Year: 1867

! LCOSCLUDED.l


! The Committee Of the Grand Lodge
/ say, of 1hese decisions:


! We think that the proposition in the
ninth question, that a Lodge retains
| jurisdiction over rejected candidates who
| live nearer to q Lodge u. D., established
after the rejection, should be qualified
with the remark, which was doubtless


intended to have been made, that the
consent Of the Lodge u. d. must first bI
obtained.


{" As to the tenth question, we have
only to say that this Grand Lodge has
more than once affirmed the right OF
| taxation by Subordinate Lodges for Ma
sonic purposes.


/ al. We think that the Grand Lodge
of Connecticut err in their conclusion
that residents Of that State made Masons
in regular Lodges out Of that jurisdiction


are claudestine. 1t is not the fact ot
such making that makes them clandes-
1 tine, not even when the Lodge has acted
improperly; but there must be fault in
the candidate also. If his conduct be
blameless, we hold that, being made in a
regularly constituted Lodge, he must be
recognized as regular throughout the
world. A candidate cannot be supposed
| to be acqusinted with the laws and reg
ulations OF the Fraternity, unless there
be proof OF knowledge; but the
Lodge, if it acted improperly in any
manner in receiving and acting upon bis
proposition, may and should be subject
10 discipline by the proper Grand Lodge,
q corrective which the Grand Lodge OF
New York will never fail to apply in
every proper case.


"III. To the question as to what is
the status of a candidate rejected on his
application, and which seems to be
made upon the suppOsition that an
objection once made Is an in
superable bar to further progress, with
out being renewed or without further
balloting, we would reply, that the can
didate may ask for a new uallOt at each
successive meeting Of the Lodge, pro-
vided such application lie over one regu-
lar meeting. Discretion will, of course,
be used to prevent annoyance by re-
peated ballotings, when it is well known
that it will be in I'm. The decision
made in 1861, that such objection shall
be bar to the further progress Of the
candidate until Withdrawn is not at
variance with the principles here laid
down. 10 only means that the objection
must be renewed whenever application
for a new ballot is made, and not that
once having been made it remains in
force although the Brother so Objecting
be accidentally taken away,'-tO quote
the language of the interrogatory.


"VIII. That when a year has elapsed
after favorable ballot on the question of
initiation, and after a demand for a new
ballot had been made and laid over, and
the candidate had not been notified to
come forward for initiation, the Lodge
has lost all jurisdiction over him, and
the candidate can be proposed in a second
Lodge and initiated without recourse to
the former Lodge.


t'IX. A warranted Lodge rejected a
candidate and year afterward u Lodge
under dispensRtiOn was created, and the
candidate was found to live higher to the
Lodge U. d. than to the warranted
Lodge; subsequently that Lodge made
the candidate, and the Lodge u. d. ap-
piled TO me to make an order that the
initiation fee be paid over to that Lodge.
| decided adversely to the application on
the ground that the warranted Lodge
had full jurisdiction Of the candidate
before the Lodge U. ID. was established,
and that such jurisdiction was eontinu-
Gus and unhroken.


ak. That the power Of q Lodge to as
sess its members Is not absolute; and
when objection is made to the assess
ment, its prcpriety should be submitted
to and approved by some higher power
before the assessment can become bind
ing. If an assessment can be made for
81 it can be made for 500 per capita. A
Lodge may dissipate its funds and assess
It's members; or it may levy an assess


ment for a purpose not strictly Masonic.


1t viii be for one Of your committees to
regulate this important feature of Law.
"XI. That Lodges U. ID. have the
right to affiliate Masons.h