Masonic Law In India.

three minute men versed in Masonic lore , bearing on the question of the power Ar ested in a Master of a lodge , ancl in other minor matters as well , but these seem to me be superfluous , inasmuch as " The Book of Constitutions" which has been drawn up by authority , contains the only law for

the guidance of all members of the society of Freemasons , as I believe each individual on initiation is compelled to take a most stringent oath binding himself to respect them , as well asJ . o stand or fall by them , in matters connected with Freemasonry . I A . ill now proceed to consider

the exceptions raised by the defendant's counsel on behalf of his client on the ground of co-partnership—1 st , I would observe that he ( the defendant ) is no longer a member of the lodge or fraternity , having been expelled by the competent authority , and this decision not having been

reversed holds good , ancl supposing that he has not been expelled , he as a simple member of the lodge had no exclusive power over the property , it being by the " Constitutions" simply vested in the Master to be held in trust for the iA hole of the members . As regards his claims , therefore , as Master of the lodge under suspension , it is indefensible as Avell as inadmissable for the following reasons : —

1 st , That he has been expelled Freemasonry . 2 nd , That his tenor of office as Master for one year has expired . 3 rd , That the plaintiff has been elected by the members of the lodge , ancl this has been duly

confirmed by a legal Avarrant , or other document equally legal , granted by the Provincial Grand Master in Bengal .

In reference to the objections as set forth hy the defendant ' s counsel that the society of Masons is not registered under Act XXI . of 1860 , I am of opinion that it is untenable , as that act Avas framed to empower a paid servant of any company or society so sueor be suedin his own name

, , ; Avhereas in this case the plaintiff sues personally for property which is vested in him and him onl y as duly elected Master of Lodge Harmony in trust for the members thereof .

For the reasons , therefore , above set forth , I think the best line of action for Mr . Jordan would have been to make over the various articles in dispute to his successor , under protest if necessary , and to have quietly awaited the issue of his reference or appeal to the Grand Master iu England .

Moreover , when called on , Mr . Jordan was unable to point out in the " Book of Constitutions" the particular rule or section by which he Avas empowered to place the lodge in abeyance , but if he had been able to maintain that the Provincial Grand Master of Bengal had and has the power to

Avithdraw the said suspension agreebly to the terms laid clown in Section 1 each of pages 45 and 55 Avhereb y he is vested with powers in his particular

Masonic Law In India.

district , similar to those possessed by the Grand Master himself . I think , therefore , I am not exceeding my duty in expressing the opinion that the reference or appeal- made by Mr . Jordan to the Grand Master of England should have been preferred through

his superior , the Provincial Grand Master of Bengal , whose authority he ( Mr . Jordan ) has persistently ancl resolutely ignored throughout the Avhole of his untoward proceedings ; and I am further of opinion , that the plaintiff has acted most leniently towards the defendant in confining his

proceedings to a civil action , as it appears at this court that the defendant might have been prosecuted criminally under Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code .

( Signed ) A . G . FORSYTH , Major , Cantonment Magistrate . Cawnpore , 29 th March , 1864 . CAWNPORE . —ALLAN V . JORDAN .

Captain Allan , Master of Lodge Harmony , lately instituted legal proceedings against Mr . Jordan for the recovery of the books of the lodge , and has gained his point . A correspondent of the Ouclh Mail , Avho gives the following report of the case , is evidently much disappointed at the result : —¦

" The Freemasons' squabble is again revived in the recent law-suit of Captain Allan v . Mr . Jordan . The case ivas tried under Act III . of 1856 ( no appeal under this Act ) , by our new Cantonment Joint Magistrate , Major Forsyth , on the 26 th ult . The Court was crowded Ai r ith Masons

and non-Masons . The plaintiff claims 200 rupees , or the books of Lodge Harmony , now in possession of Mr . Jordan . Mr . T . Newton , barrister-at-laAV , appeared for the latter , ancl after his able ancl eloquent defence , Captain Allan and his friends gave the case up as hopeless . " ( So much for

eloquence !) " The magistrate reserved his decision until the 29 th . Nearly all present at the Masonic trial were in favour of the defendant ' s right to the property , and many , in fact , laid wagers that Mr . Jordan ivould Avin the case . " ( Shortsi ghted mortals !) " Mark the inconsistenciesthe

, disappointments , Ave poor mortals are subject to . The case was decided on Masonic laAv against the defendant . The latter complained against such a decision , observing that it Avas impossible for Major Forsyth ( a non-Mason ) to judge correctly on Masonic lawwhen even the highest Masons

, differed on the point at issue . . Mr . Jordan paid the amount claimed , and , I believe , intends detaining the books , & c , pending the decision of the Earl of Zetland ( his Master in Masonry . ) "

Ar00501

FIND faiilc , when you must find fault , in private if possible ; and some time after the offence rather than at the time . The blamed are less incline ! to resist , when they arc blamed without witnesses ; both parties are calmer , and the accuser , who has seen the fault , and watched for a private and proper time to mention it .