-
Articles/Ads
Article OUR BRETHREN IN MONTREAL. Page 1 of 2 Article OUR BRETHREN IN MONTREAL. Page 1 of 2 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Our Brethren In Montreal.
OUR BRETHREN IN MONTREAL .
WE notice , -with deep regret , the deliverances of certain American Grand Lodges and the allocations of certain American Grand Masters , on the question of Masonic right and legality , and constitutional position , as
between the Grand Lodge of Quebec on the one band , and our Brethren of the three Montreal Lodges and the Grand Lodge of England on the other . As we deem all such deliverances , and all such
allocutions , not only in themselves " ultra vires , " but fundamentally wrong , from a Masonic and constitutional point of view especially , * we deem it right to call attention to the subject here to-day . What are tbe salient points in this untoward discussion ?
What in short constitute the true facts of the case ? When the Canadian Lodges , by a large majority seceded from the Grand Lodge of England , Lord Zetland , then Grand Master , as a term of recognition of the new Grand
Body , then formed , the Grand Lodge of Canada , specifically reserved the ri ghts of all those English Lodges which adhering to their warranting and mother Grand Lodge , preferred still , as " grantees , " to hold their Lodge charter
from their ori ginal" grantor , " tbe Grand Lodge of England . Such a reservation of rights was admitted by the then authorities of the newl y formed Grand Lodge to be perfectly reasonable , proper aud Masonic ; they acquiesced in
it in the most unreserved and friendl y manner , in the fullest and most unequivocal terms ; and then and since , by a repeated public avowal , very much to their credit , have declared it to be binding in its fullest extent ; the outcome , in fact , of a deliberate and honourable Masonic " concordat *"
and understanding . Since the recognition of the Grand Lodge of Canada the number of Lodges so situated has been , we believe , reduced to three at Montreal , where a Prov . Grand Master , the
venerable and respected Judge Badgeley , still remains , and for a long series of years the entire legality of their position in every way was conceded on all hands , and in fact was never doubted or questioned in any way .
Indeed , no Masonic jurist , as far as we are aware , none of any note or position , has ever sought to question the rightful existence of Lodges , long working under a lawful warrant of an acknowledged and comnetfint inrisdiptm-nnl
authorit y , until the formation of the Grand Lodge of Quebec , a secession in turn from the Grand Lodge of Canada , and whose legal position , as before the Statute Law of Quebec , as a Province in the Dominion , is verv
doubtful indeed . Until then no question had ever been raised as to ^ the force of the original agreement , or the Masonic position of the Montreal Lodges . It then occurred to some
one to put forward an American doctrine of Masonic formalit y and etiquette , arising out of the political conformation of the United States , and the difficult and delicate
question of State Ri ghts . A great number of the American «¦ •Lod ges have arisen in the manner following . In unoccupied territory three or four Lodges have been warranted by different American Grand Lodges , far off or near . As
each new State was added to the Union it became a Soverei gn State . When these Lodges thought the time had come to form a Grand Lodge , delegates from three , four , UB
, ° * six Juodges , as tbe case might be , met together , ancl constituted themselves the State Grand Lodge , each Lodge perhapslworking under a different Grand Lodge warrant .
Our Brethren In Montreal.
It has been held in America , for many patent and potent reasons , that when thus the territory is Masonically occupied , henceforward the Grand Lodge so formed is , "defacto" and " de jure , " the sole and supreme Masonic authority in that
specific territory , and that all Lodges are bound to surrender their old warrants , and take out new or confirmatory ones from the then territorial and sovereign Grand Lodge . But the practice in America has not always been smooth
or uniform , despite the apparent popularity of this modern " dictum . " Cases have occurred , some are still existing , where this American theory is repudiated and resisted . The idea and the practice are American purely , not English ;
and the English Grand Lodge has never yet conceded the right of a newly formed body , terming itself a Grand Lodge , to demand as of ri g ht the surrender of a Lodge warrant issued , perhaps 100 years ago , by a lawfully
constituted and competent Masonic authority . Indeed , our own Grand Lodge not long ago unanimousl y recognised the legality of the " status" of the Montreal Lodges in every respect .
The movement in Quebec was , as we know , successful , and very soon the legality of the position of the Montreal Lodges was denied , and the surrender of their warrants to
the Grand Lodge of Quebec , on this American view of things , demanded , despite the original binding and honourable understanding between the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Lodge of Canada .
To these repeated solicitations , exhortations , and menaces , each in turn , the Montreal brethren have always carefull y and consistentl y replied , that they are perfectly satisfied as they are ; that they have reasons of their own , general and .
particular , which make them prefer to hold to their old connection with " mother country ; " that they are a perfectly united and prosperous body , and that sooner than give
up their English relationship , which they highly prize , and will never willingly disavow , they still claim their rights , privilege , and position as lawful Lodges under the English Graud Lodge .
The English Graud Lodge is in honour bound to stand by faithful children of its own , who have committed no offence save that of loyal attachment and adherence to the Grand Lodge of England . Accordingly the formal answer
of the Grand Lodge of England not proving satisfactory to the Grand Lodge of Quebec , it has proceeded , like the Archbishop of Rheims , in the old Ingoldsb y Legends ,
magnificently " ore rotundo" to anathematise the Montreal Lodges and the Grand Lodge of England . Well may we say to clay , as the playwri ght said of old , " Risum teneatis Amici !"
If we may judge of the mental calibre of those who have encouraged and taken this childish step , if we may form an opinion of their Masonic feelings by their utterances and their temper , we are compelled to say that they turn
out very badly , and are decidedl y " below par . " We are very sorry , therefore , to see or hear some American Grand Lodges and some American Grand Masters echoing such unmanly and un-Masonic sentiments , and endorsing such
bad law . Many distinguished bodies and leading Freemasons in America have , on the contrary , enunciated very seasonable and good old-fashioned Masonic common sense on the subject , and have done honour to themselves
by the clearness of their " dicta " and the soundness and reality of the constitutional position they have taken up . Nothing can be so antagonistic to Masonic good feeling , so prejudicial to the comity of universal Freemasonry , so
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Our Brethren In Montreal.
OUR BRETHREN IN MONTREAL .
WE notice , -with deep regret , the deliverances of certain American Grand Lodges and the allocations of certain American Grand Masters , on the question of Masonic right and legality , and constitutional position , as
between the Grand Lodge of Quebec on the one band , and our Brethren of the three Montreal Lodges and the Grand Lodge of England on the other . As we deem all such deliverances , and all such
allocutions , not only in themselves " ultra vires , " but fundamentally wrong , from a Masonic and constitutional point of view especially , * we deem it right to call attention to the subject here to-day . What are tbe salient points in this untoward discussion ?
What in short constitute the true facts of the case ? When the Canadian Lodges , by a large majority seceded from the Grand Lodge of England , Lord Zetland , then Grand Master , as a term of recognition of the new Grand
Body , then formed , the Grand Lodge of Canada , specifically reserved the ri ghts of all those English Lodges which adhering to their warranting and mother Grand Lodge , preferred still , as " grantees , " to hold their Lodge charter
from their ori ginal" grantor , " tbe Grand Lodge of England . Such a reservation of rights was admitted by the then authorities of the newl y formed Grand Lodge to be perfectly reasonable , proper aud Masonic ; they acquiesced in
it in the most unreserved and friendl y manner , in the fullest and most unequivocal terms ; and then and since , by a repeated public avowal , very much to their credit , have declared it to be binding in its fullest extent ; the outcome , in fact , of a deliberate and honourable Masonic " concordat *"
and understanding . Since the recognition of the Grand Lodge of Canada the number of Lodges so situated has been , we believe , reduced to three at Montreal , where a Prov . Grand Master , the
venerable and respected Judge Badgeley , still remains , and for a long series of years the entire legality of their position in every way was conceded on all hands , and in fact was never doubted or questioned in any way .
Indeed , no Masonic jurist , as far as we are aware , none of any note or position , has ever sought to question the rightful existence of Lodges , long working under a lawful warrant of an acknowledged and comnetfint inrisdiptm-nnl
authorit y , until the formation of the Grand Lodge of Quebec , a secession in turn from the Grand Lodge of Canada , and whose legal position , as before the Statute Law of Quebec , as a Province in the Dominion , is verv
doubtful indeed . Until then no question had ever been raised as to ^ the force of the original agreement , or the Masonic position of the Montreal Lodges . It then occurred to some
one to put forward an American doctrine of Masonic formalit y and etiquette , arising out of the political conformation of the United States , and the difficult and delicate
question of State Ri ghts . A great number of the American «¦ •Lod ges have arisen in the manner following . In unoccupied territory three or four Lodges have been warranted by different American Grand Lodges , far off or near . As
each new State was added to the Union it became a Soverei gn State . When these Lodges thought the time had come to form a Grand Lodge , delegates from three , four , UB
, ° * six Juodges , as tbe case might be , met together , ancl constituted themselves the State Grand Lodge , each Lodge perhapslworking under a different Grand Lodge warrant .
Our Brethren In Montreal.
It has been held in America , for many patent and potent reasons , that when thus the territory is Masonically occupied , henceforward the Grand Lodge so formed is , "defacto" and " de jure , " the sole and supreme Masonic authority in that
specific territory , and that all Lodges are bound to surrender their old warrants , and take out new or confirmatory ones from the then territorial and sovereign Grand Lodge . But the practice in America has not always been smooth
or uniform , despite the apparent popularity of this modern " dictum . " Cases have occurred , some are still existing , where this American theory is repudiated and resisted . The idea and the practice are American purely , not English ;
and the English Grand Lodge has never yet conceded the right of a newly formed body , terming itself a Grand Lodge , to demand as of ri g ht the surrender of a Lodge warrant issued , perhaps 100 years ago , by a lawfully
constituted and competent Masonic authority . Indeed , our own Grand Lodge not long ago unanimousl y recognised the legality of the " status" of the Montreal Lodges in every respect .
The movement in Quebec was , as we know , successful , and very soon the legality of the position of the Montreal Lodges was denied , and the surrender of their warrants to
the Grand Lodge of Quebec , on this American view of things , demanded , despite the original binding and honourable understanding between the Grand Lodge of England and the Grand Lodge of Canada .
To these repeated solicitations , exhortations , and menaces , each in turn , the Montreal brethren have always carefull y and consistentl y replied , that they are perfectly satisfied as they are ; that they have reasons of their own , general and .
particular , which make them prefer to hold to their old connection with " mother country ; " that they are a perfectly united and prosperous body , and that sooner than give
up their English relationship , which they highly prize , and will never willingly disavow , they still claim their rights , privilege , and position as lawful Lodges under the English Graud Lodge .
The English Graud Lodge is in honour bound to stand by faithful children of its own , who have committed no offence save that of loyal attachment and adherence to the Grand Lodge of England . Accordingly the formal answer
of the Grand Lodge of England not proving satisfactory to the Grand Lodge of Quebec , it has proceeded , like the Archbishop of Rheims , in the old Ingoldsb y Legends ,
magnificently " ore rotundo" to anathematise the Montreal Lodges and the Grand Lodge of England . Well may we say to clay , as the playwri ght said of old , " Risum teneatis Amici !"
If we may judge of the mental calibre of those who have encouraged and taken this childish step , if we may form an opinion of their Masonic feelings by their utterances and their temper , we are compelled to say that they turn
out very badly , and are decidedl y " below par . " We are very sorry , therefore , to see or hear some American Grand Lodges and some American Grand Masters echoing such unmanly and un-Masonic sentiments , and endorsing such
bad law . Many distinguished bodies and leading Freemasons in America have , on the contrary , enunciated very seasonable and good old-fashioned Masonic common sense on the subject , and have done honour to themselves
by the clearness of their " dicta " and the soundness and reality of the constitutional position they have taken up . Nothing can be so antagonistic to Masonic good feeling , so prejudicial to the comity of universal Freemasonry , so