Iowa state bystander. [volume] (Des Moines, Iowa) 1894-1916, 1905-07-28

whenever three Aodyes have rorme
a grand soace in any state II has sole
: absolute and exclusive Jurisdiction Il
lrfa1 srare q other grand lodge waa'
ever can lawfully Interfere with an
I jurisdiction ana can nsn her esFaalisl
!. hodge in such STATE NH continue an,
, 4 authority ever bodies over which
, might property have exercised piia
10 The organization N such srsnt
lodge therein
. This doctrine has heen hsla 10 M
! Sllr in the case af Prince Hail grant
: Dodge, Rui IL is nEnnlustrely proven
ay The researchers nj II&rn ana Ems
! \ giss Masonic scholars iha1 n. the tl1ng
4 I'm puasIion this theory nj exclusive
\ 5urasalsrinn aRs unknown The 9acl
lha7 1ais cal0raE haGy aia not JOIN
with she Whine Images IA Massachp-
SENS sa1 hF time taf forlaaS5an M IiIal
grand laage cannot I've held IN Rfacl
IFS rsEnlaraIE
n Rphs-r p G70ai6. The greatest u
Masonic hisEardH1s, &na(yz-lrs q sIlls-
liar ease. Says
@TfEis sfxsp wallla MT scar1'r viii
III 1hR stamp gly iI-,egulG-jCg rs -FslA -+ls
4.llrf NIllfl444lltf& S+A4-AbF4lNss 'N~ ---"a
minority gEf lodges. aGrGe or shall,
wlgit:h might Decline IN affiliate with
4 the aesw s1-gETiEataIn. TShR SlBTns o1
these xaulG hs un4u,pa4rtd ty The
lsia N Ehf InEipCd Y
In zha same Garnact1g'R, speaking
\ nj me A.17ssNiran si2aog1ans, Mr.. Gonld
asagzs;
4 SOM n I2i3Esse authorities SO SO far
\ s. 1D l1sl1uEs..I 1.faI If three Cut ii
T.tn4sgr slz1na lodges ASSEMBLE and er'aGl
grand laarf. I1ga remaining ninety
y siE gacalnR 2r-sEg-Tlils-- This a course
4 Is 2 E1lGEns--gsus doctrine,
i Tns r~uE at M whole matter is
4 rfras 4xp-assed fy Mr.. Tptna in his
,lt.a-f.Far upcn the American doctrine:
I 'eEES1y- This much We NAV admit. that II
srrc;h 3 Jaw tof exclusive JuI1Sdict1ou3
existed IN 1898 il must have been
made by white Masons, for even II
the negroes accepted snets a law forty
wears yRa-s later, the widest rc-
nancer VIII hardly claim hal any al
me three negro lodges IN existence
IL 1903. or any member OF ANY M
these lodges had, directly oTiadl17eCIlg,
gsselted TO anE such doctrine as ear
liz az 1875 He when could that law
ge binding On the negro Masonss Will
folly be carried SO far as N claim
maj white Masons could First, ex-
clR9a 1he negro brethren from the
whi organizations and then haF-
ing done this proceed IN EhessE or
zazzazr5Cas without the consent OF
LIE negroes 10 create a Law ifIH-
would bind negro Maso1s and render
Il impossible for them Ie continue
their GROWTH Surely the proposition
x TOO mons raus 10 Dc considered
The same aat1or takes up the CUES
ziu1 In 5e7aIl as ID later negro lodges
and grand bodies and analyLas lhF
yy-7ogsas5tfpn thai the diffusion Of ne
IT'D Mascarr IN ths newer states and
territories is an uCqaesrlo1sea In
fr11ranea- and that invading bodies
are indisp4tably illagirtmals. And OF
This ha says
ne uzgroes having lawfully re-
ceiTe5 the light Of Masonry and being
detarred from the organizations con
! cro1lad lsr the whites. had both the
right an dThe duty TO provide WAYS
and means 20 pass that l5ghT % Ia71r
rssster1ry- that 10 the mewp auDe
pos1e-5ty. that as the white pTac-
/ -7razsy-aat in many instances ex-
Vnessly-lini-ed their opera ions 10
The white race. ami the negroes prac-
t7caEly limited theirs TO The black
] race. there is NO real con aicI of j1Tis-
dicz5on between them: that most If
lot AL OF the so-called laws with
which their presence is supposed 10
1 cor7fc+. the modern languages built
17s nr the whites without their con
sent after lheir rights 10 exist had
accrued lha- hese laws are valid not
only 50 Icing Is they DO nor conflict
I with RICH 5 that are based upon the
/ higher laws Of the Masonic institu
lion itself: and finally that the ex-
1 ls-encF among the negroes Of Mason
II IS lawful origin: iCs successful
4 existence against every form
q opposition to- practically a cen nry
and q quarter. -he beoeiiciRnt effects
1 Ct lis existence and that as The intel
zsenca, the morality, the ability and
tEa consequent influence % 1ha- race
increase the Inconsistency Of position
OF 1he white organizations Will be-
co-1e more and more apparent 10 al
thinking minds"
Against tha claim that negro grant
lodges are clandesIine this same al
rhor5-y gives apt argument He SAYS.
Authority From England.
IF and American citizen jump
youT Homestead or moning claim, fe
does not By thai act cease 70 De an
American citizen, an the cild-tan on
which he bege-s while soua ing on
vcaI- land arg not Legitimate il he
complies with the marriage taws-no
matte how many other laws he may
violate Just 50, If England warrants
lodge in New South Wales or Scot
land. in Peru Or New Zealand, or
Hamburg, in New York: Or if a lodge
IF Maseas invaies your territory.
England Or the Other invader may be
very unjust and unkind. and worthy
Of your hostili y: but the invading
grand lodges Or their lodges do not
lose any particle Of their Masonic
! legitimate Or clandssTine, il the land
| marks Of Masonry are not violated
no matter what other laws or regu-
/ la1ions or doctrines are on ragged In
the one case the man is claim
Jumper-bnt a citizen and the father
of legitimate offspring; IN the other
the grand lodge is an .invader-out
a regular grand lodge OF Mascns and
the parent OF legitimate and perfectly
| regular lodges and Masons.
| The Gazette recognizes hat the
| fact that this controversy is not one
1 for the discussion in newspaper col
urnns. 1t is believed, however that
presentation of the case from the
viewpoint of co,ored MaSons will be
4 zx ;.,aro., even m white members