Contents.

CONTENTS .

LRADRRS— l-AGH . American and English Masonry ... ... ... ... 473 The Lodge of Scoon and Perth ... ... ... ... 474 Hidden Mystery—No . 5 ... ... ... ... ... 47 ? Dunckerley ' s "Charges , " 1 757 ... ... ... .-r . ... 47 6

Provincial Grand Lodge of Cumberland and Westmorland ... ... 477 Provincial Grand Chapter of Essex ... ... ... ... ... 477 Provincial Grand Mark Lodge of Devonshire ... ... ... ... 47 S Masonic Festival at Southport ... ... ... ... ... 47 S Halifax Freemasons'Diamond Jubilee Celebrations ... ... ... 47 S Consecration of the Acanthus Lodge , No . 2715 ... ... ... 47 a

MASONIC NOTESQuarterly General Court of the Girls' School ... ... ... 4 S ! Provincial Grand Lodge of Leicestershire and Rutland ... ... 4 S 1 Kelly Memorial Fund ... ... ... ... ... 4 S 1 Provincial Grand Chapter of Warwickshire ... ... ... 4 S 1 Provincial Grand Lodge of Durham ... ... ... ... 4 S 1 Committee of Management Meeting of the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 S 1

Correspondence ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 S 2 Complimentary Dinner to Bro . VV . Sparks , Sec . 2765 ... ... ... 4 S 2 Craft Masonry ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 82 Royal Masonic Institution lor Girls ( Ouirteily Court ) ... ... ... 4 8 ( 1 Laying Final CopingStcne of Southampton Docks ... ... ... 4 S 7 Instruction ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 S 7 Masonic and General Tidings ... ... ... ... ... tSS

American And English Masonry.

AMERICAN AND ENGLISH MASONRY .

We reproduced last week from the pages of thc American Tyler , an article by that very distinguished American Alason , liro . JOSIAH H . DRUMMOND , Past Grand Master of Maine , which is intended bv him as a reply to Bro . G . W . SPETll ' s paper

entitled " An English View of American Freemasonry . We look upon it as being undoubtedly the best answer that has been given , and in all probability about the best that could be given

lo our Bro . Si'KTll ' S not unfriendly criticism of Masonry as it is practised by our American brethren . But while we most readily 1 oncede that Bro . DRUMMOND has stated his case very clearl y and concisely , and at thc same lime with the knowledge and

ability wc look for in so learned a brother , we do not think he has succeeded in dislodging Bro . Sl'F . Tll from the positions he has taken up . Bro . Sl'KTll ' s main contention is that there , is a marked divergence both in theory and practice between ( he

American and English systems of Masonry . lb- probably regards this divergence as being the more remarkable from 'he fact of the two systems having but one and the same "rigin . We have not understood him as denying that much

"f this divergence has been brought about by national difltTcnccs of thought and custom , but both he and we , in llie course of our perusal of American Masonic publications , have noticed that certain things are done in accordance with

certain views which have slowly , nay , almost imperceptibly , won favour wilh our American brethren , but vvhich wc in England regard as outside the original scheme of Freemasonry . Bro . I ' . MONI ) virtually admits this . One of the points to which

liro . SPETH called attention was the number and variety of the 'i'lestions which are annually submitted to the Grand Master of ""e of the American Grand Lodges for his decision . Many of lieso questions have relation to matters ol the most trivial

1 haracler , which , from his point of view , should have been M'Idled off-hand by the local authority , not referred for settlement to the supreme authority over the whole jurisdiction .

' "'f the point is not a new one , for we ourselves have noticed in ni ° re than one instance that complaints have been made every n " \ v and then by this or that Grand Master of the triviality of the -pieslions submitted for his decision , Bro . DRUMMOND , while

American And English Masonry.

admitting that some of the questions are " trivial and puerile , " appears to uphold this custom on the ground that after all the number of reported decisions is comparatively small . "In a Grand Jurisdiction having 200 lodges thc average number of

reported decisions docs not exceed 20 , and in many not half that number . " But these 20 , or even this half of 20 , decisions arc reported in a single year , and as there are 50 ( irand Lodges in the United States , the number for the whole country is

considerable , while if the decisions reported during a period of five or lo years arc taken account of , the number becomes formidable . The question of numbers b y itself is of no great moment , but these decisions , when thev have been

endorsed by the Grand Lodge , have all the force of law in the jurisdiction they immediately concern , and one can more easily imagine than describe the difficulty that will some day arise when an attempt is made to codify thc decisions of all the *; o Grand Lodges of the United States .

Again as to the " size " of American lodges , Bro . DRUMMOND remarks that in America "the prime object of the working of a lodge is to teach Masonry ; to impress upon thc minds of individuals the principles of Masonry as rules to govern their

own conduct in their daily life and conversation ; it is to make better men rather than more social companions . " But is this object more likely to be attained by means of large lodges than small ? The " prime object " of our small lodges is precisely the

same , and while the meetings last , there is nothing but Masonry to occupy thc minds of thc brethren ; and it is only when thc duties of the lodge have been f •¦ Hilled that the members give themselves up to a little social

enjoyment . I hus it is that in thc small English lodge every member knows every other member , and the goodfellowship on which Bro . Si'RTH justl y lays stress comes in . But the big American lodge must very closely resemble a

battalion of volunteers who meet for drill purposes , and then disperse to their homes . But is it not rather absurd for Bro . DRUMMOND to insist so strenuousl y that Masonic lodges meet for the sole purpose of instilling into the minds of the members

those principles of morality with which they are supposed to be already familiar ? Or , if they are not familiar with them , then Ihe lodges have done wrong in admitting them into thoir membership .

On the whole , we . incline lo think that in spite of Bro , DRUM . VIOND ' vi : ry able rejoinder , the arguments advanced b y Bro . Si'KTll in favour of the English system of Masonry as compared with that of our American brethren , still hold the

held . In both countries the lodges do their utmost to receive none but worthy men as members , but then comes thc difference in the two systems . Here , when we have brought the worthy men together , and thc Masonic duties of the day are over we

afford them opportunities of becoming known to each other , and thereby cultivating among themselves that strong sense of the goodfellowship , which is the basis of Freemasonry all the world over . In the United States they install their good fellows in the

goosestep ol I ' rcemasonry , and then bewilder them with all kinds of fanciful theories as to the status and rights of nonaflfiliat . es , the doctrine of Grand Lodge sovereignty , the exclusive jurisdiction of lodges over rejected candidates , and so

forth . We prefer our system lor its own sake , but more especially because there is nothing in our mode of cultivatin " - goodfellowship which is inherentl y opposed to the fundamental truths of Freemasonry . '