THE GRAND LODGE MOVEMENT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXI, Issue 279, 26 November 1890, Page 4

THE GRAND LODGE MOVEMENT.

AN IMPORTANT RULING.

(BY TELEGRAPH.—OWN CORRESPONDENT.)

Christchurch, this day. The following communication received by the Acting D.G.M. of Canterbury, E.C. Bro. Cunningham, from the Grand Secretary of England, in reference to the power of a minority of a Lodge to retain the Charter when a majority has decided to transfer the allegiance of the Lodge to another Constitution, has been made public here:— " Grand Secretary's Office, Freemasons' Hall, Great Queen-street, London, W. C. 19 July, 1890. Bro. P. Cunningham, D.D.G. Master-in-Chargo, Canterbury* New Zoaliand. Dear Sir and Brother,^—l ata in te* ceipt of your letters of 16th and 23rd May,' and of your telegram of tbe 19th of the same month, on the subject of the rece.nl movement in New ZMland for v lIS formation of a Grand Lodge in that colony. In your telegram you ask for a reply by cable to certain queries. 16 would, however, be impracticable to give such replies satisfactorily, but having just at the same time received the resignation of Bro.; Thomson aa your District Grand Master, I telegraphed its acceptance as soon as the recent break in the cable permitted, and this I understand to be about! the most pressing point. I will now reply to your other queries. (1) Brethren who leave tbe English Constitution and take part in the new body have ipso facto placed themselves under Arct. 204, Book of Constitutions, so long as the new body remains unrecognised by our Grand Ledge, and therefore cannot be received as visitors in any English Lodge. (2) This question as to tbe majority taking the Lodge over haa already twice been answered to the D.G. Master of Wellington, who has been informed that the Grand Registrar as the legal adviser of Grand Lodge has officially ruled that Article 219 of the book of Constitutions was framed for domestic purposes, and was never intended to meet the case of a Lodge severing its allegiance from its mother Grand Lodge. Consequently, then, a majority can take the Lodge over. I may mention that this view was taken in the recent Australian Grand Lodge movements, and was offically confirmed by our Colonial Board. The question of the distribution and allotment of the funds of private Lodges and of District Grand Lodges under the circumstances referred to is one which the Grand Lodge has no power to decide.' These funds and other property do nob belong to the Grand Lodge, but to the local bodies, and with them must rest the onus of dealing with them on an exceptional occasion as they may think right and proper. Further I may mention that an application has been received from the socalled Grand Lodge of New Zealand for recognition, which will be laid before the Grand Lodge on the 3rd September next. Of course I cannot say what the decision will then be, but looking at the relative numbers and other circumstances, the result is at all events very doubtful.—l remain yours, etc., Shad well H. Clerke, Col., G.S."