Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

We do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions of our Cor . respondents . All Letters must bear the name ani address of the Writer , not necessarily for publication , but as a guarantee of good faith . We cannot undertake to return rejected communications .

BRO . CLABON'S MOTION . To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —Referring to the proceedings of the Grand Lodge on the 6 th inst ., as reported in the CHRONICLE of the 9 th inst ., at which I was present , I think some of the statements made by Brother James Stevens , if left uncorrected , are likely to mislead . He stated ,

1 st . The Provincial brethren at the present time contribute to the Fund of Benevolence about as much as the Metro . politan . 2 nd . Did not the country brethren who were relieved represent two-thirds of the amount of that number ? 8 rd . He was adverse to being mulcted in a larger sum than tbe Provincial brethren .

Were these statements correct they would tell against the Provincial brethren . I have before me the printed reports of the Qnarterly Communications of Grand Lodge , and taking the contributions received from tbe various Lodges , as therein published , for a period of twelve months , commencing 1 st July 1881 , and ending 30 th June 1882 , I find the contributions from the Lodges to the Fund of Benevolence amount to £ 7496 6 s 5 d .

From London Lodges - - - £ 2587 3 6 From Provincial Lodges - - - 4894 3 11 From Abroad 14 19 0 That , I think , proves Brother Stevens's first statement to be incorrect . On carefully analysing tbe grants made , over tbe same period , I find the sumB voted to London and Provincial brethren amount to £ 10 , 205 ,

namely—To London brethren - - •£ 4186 0 0 To Provincial brethren - - - 6020 0 0 If the Provinces send up nearly tivo 4 hirds of the payments to the Fund of Benevolence ( besides contributing a like sum to their own Provinces ) surely it it is no hardship to the London brethren if their Provincial brethren get two-thirds of the grants . The above figures , however , do not show they receive that proportion .

Bro . Stevens ' s third statement is quite wrong . It is well known that every Mason in England and Wales contributes one shilling per quarter to Benevolence . In London the whole is paid over , but in the Provinces the Constitutions allow the brethren to send half to London , and half to their Provincial Grand Lodges . If all were sent to London , the matter would stand thus : —

Contributions from London Lodges - - £ 2587 3 6 „ „ Provincial Lodges - 9788 7 10 BI think such a statement should not have been made by Brother Stevens , considering his Masonic experience and knowledge , and could only have been done to tell in favour of the motion , and to the detriment of the Provinces .

In Bro . Clabon's closing remarks , he called attention to the votes of that evening as between London and the Provinces . Out of eighteen cases , twelve were Provincial and six London . Quite right , the proper proportion . The case , however , really stood—seven London ( £ 350 ) and eleven Provincial ( £ 750 ) . "Brother Clabon further stated— " He asked the country brethren to

give one shilling a-year—all this grand oratory had been against paying one shilling a-year . " Brother Clabon hardly realises that meant drawing nearly £ 5000 a-year from the Lodges in the Provinces , for , had the motion been oarried , the quarterages of the Provincial brethren would have been raised to Is 6 d , half being sent to London and half to the Provincial Grond Lodges , otherwise the

position of London and Provincial brethren would have been different , which is quite inconsistent with the Constitutions of the Order . The best suggestions made at the meeting were , altering the time of membership qualifying for a grant , or that no grant should be made exceeding £ 5 , unless the brother had been initiated more than five years , and also discontinuing the large grants , except nnder very exceptional cirenmstances .

Apologising for the length of this letter , I am , yours fraternally , CHARLES S . MASON P . M . 304 , P . P . G . Treasurer W . Yorks Leeds , 12 th December 1882 .

MOTIONS " OUT OF ORDER . "

To the Editor of the FREEMASON s CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I appear to be most nnfortunato in my endeavours to set before the Grand Lodge a matter which , in the opinion of numerous Metropolitan Freemasons , ie of great

importance . On three several occasions I have been ruled " Out of Order , " bnt on what jnstifiable grounds neither my friends nor I can understand . I shall not now advance the arguments I can adduce for the adoption of one or other of the suggestions I have made for the sab-

Correspondence.

division of the Metropolitan area , so as to secure for the members of nearly three hundred and fifty Lodges meeting therein , equal rights and privileges to those enjoyed by brethren whose Lodges are ontside the ten miles radius from Freemasons' Hall . The fortheotng debates on the Revision of the Constitutions of the Order will afford me an opportunity of which I shall not be slow to avail myself .

Without present reference to tbe reasons advanced for setting aside my two first notices of motion , which reasons I controvert , I should like to know how far the ruling of the Acting Grand Master at the last Quarterly Communication is consistent with tbe proceedings which had previously taken place on the same evening . It was adjudged that my motion was " an abstract

resolution , which , if carried , would be at variance with the Book of Constitutions , and would have to be followed by an operative resolntion , " and therefore the motion was " out of order . " Now , granting for one moment the correctness of this decision , would not the same have equally applied to Bro . Clabon's motion , wbiob was admitted and debated ? Our worthy brother moved a direct alteration of tho

second Article in the present Book of Constitutions , relating to tho Quarterage payable from every member of eaob Lodge , and therefore his motion was quite as " abstract a resolution , requiring a subsequent operative resolution , " as was mine , proposing a direct alteration of the Article which defines what are Lodges within the London district . " Let any brother fairly and dispassionately set the respective propositions before him for consideration , and most assuredly he

will see what I represent is correct . Can it be that in Grand Lodge there is one ruling for a brother in the purple , and another for a brother in the bine ? We should all hope not ; but from the persistent manner in which my several attempts have been , as I may say , strangled in their birth , I cannot be blamed if tbe suspicion on my mind , that such is the case , is strengthened by the technical objections which have been taken on eaoh occasion .

Yours faithfully and fraternally , JAMES STEVENS P . M . P . Z Clapbam , 11 th December 1882 .

Reviews.

REVIEWS .

All Books intended for Review should be addressed to the Editor of The Freemason ' s Chronicle , 23 Great Queen Street , W . C . — : o : — Freemasons' Calendar and Pocket Book for the year 1883 . London : Spencer ' s Masonic Depdt , 23 a Great Queen-street , W . C .

THE spirit of progress would seem to have taken some hold of the Calendar Committee of the Board of General Purposes , and this year we have to congratulate its members on a further innovation . They have now introduced a list of all the Grand Officers from Wardens downwards who have been appointed since the Union of 1813 , and in this the new issue is a decided improvement . We see no reason

however , why the list Bhould not have been made complete by including the distinguished brethren who have filled the offices of Pro Grand Master and Deputy Grand Master respectively . In such case , the list would have the further merit of completeness . On the other hand , and by reason , perhaps , of the very boldness they have shown in introducing the novelty , they cling with remarkable

tenacity to the errors we have noted in previous Calendars . Tbey still continne to mislead their readers by announcing that the Lodges and Chapters meet , as the case may be , on the 1 st Monday , last Wednesday , 2 nd Tuesday , that is , of course in every month , whereas it is well known that a vast number of Lodges meet at the outside not more than eight times in the year , and many of them on still fewer

occasions , while Chapters generally meet only once a quarter . As tbe Board of General Purposes and , of course , its Calendar Committee have access to the official records , there is no excuse for the repetition of this error in future Calendars . Again , Lodges Nos . 3 , 5 , 7 , 9 , 11 , 13 and 15 are still distinguished by the letters T . I . ( Time Immemorial ) placed against them in the column provided for " Dates

of Origin . " Has the Calendar Committee lost sight of tbe fact that in 1717 there were only four Lodges which took part in the establishment of G . L . ; that one of these about 1721-2 voluntarily sacrificed its original , or , as we should say , "Time Immemorial" Constitution , and sought and obtained a Warrant from Grand Lodge , while a second died out a little before , or just about , the time when the

Schism broke out in English Masonry ; that only two T . I . Lodges remain , one other , though still surviving , being a warranted Lodge , and , consequently , that to describe Lodges , whose earliest record dates no further back than 17 th July 1751 as T . I . Lodges , is in the face of it absurd . Then , in Bro . Gould ' s "Atholl Lodges , " under present No . 15 , we have the following : " The Warrant

of No . 8 —its number on the roll of the "Ancients seems to have been the first issued by the " Ancients , " and was Bigned by the Masters of Nos , 3 , 4 , 5 , and 6 in 1751 , in favour of James Bradshaw M ., Thomas Blower S . W ., and R . D . Guest J . W . " We shonld like to be informed by the Calendar Committeeat all events in the case of present No . 15—how it can possibly be a

Time Immemorial Lodge , when it has worked from the very commencement under a Warrant issued in a year that can be determined by reference to old records . Moreover , the " places "—in one instance the word " Warrant" is used—and nearly all these so-called T . I . Lodges were at soma time or other purchased by Lodges lower down

on the roll of the " Ancient " Grand Lodge . We should like to hear vjbat Bro . Gonhl , who is himself on tbe Calendar Committee , has to say in defence of the Committee's designation of these Lodges . As to tho general appearance of the Calendar , the arrangement of its contents , and its accuracy—except where questioned as abovowe have nothing but praise to bestow .