Grand Lodge And The Boys' Preparatory School.

t would be very generally followed , if all the special grants in aid of the Preparatory School could be announced together , but not so generally adopted , even if at all , if the

£ 1 , 000 from Grand Lodge were disposed of at once . There are other matters in connection with this Preparatory School , beyond the fittings , for which special grants

would be very acceptable , and we venture to suggest this means of encouraging them , ere it is too 1 ite . This , from our point of view , it will be if the £ 1000 voted by Grand Lodge is included in next week ' s returns .

We would even go so far as to suggest to the Provincial and Private Lodges that they should each take into consideration the advisability of imitating the example of Grand Lodge in giving the Preparatory School a good start . If

the project were taken up with anything like spirit a handsome total might be realised , which would not only clear off all charges in connection with the actual starting of the

School , but might leave a surplus for investment which should produce an amount that year , by year , would serve to illustrate the benefit of a good example .

Correspondence.

CORRESPONDENCE .

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

RENUMBERING OF LODGES . To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' CHRONICLE , DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I am in entire agreement with your " Editorial " in objecting to any alteration in the numbers of Lodges , simply bpcanse of the few Lodges which have so peacefully and Masonically left us to form the Grand Lodge of South Australia , or

because of any other reason that has been offered . I am old enough a Mason to remember the dire confusion caused by the hist change of numbers , which was in 1863 . The previous alteraHon was in 1 S 32 , and the first this century was in 1814 . Now , the last mentioned was a necessity , and was separated from the second by a period of 18

years , the lapses even amonfrst old Lodges being rather manv in the interim . The third alteration , however , was not until 1863 or 31 years removed from the previous renumbering . To my mind there should be no more such violent alterations thi ^ contnry , especially as there are bat few vacancies in the "Union" Lodges , holding warrants granted in 1813 or back to the earliest on tho Boll .

In 1832 the last of these Lodges was moved from 647 to 424 , and in 1863 from 424 to 339 , whereas in 1885 tho number 339 would only be ra sed to 333 , or six higher than now . But tho change would bo srill less in respect to several of the older Lodges . From 18 to 117 tho whole of these 99 Lodges wonkl

only he moved one higher . From 119 to 121 inclusive , the numbers would be altered to 117-119 , and from 123 to 137 simply thr-e higher . Those ranging from 139 to 160 , if altered as desired , would be each moved up /> w , and 162 to 181 would each be five higher Now I submit that these differences in numbers , distinguishing the

old "Union" Lodges , would be a los ^ iu every sense but one ; and that single or solitary advantage , would be as nothing compared with the numerous disadvantages . I do not allude to much younger Lodges , because the foregoing facts should be enough to prove how needless is tho change demanded .

I intend referring at greater length to this subject before long , but could not let yonr kind notice of my Masonic labours pass without a line in appreciation . Youi' 3 fraternally , W . J . HUGIIAX .

To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I am pleased to see , from yonr leader on the Grand Lodge of South Australia , that we may rely on your assistance in opposing the suggested renumbering of onr Lodges , a course which wonld result , as you say , in confusion and annoyance in

many quarters . I am , perhaps , differently circumstanced to the majority of brethren , inasmuch as I have to communicate with many of our Lodges in tho course of tho year , but at the same time thnre are many others similarly circumstanced with myself , and doubtless they will agree with me that number , name , and locality each and

all serve to call to mind the correct address of a Lodge without the necessity of referring to the printed list . To explain my meaning 1 can sometimes remember the number of the Lodge meeting in a particular town , but for the moment cannot recollect the name ; when , however , I get the number and associate it with the town , a

visit in years gono by , or some other of the many " points " which serve to assist one ' s memory , the whole comes to mind . It frequentl y happens this knowledge is of service to me , and I certainl y think a renumbering wonld be very inconvenient to me personally , if not to brethren generally .

I am , Dear Sir , Yours fraternally , A PROVINCIAL SCRIBE ,

Representative Provincial Stewards At The Festivals.

REPRESENTATIVE PROVINCIAL STEWARDS AT THE FESTIVALS .

To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —I am aware my present remarks may not meet with universal approval ; they may even call down on my head a storm of abuse , but with yonr permission I will make my views public , in tho hope that the question on which I address yoa

may be ventilated , and that , in the end , good may result from my humble efforts . For some time past there has been , I think , a growing desire on the part of influential Provincial brethren to monopolise for the year the benevolence of their district for one or other of the Masonic Charities , for which they net as exclusive

Steward for the time being . Their efforts are doubtless actuated by good motives , but I question whether the Institutions have reaped any benefit from this system of monopoly . In many districts where an influential brother undertakes the responsibility of representing the whole Province it is impossible

for him personally to canvass all the Lodges comprised in it ; the work accordingly falls on deputies , indeed , it is not unusual for the Province Steward to enlist the help of a member of each Lodge , but I very much question if those " representatives" take as muob interest in the work as they would if they were personally acting aa

Steward . I will relate my own experience in connection with this matter . I agreed to serve the office of Steward for one of the Charities , and later on one of the officials of my Province uuderfctok a similar office for the same Institution . Perhaps he did not know I was already acting , and using my endeavours to get a good

list together . In any case he became a poacher on my preserves ; iu other words , he sent circulars to my Lodge , saying he w ^ s acting as Steward for tho Province , and asking for support . The official ^ either frightened of offending tho Provincial dignitary , or fearing lest their chance of Provincial honours would bo lessenod , felt they

should support his Stewardship rather than that of their own member , and I know the Institution suffered iu consequence , as many amounts were lost to my list on the plea that the other wa 3 the " Provincial representative , " and lost to him because not properly looked after bv this self . constituted monopolist . I decided to serve

in the future , if ever I again undertook the duty , as an unattached Steward , and the growing number of this latter class leads me to wonder if any of them have had experiences similar to my own . In any case I fully believe that the system of " representative " Stewardships is open to question , and if once it canbe shown in its true nspect

I feel a change will take place , resulting iu benefit to the Charities . I hope , Sir , neither you nor any of your readers will imagine I have heen actuated by feelings of jealousy in writing this tetter to yoa . I nssnre yon such is not tho case . I have long since dismissed the circumstances , except to mention thorn in illustrating my views on tho subject .

I am , Yours fraternally , J . At .

Contempt For Provincial Honours.

CONTEMPT FOR PROVINCIAL HONOURS .

To the Editor of the FREEMASONS CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —From your report of the Provincial Grand Lodge of Middlesex , I loam that tho Provincial Grand Master , when investing his Officers , expressed great dissatisfaction that OHO of those s-lrcted last year had not

then been present to be invested , and was also absent from this year ' s gathering . I was present at tho meeting of 1 S 84 , and can fully under .-bind the disgust of Sir Francis Bnrdott that the brother complained of was still treating tho appointment with contempt . Surely it would have been much better for him to have

declined it rather than to offer insult to one of the most enthusiastic brethren the Cnift has ever known . I feel tho Provincial Grand Master of Middlesex has dene a service to Freemasonry in saying he

will not in future appoint any brother to Provincial office unless the requirements of the Order are complied with , as once having been publicly drawn attention to , it is to be expected the rules will be more generally respected .

As W . M . for the usual term of a private Lodge , in which one of the Officers was conspicuous by his absence , I can fully appreciate the feelings of Sir Francis Bardett , and in still further drawing

attention to his remarks , I hope I may be the means of saving others from similar annoyance . Such is my excuse for troubling you with this epistle . I remain , yours fraternally , P . M .

Lodge Names.

LODGE NAMES .

To the Editor of the FREEMASON ' S CHRONICLE . DEAR SIR AND BROTHER , —If it were necessary and yonr space admitted of a full discussion of the subject , it would not be very difficult to show that the practice of naming Lodges alter well-knovvu brethren is not a sound one . I may not be able to convince

" SUBURBAN , " whose letter appeared in yonr last issue , but 1 should like to offer a few thoughts for his consideration . I mi ^ ht begin by asking " What ' s iu a name ? " A good deal when the record of deeds is one of more than local importance . Then the name associated wiih such deeds becomes a perpetual example and monument , aud is

ever honoured by being used . A local reputation , except under very exceptional circumstances , is generally gained by the exercise of qualities which should be common to all Masons , which demands no high social position , aud which finds sufficient distinction in the various offices the Craft has to beatow . A name of a Lodge