-
Articles/Ads
Article UNITED GRAND LODGE. ← Page 2 of 3 Article UNITED GRAND LODGE. Page 2 of 3 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
United Grand Lodge.
ventured to believe that he could propose these resolutions with the confidence that they would receive from them the most unanimous and cordial reception , showing that the great body of English Freemasons knew rightly what it was to be well served , and also how to express their gratitude for such services .
The seconder of the proposition said he considered it a very high honour to have the privilege of supporting the proposition which was then before Grand Lodge . The earnest and graceful terms in which it had been proposed would render any remarks on his part quite feeble and unnecessary . The brethren , he said , must all he grateful to the acting M . W . G . M . for having so
eloquently and feelingly expressed their sentiments , and lie felt assured that no one else could have couched their thoughts in more able language than that in which they had been embodied . The motion was , as we have already reported , carried unanimousely . On Bro . Steven ' s motion for the election of a committee of
Past Masters to devise some means of carrying out uniformity in working in Masonic Lodges , the names of thirty-nine P . M . 's were read by the Grand Secretary , whose appointment was advocated by the proposer of the motion , leaving power to add to their number .
Bro . Savage considered that the brethren nominated were not the most suitable to carry out the proposition of Bro . Stevens . Ho should not propose to increase the number ; on the contrary , in his opinion , fifteen or less would have answered the purpose much better than the large number proposed . He stated that two distinct systems of woiking were in general use , and the
labours of the committee would accomplish nothing if brethren conversant with both systems were not nominated . He missed several names which certainly should have been included . A committee or thirty or fifty were not required ; ten or fifteen he considered would be amply sufficient . Bros . Udall and M . Cooke also spoke in opposition .
Bro . Horace Lloyd , Q . C , in proposing an amendment "That the appointment ot this committee be deferred until the next meeting ofthe Grand Ledge / ' stated he did so for two reasons—first , that he considered too large a number had been nominated to form an efficient working committee , which would have first to investigate and then to report ; secondly , the subject had not
been sufficiently considered to enable the brethren to recommend who sheuld be nominated as members of the said committee . The idea was that all the different schools of opinion should be represented , and that the Grand Registrar , the Grand Secretary , and the President ol the Board of General Purposes should act upon it . The report of a committee so constituted
would , he thought , be received with approval from all parties , and he hoped therefore that the consideration of the election of the committee would be deferred to the next meeting of the Grand Lodge .
Bro . Havers would make a few remarks . He would not discuss the nomination ofthe Committee so much as the policy of selecting a Committee at all . The question had beeu raised , in a friendly manner , many years ago , by the late Bro . Stephen Barton Wilson and Bro . Henry Muggeridge . The brethren appointed to the task sat from time to time for many months , and the result was nil . He was of the opinion that with all the best intentions
in the world , any attempt to secure uniformity of ritual would fail , and that it was physically impossible to effect , as all were not equally gifted with memory and literary capacity . That was the result arrived at by a small committee , and it would be ridiculous to anticipate unanimity of action in a committee composed of 39 or more brethren . The King of Sweden , ho said
United Grand Lodge.
had called attention some timejaince to the Swedish ritual . It was examined . and though it was found that the ancient landmarks were preserved , it would be impossible to adopt the Swedish ritual and system of working in this country , He concluded by expressing his opinion that the wisest course would be to defer the question . In the course of the discussion upon the Report of the Board
of General Purposes , Bro . Clabon said that on a former occasion he had proposed that the surplus funds of the Board of Benevolence should be appropriated for the purpose of apprenticing the children of the-School . The Committee had approved the proposition , but when brought before the Grand Lodge it was negatived . The Committee recommended increased to the Board of
Benevopowers lence , and that the rules to be followed by different classes o f applicants should be assimilated . At the present time , Bro . Clabon stated , personal inquiries were made only in London cases , but he recommended that a visit should be made in all cases . The next question was that the President and Vice-President should be appointed once a year , or whether , as at
present , they should be nominated at each meeting of the Board . The Board being called by several names , he suggested that defect should he-remedied , and that it should be called the "Lodge and Board of Benevolence , " instead of the "Committee and
Board of Benevolence . On the motion of Bro . RankineStehbing , " That in the opinion of this Grand Lodge , no future Grand Master should hold that office for more than five ye __ s in succession , unless in the case o f a Royal Prince , " that brother said it was his desire that the the election should take place annually , as now- The presen t mode of election had answered well , but he thought they
very should place a limit upon the retention of the office , and that it should not be held by any Grand Master for a longer period than five years . This , he stated , was not a new motion , but , in facfa a return to ancient usages . Informer times it was an uncommon occurrence for a Grand Master to hold his office for more than twothreeor four yearsit being upon record that there had
, , , been 32 Grand Masters whose term did not exceed two years , and he considered it desirable to connect as many distinguished noblemen as possible with the Craft . Whenever the term hap been extended bevond that time it was for some especial
reason-Lord Byron , for instance , sat five years , but lus re-election was in consequence of his assiduous attention to his duties . In Scotland , he must admit , such an arrangement had not been found practicable , but certain peculiarities in Scotland rendered a comparison between the two countries in this case inapplicable . He thought this proposition , if carried , would have the effect of
drawing large numbers of peers round the Masonic throne—a result which could not be otherwise than beneficial to the cause of Masonry . What , he asked , would he the effect if the rule new prevailing in Grand Lodge were in vogue in small lodges ? Whenever continual re-election occurred in private ledges , it had invariably an injurious effect . He considered the question a most
important one , and he should boldly declare his sentiments without , he hoped , being thought to cast reflections upon anyone-Their retiring Grand Master had been both assiduous ancl efficient : ou this ground he made no complaint- But what he did complain of was this , that when one Grand Muster occupied the throne for more than a quarter of a century , only one stream of thought pervaded all the proceedings . He asked what would be the condition of the State and the Church if statesmen ami
bishops were all ofthe same mind ? In any country , any institution , any people , any professions—if there is but one description of opinion , they did not acquire strength . He concluded with the assurance that he wished to cast no reflection upon
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
United Grand Lodge.
ventured to believe that he could propose these resolutions with the confidence that they would receive from them the most unanimous and cordial reception , showing that the great body of English Freemasons knew rightly what it was to be well served , and also how to express their gratitude for such services .
The seconder of the proposition said he considered it a very high honour to have the privilege of supporting the proposition which was then before Grand Lodge . The earnest and graceful terms in which it had been proposed would render any remarks on his part quite feeble and unnecessary . The brethren , he said , must all he grateful to the acting M . W . G . M . for having so
eloquently and feelingly expressed their sentiments , and lie felt assured that no one else could have couched their thoughts in more able language than that in which they had been embodied . The motion was , as we have already reported , carried unanimousely . On Bro . Steven ' s motion for the election of a committee of
Past Masters to devise some means of carrying out uniformity in working in Masonic Lodges , the names of thirty-nine P . M . 's were read by the Grand Secretary , whose appointment was advocated by the proposer of the motion , leaving power to add to their number .
Bro . Savage considered that the brethren nominated were not the most suitable to carry out the proposition of Bro . Stevens . Ho should not propose to increase the number ; on the contrary , in his opinion , fifteen or less would have answered the purpose much better than the large number proposed . He stated that two distinct systems of woiking were in general use , and the
labours of the committee would accomplish nothing if brethren conversant with both systems were not nominated . He missed several names which certainly should have been included . A committee or thirty or fifty were not required ; ten or fifteen he considered would be amply sufficient . Bros . Udall and M . Cooke also spoke in opposition .
Bro . Horace Lloyd , Q . C , in proposing an amendment "That the appointment ot this committee be deferred until the next meeting ofthe Grand Ledge / ' stated he did so for two reasons—first , that he considered too large a number had been nominated to form an efficient working committee , which would have first to investigate and then to report ; secondly , the subject had not
been sufficiently considered to enable the brethren to recommend who sheuld be nominated as members of the said committee . The idea was that all the different schools of opinion should be represented , and that the Grand Registrar , the Grand Secretary , and the President ol the Board of General Purposes should act upon it . The report of a committee so constituted
would , he thought , be received with approval from all parties , and he hoped therefore that the consideration of the election of the committee would be deferred to the next meeting of the Grand Lodge .
Bro . Havers would make a few remarks . He would not discuss the nomination ofthe Committee so much as the policy of selecting a Committee at all . The question had beeu raised , in a friendly manner , many years ago , by the late Bro . Stephen Barton Wilson and Bro . Henry Muggeridge . The brethren appointed to the task sat from time to time for many months , and the result was nil . He was of the opinion that with all the best intentions
in the world , any attempt to secure uniformity of ritual would fail , and that it was physically impossible to effect , as all were not equally gifted with memory and literary capacity . That was the result arrived at by a small committee , and it would be ridiculous to anticipate unanimity of action in a committee composed of 39 or more brethren . The King of Sweden , ho said
United Grand Lodge.
had called attention some timejaince to the Swedish ritual . It was examined . and though it was found that the ancient landmarks were preserved , it would be impossible to adopt the Swedish ritual and system of working in this country , He concluded by expressing his opinion that the wisest course would be to defer the question . In the course of the discussion upon the Report of the Board
of General Purposes , Bro . Clabon said that on a former occasion he had proposed that the surplus funds of the Board of Benevolence should be appropriated for the purpose of apprenticing the children of the-School . The Committee had approved the proposition , but when brought before the Grand Lodge it was negatived . The Committee recommended increased to the Board of
Benevopowers lence , and that the rules to be followed by different classes o f applicants should be assimilated . At the present time , Bro . Clabon stated , personal inquiries were made only in London cases , but he recommended that a visit should be made in all cases . The next question was that the President and Vice-President should be appointed once a year , or whether , as at
present , they should be nominated at each meeting of the Board . The Board being called by several names , he suggested that defect should he-remedied , and that it should be called the "Lodge and Board of Benevolence , " instead of the "Committee and
Board of Benevolence . On the motion of Bro . RankineStehbing , " That in the opinion of this Grand Lodge , no future Grand Master should hold that office for more than five ye __ s in succession , unless in the case o f a Royal Prince , " that brother said it was his desire that the the election should take place annually , as now- The presen t mode of election had answered well , but he thought they
very should place a limit upon the retention of the office , and that it should not be held by any Grand Master for a longer period than five years . This , he stated , was not a new motion , but , in facfa a return to ancient usages . Informer times it was an uncommon occurrence for a Grand Master to hold his office for more than twothreeor four yearsit being upon record that there had
, , , been 32 Grand Masters whose term did not exceed two years , and he considered it desirable to connect as many distinguished noblemen as possible with the Craft . Whenever the term hap been extended bevond that time it was for some especial
reason-Lord Byron , for instance , sat five years , but lus re-election was in consequence of his assiduous attention to his duties . In Scotland , he must admit , such an arrangement had not been found practicable , but certain peculiarities in Scotland rendered a comparison between the two countries in this case inapplicable . He thought this proposition , if carried , would have the effect of
drawing large numbers of peers round the Masonic throne—a result which could not be otherwise than beneficial to the cause of Masonry . What , he asked , would he the effect if the rule new prevailing in Grand Lodge were in vogue in small lodges ? Whenever continual re-election occurred in private ledges , it had invariably an injurious effect . He considered the question a most
important one , and he should boldly declare his sentiments without , he hoped , being thought to cast reflections upon anyone-Their retiring Grand Master had been both assiduous ancl efficient : ou this ground he made no complaint- But what he did complain of was this , that when one Grand Muster occupied the throne for more than a quarter of a century , only one stream of thought pervaded all the proceedings . He asked what would be the condition of the State and the Church if statesmen ami
bishops were all ofthe same mind ? In any country , any institution , any people , any professions—if there is but one description of opinion , they did not acquire strength . He concluded with the assurance that he wished to cast no reflection upon