expect that men and Masons , ( nofc school boys , ) coulcl at the time oppose the jurisdiction of the R . AV . Prov . G . M . when he had been appointed by the M . AV . Grand Master , at their request , to consider the matter in dispute between them . The Colonial Board have also taken the vieiv of the

ajipeal as wholly informal . The only informality consists in not conforming to the preliminary requisites prescribed by the Book of Constitutions in cases of appeal ; ivhich they did not do , considering that they had the power of appeal to higher authority , and being perfectly aware that if they had addressed any communication to the AV . M . Bro . P . G . Vessuup , who had already treated other addresses sent him . with dire contempt , their representations would not have been attended to , supported as he was by R . W . Prov . G . M .,