Ar00201

They seem to forget that London is not England , and that although our present partial Constitution places the government of the Order in the hands of the London Brethren , yet that the six hundred Country Lodges have an equal right with the one hundred Metropolitan Lodges to full information as to what is to be discussed in G . L . ; but this can only be communicated to them

by the publication of the reports to be considered . No member of the EXECUTIVE was at the pains to explain the principle upon which Country Masqns are taxed with travelling expenses , to obtain that for which their privileged London Brethren pay nothing . GRAND LODGE adjourned soon after Eleven .

Ar00200

WE have always clung to the hope that the P . G . L . of Canada would maintain its connexion with England . We deeply regret that they have decided otherwise . We doubt the policy of the steps they have taken ; but we have no doubt whatever as to its strict legality according to all the principles of the Masonic

constitution . Be it observed that the authority of the GRAND MASTER is derived solely from GRAND LODGE , which alone is declared to have " inherent , " as distinguished from " delegated , " power ; and which alone is supreme . This supreme bodis " a general representation of all

y private Lodges on record ; " so that union and representation are inseparable ; and it is only in so far as it really is a general representation of private Lodges that Grand Lodge has any claim whatever to legislate for

them . To talk of a Divine right in the G . M . or in G . L . to govern all English Masons , is as ridiculous as to claim the same authority for the Speaker of the House of Commons , or for the Committee of Management of one of the London Clubs . The arrangement is purel y one of convenience , founded , as the Book of Constitutions tells us , p . 16 upon the principle of "

representa-, tion . " Now we should very much like to know how our Canadian Brethren were " represented" in Great Queen Street ? There is little enough of representation as regards the English provinces ; still , as we are coolly told by the Londoners , we can " come up" if we like , though at a cost of some £ 5 or J 10 ; but the Canadians

could not " come over" and go back again , for less than £ 60 , which they doubtless thought was a heavy quid to pay for the very questionable quo of having a G . M . in London , in place of at Toronto . We are therefore unable to see any constitutional objection to the step the Canadians have thought fit to

take . To assert that a body of Masons on the other side of the Atlantic , nearly as numerous as ourselves , and of hig her social position , are guilty of rebellion because they find it more convenient to have their own representative government in their midst , rather than be governed by the London Lodgesamong whom they

, neither are , nor can be represented , and by a G . M . in whose election they have no voice at all , is an insult to common sense , as well as to common justice . We had rather rest the question upon these broad

grounds than upon the narrower one of precedent . This , however , is not wanting . In 1717 ( as every one knows ) four London Lodges , in spite of the existence of a G . M . and G . L . at York having Masonic jurisdiction over all England , met , and formed themselves into a G . L . ; and they and the G . L . of York continued to co-exist and to quarreltill their union in 1813 .

, The quarrelling was foolish , narrow-minded , and m > Masonic ; the establishment of the " rebellious" G . L . was neither , as its promoters doubtless found it very inconvenient to take a fortnight ' s journey to York over a road infested with highwaymen , in order to " represent " their Lodges .

The Canadians , however , have kept strictly within the law . They have returned their warrants to England , thereby severing their connexion with us , and then have formed themselves afresh into a G . L . Their position is much complicated , by their failure to unite with another body , composed , not of those who

have " assumed to defy the authority of the Provincial or District G . L ., and to constitute themselves into what they called a G . L ., " as has been erroneously stated , but of Scotch and L'ish Masons , who are very numerous in Canada , and hold warrants from their own Grand Lodges . These having last year formed themselves into a Grand Lodgeand being joined by a small

, number of English Masons , have been recognised as such by the Grand Lodge of Ireland , which has equal Masonic jurisdiction with ourselves in Canada . There are now therefore three bodies , all as we believe having a legal and Masonic status , and each anathematizing the other two : —the Grand Lodge of Canada—Scotch

, Irish , and some English;—the Ancient G . L . of Canada , —late our P . G . L . ;—and , lastly , those few Lodges who still hold our warrants . We sincerel y hope that a union between these bodies may very speedily be effected , as the present state of things cannot but be most prejudicial to the best interests of the Order .

We regret to hear rumours that the Province of Quebec and Three Rivers is likely to follow the example of Canada . We trust that this will not be the case , but that they will give a fair trial to the Grand Master ' s new scheme of local self-government , which was conceived in a liberal spirit , and will , we believe , meet all the requirements of our Colonial Brethren .

Ar00202

THERE are , perhaps , no phrases so frequentl y in the mouth of certain Masons as " the princi ples of our Order , " and " ancient landmarks . " There is scarcely any subject upon which there is so great ignorance in quarters where information might naturally be expected .

We trust the new Masonic Library may not be without its effect in remedying this lamentable state of things ; but the root of the evil will not be reached till every Mason feels called upon to acquire the Alphabet of the Order , so as to be able to judge for himself , whenever questions of principle are at issue , in place of being forced to trust to the historical accuracy of those who profess , at any rate , to be better informed than himself .