Mark Masonry.

duty of the Supreme Grand Chapter towards the Eng'lish Mark lodges holding of it , if it determines , eventually , to recognise its opponent . The Supreme Grand Chapter would then be morally bound to stipulate , in any concession it might

make , that those English brethren who prefer to remain in allegiance to it should not be coerced to commit Avilful and deliberate perjury , such as they must do , by taking a new oath , the Supreme Grand Chapter having no vestige of power ,

human or divine , to absolve them from the fealty they have already sworn . Whilst the English Mark Masters doubt the policy of the Supreme Grand Chapter to hand them OA'er , even to the Grand Lodge , or Grand

Chapter , of England , they can entertain no doubt that it is out of the power of the Supreme Grand Chapter—under the clause inserted in its English Mark warrants—to transfer its English lodges to the self-styled " Grand Lodge of Mark Masters , "

& c , because , before this is done , the usurping body must be recognised by the Supreme Grand Chapter as a " lawfully constituted body of the country , " which the former can never prove itself to be , as it was at first founded in Avrong , still

continues its Avrong-doing , and nothing on earth can purge it of illegality and unlawful constitution , but dissolution and entire reconstruction , under a recognised lawful head , for which pnrpose it must absolutely cease to exist and be reconstituted ab initio .

All Masonic authorities appear to have very singular ideas respecting the recalling of warrants , and the Supreme Grand Chapter of Scotland is quite at one with the received doctrine . The Report says , "in an } ' of these events your

Committee Avtmld recommend the Supremo Chapter at once to recall the Avarrants already granted , " & c . ; but it is most respectfully submitted that such a course—in any degree and under any jurisdiction—is a grievous wrong , aud totally

indefensible on any ground . It is one of the fundamental ri ghts of a lodge to retain possession of its warrant . A . warrant may be revoked , or declared null and void—as one portion of the clause , before alluded to , in the Report phrases it—bnt it

cannot be recalled for having been entrusted to the Master and his successors . He is bound to hold it in trust for them , and no power can take the parchment back Avhen it pleases the grantors to demand it , because it is a commodit y bought and paid for—a property for which value hits been

given ; and when once so sold , the absolute and entire possession of the instrument is with the purchasers , and the vendors have no claim or lien upon it . To recall a Avarrant is a wrong , because it removes from the proper custodian all evidence

that certain brethren were made in a lawful manner ; and it would be quite correct if any set of persons took aAvay such a Avarrant by force , to give them into custody for felony . In the charters granted to municipal or other corporations by the

Crown—granted Avithout payment or purchasecertain rights and privileges are insured to the subjects named therein upon their doing some acts of homage or fealty in return . There have been many cases in which the charters of cities and towns haA r e been lost through the omission of performing the prescribed tenure under which they

Avere held but m such cases no one ever heard of tho Crown demanding a surrender of the deed itself , it being quite enough that it be known the privileges arc no longer enjoyable under it , and the charter is said to be "lost , " although , in

reality , ifc remains in the hands of the body corporate to whom it was originally granted . That being the usual practice with regard to a gratuitous grant of rights ancl privileges , how , in the name of equity aud common sense , can a

vendor claim from a purchaser a redelivery of the article bought at any moment of time the former may choose to demand it ? Granting that the Supreme Grand Chapter can declare—under the previously-mentioned clause— -those warrants to be null and A oid , they cannot recall them or repossess themselves legally of the instrument they sold .

One more matter of very subordinate importance , yet much to be regretted , is to be found in the . Report of the Supremo Grand Chapter . They have , perhaps unconsciously , permitted themselves to adopt the loose phraseology of their antagonists ,

and , on several occasions , to call the Mark , consisting of but one degree , an Order , AA hich term implies tho grouping of several degrees , as Avell as Masonic Knighthood , au honour totally unknown to the brethren who celebrate a strictly operative

legend . It has , no doubt , been purposely adopted by the self styled "Grand Lodgeof Mark Masters , " & c , because , through certain influences , altogether unnecessary to specify more fully , they are located under the same roof with the real Order of

Masonic Knights Templar , and may have been adriofcly used to influence the Avaverers under the sanction of the old adage of ff knowing a man by