MASONIC.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8387, 15 October 1890, Page 6

MASONIC.

THE NEW ZEALAND GRAND LODGE. The following exrracts from a letter received this mail by Brother W. H. Cooper, A.G. Secretary, from W. Brother T. W. Kitt, Past Master of the Eden Lodge, will prove of interest to the brethren of the colony: —"I hurried back from Liverpool sooner than I otherwise should have done in order to attend the Grand Lodge meeting in London, particularly as the New Zealand application for recognition was on the agenda paper. I knew, however, long before that the whole thing was ' cut and dried' from the tone of the Grand Secretary's remarks to me, but thought there might be some discussion on the subject, bat only the mover and seconder spoke, and all the most ardent supporters of the Grand Lodge of New Zealand could take exception to was some of the figures, for the remarks were most temperate. In the absence of Brother Philbrick, Q.C., Grand Registrar, Brother Sir John Monckton moved ' That the application for recognition be not granted,' which was seconded and carried, but not by any means unanimously, for a considerable number of the brethren did not vote, my•self, of course, amongst the number, and in conversation after the bulk of the brethren expressed themselves favourable to our movement. Recognition is certain as soon as you get a substantial majority. When in Dublin I had a long talk with one of the principal officers of the Irish Grand Lodge who seemed considerably exercised in his mind about the Ara Lodge, now that his Board of General Purposes (not Grand Bodge remember) has ruled that the minority can hold the warrant as lie is quite opposed to this ruling, and he tb 'Jght it would be a good thing if the Ara brethren got up a petition explaining all the circumstances of the case, and protesting in suitable terms against the manifest injustice of this ruling. His idea is that while the Board ruled to allow the minority to work, yet they did not recommend this course being taken, as it was establishing a precedent that was not advisable. With regard to this vexed question of minorities takingon themselves the right to continue to work, and claiming all properties, while the English Grand Registrar and the Colonial Board have ruled that it is contrary to the Book of Constitution and Masonic usage. The following extract from a letter on this subject, in reference to the Grand Lodge of New Zealand, by Brother W. J. Hughan, the greatest living authority on all Masonic questions, will be of interest. Quoting the rule in the Book of English Constitution that they wish to apply, he says in letter dated September 1, 1890:—'It seems to me that this rule concerns the .minimum number that can keep together as a lodge, when the members have so diminished through the deaths of members, loss of interest, other causes, etc. The question as to the action of a majority of the members to continue with our Grand Lodge, or sever their connection, is not referred to in the rule, so far as I understand or remember the reasons advocated for such a regulation. When a majority decide to leave the Grand Lodge and return their warrant, after all prelimnaries have been attended to, surely decides the matter, and would justify the Master, after due confirmation and payment of all claims, to distribute the effects pro rata amongst the members. I conceive that there are no three members of the lodge to be considered when the resolution to necede has been passed and confirmed under present rules, but I think it would be as well for a regulation to be added to the Bo<;k of Constitution providing for threefourths of ail members on the roll agreeing to such a secession before it can be consummated."