Resignation Of Membership.

to accept it , and he ceases to be a member . But in this case it went beyond that ; no dues were payable , the Lodge accepted the resignation , everything was complete , and his resignation entered . " . . . The Dep . Dist . G . M . assigned two reasons -first . . " second , that , although accepted , the resignation was not complete until that acceptance was notified to the resigning Brother . Upon these points ,

he ( Bro . McIntyre ) thought the Dep . Dist . G . M . was wrong . A man might in the heat cf the moment say I resign : under such circumstances , until the resignation was recorded , il would not amount to anything ; but if a man deliberately writes resigning his position , and that resignation is accepted , it is not in the power of the members to say that that resignation is withdrawn . " And the appeal was allowed .

( Grand Lodge Proceedings , Vol . 2 , p . 2 Qj . ) In this case also stress is laid upon the deliberate intention and acceptance ; and Bro . McIntyre clearly lays down that a verbal resignation made in heat may be withdrawn before acceptance and recording . A fortiori , a resignation withdrawn before it has been laid before the lodge " would not amount to anything . "

The next case is the appeal ( heard 6 th December , 1876 ) of the Sussex Lodge , No . 354 , Kingston , Jamaica , against the judgment of the District Grand Lodge of East Jamaica directing the lodge to rescind its minutes ot 28 th July , 1875 , accepting the resignation of Bro . M . until certain charges alleged against him had been inquired into .

Bro . McIntyre , in stating the case , said : That the Brethren , or some of them in the lodge had behaved in a manner extremely disrespectful to the Dep . Dist . Grand Master , and they had not , as far as he could judge from the papers , allowed him io carry out the principle ! of the Craft . On the other hand , when he stated the facts , Grand Lodge must come to the conclusion that the appeal must be allowed , and the decision of the Dist . Grand Lodge reversed . "

The facts very shortly were that Bro . M . had certain charges preferred against him before the Dep . Dist . Grand Master . Bro . M ., knowing that this charge would be preferred , tendered , on the 21 st July , his resignation of the office of J . W . of the lodge . Subsequently , on the 28 th July , he wrote resigning membership . A lodge of emergency was summoned to consider whether the resignation of office should be accepted , but before it met a letter was received from Dep . Dist . Grand Master containing the charges . These the Lodge did not go into , but

entered on their minutes a resolution accepting the resignation of membership . Bro . Mclntire thought " that the Lodge having behaved in the way it had it was competent for the Dist . Grand Master to have summoned the officers of the Lodge before him , and to have dealt with them as he might be advised . But what he did was this—he summoned the officers of the lodge , and when their minutes were produced before him , he required them to rescind the resolution at which they had arrived , and expunge from their minutes the resolution which was therein recorded .

that they had accepted the resignation of the Brother . It appeared to him ( Bro . McIntyre ) that inasmuch as the S . W ., backed up to a considerable extent by the Secretary and the brethren , chose to evade his duty , which was to receive the correspondence of the Dep . Dist . Grand Master , and have the matter discussed by the Lodge , those Brethren behaved in a manner which was improper , and which might have brought down on them the condemnation of the Dist Grand Master and the Dist . Grand Lodge . But it was quite competent for them , however contumaciously they

might have behaved , to have received the resignation of the Brother , and record it on the minutes . It had always been held by Grand Lodge that if a Brother chose to resign his position as a member , no Lodge could hold him . A Brother had a right to resign , and there was no need of a resolution accepting his resignation . This resignation itself was a fact , and he ceased from the moment of tendering it to be a member of the Lodge . The notion of the Dep . Dist . Grand Master seemed to be that if a Brother ceased to be member of a Lodge , the

Grand Lodge and the Grand Master of the District had no power over him . He thought the Dep . Dist . Grand Master was mistaken . While a man continued to be a Mason under the English Constitution , he was amenable to the Grand Lodge of England wherever he might be ; he was amenable to the district or the province in which he might be residing at any time , so long as he resided there . When he resigned he excluded himself , by his resignation from a Lodge ; but the District Grand Master had power over him , and could summon him before him to produce

his certificate , and hear any charge against him ; and he could adjudicate upon the charge if it were true , in anyway , even to suspending him from his functions in Masonry , or he might summon him to the District Grand Lodge to be expelled . Therefore , although this case must be decided in favour of the Lodge , however badly they might have behaved to the Dep . Dist . Grand Master , he might still

deal with the Brother who could not be allowed to avoid an investigation into his character simply by resigning his lodge . But , although in the meantime the appeal must be allowed , nothing had been done to prevent the Dep . Dist . Grand Master or his District Grand Lodge from dealing with the Lodge and the Brother PS the facts of the case justify . He would therefore move ' That the judgment of the District Grand Lodge be reversed and the appeal be allowed . ' "

The present Grand Registrar , Bro . Philbrick , in seconding , summed up the matter really at issue in this particular case , in these words , " Lodges are voluntary associations . A man cannot , as the Grand Registrar has said , he forced to remain in a Lodge longer than he pleased . He could not be made to continue his liability for increased subscriptions . But , for all that , his status as a Mason could not be altered , and he was still—whether a member of the Lodge , or not a member of any Lodge—a member of the Great Body of the Craft , and amenable to the jurisdiction of Masonic law . "

( Grand Lodge Proceedings Vol . . ' , p . 277 ) . Now , in this case , it will be noted that the decision was that the lodge having accepted the resignation could not be forced to rescind their acceptance . It is not argued that they could not have refused to accept , pending the investigation of the charges ; but on the contrary , the arguments seem almost to imply that they ought so to have refused I This is a very important case , and worthy of most

careful study by those who wish to know how nearly the views of our two learned Grand Registrars coincide on the question of the jurisdiction of the Craft authori - ties over brethren who have endeavoured to sever their connection with the Craft . On 3 rd December , 1879 , there was the appeal of Bro . Josh . Fallot , P . M . of La Ca : saiee Lodge , No . 590 , Jersey , against the decision of the Dep . Prov . G . M . nf Jersey affirming his ( Bro . Pallet ' s ) resignation as a member of the La Ciesarle Lodge .

/ n this case the report is not too clear as to the dates , but it would seem that at the March meeting Bro . Fallot , who was Secretary , read a long letter from himself stating that " after mature reflection it is with regret that I feel compelled to adopt the following unalterable and irrevocable resolution "—which was in effect , alter giving his reasons , that he retired from the lodge and Freemasonry . He wished to place this letter on the minutes in its entirety , and the refusal of the

lodge led , at a subsequent meeting , to a stormy scene . The resignation , however , was accepted , recorded , and confirmed at the next meeting . After the confirmation Bro . Fallot appeared in the lodge and wished a protest entered on the minutes that " inasmuch as they refused to have this letter of his , in which he stated his resignation , put in exlcnso on the minutes of the Lodge , his resignation did not amount to a resignation at all . "

The lodge " adhered to their determination , having accepted his resignation as a member of the lodge , he was no longer a member . " Bro . McIntyre concluded his summary of the case . " Upon the statements alleged before him ( the Dep . Prov . G . M . ) , he came to the conclusion that the letter was a letter of resignation—you did then intend to resign your membership of the Lodge ; your Lodge accepted your resignation . " . ... " It docs appear to mc , after giving the matter the best consideration , that the decision

Resignation Of Membership.

snould be affirmed . Bro . Fallot has brought all this upon himself , and I shall advise this Grand Lodge to dismiss his appeal , and to hold that his resignition was properly accepted . " The motion was seconded by Bro . James Mason , P . G . S . B ., and carried unanimously . ( Grand Lodge Proc : Vol . 3 , p . 301 . ) Observe the stress aeain laid on the acceptance .

We now come to the case in 1889 , which was an appeal against a ruling of the District Grand Master of Burma , dismissing a complaint agai nst the Lodge Victoria in Burma , No . 832 , Rangoon , for permitting Bro . Joseph Dawson , P . M ., to withdraw his resignation of membership of the lodge , which had been regularly announced in writing to the Secretary and entered on the minutes . The report of the Grand Registrar's statement of the facts seems to be hardly accurate , but it would appear that after the resignation had been received , and recorded on the

minutes , some of the brethren wished it to be withdrawn , but Bro . Dawson refused to withdraw it . In this case , therefore , there would have been acceptance . Subsequently Bro . Dawson would appear to have changed his mind and withdrawn , and the District Grand Master held that there had been no confirmation of the minutes accepting Bro . Dawson ' s withdrawal ( apparently a misprint for " resignation " ); in fact , though Bro . Dawson tendered his resignation , it was never accepted by the lodge . The District Grand Master seems to have been of the

same opinion as the late Dr . Oliver , who held that membership does not cease " until the minutes are confirmed at the next regular lodge . "—( Masonic Jurisprudence , p . 108 . ) Dr . Oliver apparently regarded confirmation of the minutes in this case as something more than merely affirming the correctness of the minutes , and in this it is submitted he is wrong . The acceptance completes the act . The Grand Registrar correctly quoted the law as laid down by Bro . McIntyre in 18 74 , that when a brother " withdrew , and said he withdrew and signified it to the lodge

it was no longer in the power of the lodge to retain him agaimt his wish as a member of the lodge for a single day , " and in this case , " as the facts stood , the resignation , he thought , did take effect . Unfortunately , however , the actual form of the motion he made went further than was necessary— " That the appeal be allowed , and the decision ofthe District Grand Master be reversed , and that Grand Lodge declare that the resignation of Bro . Dawson communicated to the lodge virtually caused his resignation of the lodge . "

Bro . J . S . Cumberland then put it to the Grand Registrar that , according to his ruling , a brother , having once sent in his resignation could not withdraw it , however much he wished to do so ; and the Grand Registrar , after carefully guarding himself by saying he had been appealed to to make a statement of Masonic law besides that which was required by the case in hand , gave it as his opinion that that would be so . As an example , he said : " If he , as a commercial man , wrote and said , you have the offer of certain . matters , and the person to

whom he wrote wrote back and said , I accept the offer ; that was a bargain . If the person said , I disclaim it , and wrote to disclaim it of his own motion , why then he had effectively disclaimed it . " Bro . James Lewis Thomas agreed " that where the resignation was accepted the withdrawal from membership should stand . But the brother should have the power and liberty to withdraw his resignation until the meeting . It seemed to him a common sense view of the case . Until a resignation was accepted he did not think it was final . "—( Freemason , Vol . XXIII .,

A 337 . ) On this occasion the opinion of the Grand Registrar , not being required for the purposes ofthe case in hand , was a mere obiter dictum , and was given offhand . It was evident , however , from the example that he used that on consideration he could not and would not uphold it , for in the very case of the example he quoted it is a well known principle of law that an offer so made can be withdrawn at any time until it has been accepted . Directly , however , that the person to whom it is made accepts , both parties are bound , the contract has become complete by the acceptance , and the acceptance cannot be withdrawn .

In the case in March , the Grand Registrar had to consider the very point , and he then made his meaning quite clear in accordance with the law as above stated . It is submitted that all the cases before decided fully bear him out in the advice he gave , and even go further than he went and establish clearly that a resignation , though communicated to the lodge , can be withdrawn at any time before acceptance . The decisions certainly establish that a brother cannot be kept a member " against his wish , " but if he alters his mind before acceptance , there is no longer a will and intention upon which the lodge can act .

The mere sending a letter to the Secretary to be communicated to the lodge is nothing . The Secretary is not the lodge . He is merely an official to receive and communicate to the lodge , and it is the lodge in its corporate capacity which must meet and accept the resignation . It will have been seen from Bro . Mclntyre ' s words in the Bulwercasein 18 75 , that the difficulty felt by the Freemason ( leaderettes , March 16 th ) as to there being no locus panitentiat in the case of a verbal resignation is based upon a

misapprehension , and that a resignation , verbal or written , stands upon the same footing , and may be withdrawn in either case before acceptance ; though , of course , in the case of a verbal tender of resignation the time for re-consideration is much shorter if the lodge acts promptly in accepting . The whole question seems such an obvious matter of common sense , that it is not easy to understand how any difficulty can have arisen . Masonry is free , but such a hard and fast line of

redtapeism as has been sought to be established would do away with all freedom . We are but human , and every reasonable latitude should be given for reconciliation and restoration of harmony . Many a valued brother has been saved to his lodge and the Craft by a timely and courteous request to reconsider his words and withdraw his resignation , who would have been forever lost had his hasty words or letter been taken as irrevocable , and had he been told he must undergo the ordeal of being again proposed for ballot as a re-joining member . LEX SCRIPTA .

Masonry In The Tropics.

MASONRY IN THE TROPICS .

The Maso ; -. ic Fraternity in Bermuda and in St . Thomas , Antigua , Trinidad , Birbadoes , Jamaica , and other of the West Indian Islands , have been favoured during the past two months with the presence of Bro . J . Ross Robertson , Past Grand Master of Canada , who with his son , Mr . j . Sinclair Robertson , has been making a tour of Bermuda and the West Indies . The visit of Bro . Robertson to the islands , except Jamaica , was

necessarily short , extending to not more than one or two days . At Bermuda on the evening of the tOth February , at a few hours' notice , and by the energy of Bro . George Simpson , a leading number from the five lodges on the island met informall y in the Masonic Hall , there not being time for a regular meeting ; and listened to a lscture on the origin and history of Craft

Masonry , which gratified the brethren and was much appreciated . Amongst those present were Bros . George Simpson , P . M . ; Thomas J . Wadson , P . M . ; James C . Pocock , P . M . ; Charles A . Jones , P . M . ; William Smelhe , Edgar C . Wilkinson , Francis S . Taylor , W . M . 726 , G . R . S . ; John F . Motyer , S . W . 224 , G . R . E . ; James W . Booth , John Greenslade , Charles R . Tennant , Eugene A . Meyer , David Spurling , and William Greig Hutchings . At St . Thomas , the members of Lodge No . 356 , E . R ., were called together on . ' 2 nd February . Amongst those present were Bros . A . Bsrentzen (