General Grand Lodge as an argument against the organization of such a body. The convention considered six subjects, coming within the scope of the resolution under which they were appointed.

1. Uniformity of work.

2. The Representative system.

3. Necessity of Grand Lodge certificates.

4. Receiving promissory notes for Degrees conferred. 5. Transaction of Masonic business in Lodges below the Degree of M. M.

6. Upon the grade of penalty to be inflicted for the nonpayment of dues.

These were questions, particularly the last three, of great importance to the Craft everywhere. The action taken proved the advantage that could be derived from a Grand Body having authority to speak upon these and kindred

matters.

Upon Uniformity of Work, the convention recommended a convention of skillful brethren, one or more for each Grand Lodge, to be styled Grand Lecturers, to meet together once in three years to compare their lectures and correct variations. In accordance with the recommendation, delegates from sixteen Grand Lodges met at Baltimore, in May, 1843. Bro. John Dove, of Virginia, was elected Chairman. It has been supposed that they agreed on a system of work; but, if they did, it has not been promulgated to the Craft. Each delegate reported, upon his return home, that the work he had formerly taught had been adopted, with slight variations, except some new things. Two text-books were issued, differing materially, each claiming to be the work adopted. I have heard a dozen variations of the Lectures, each declared to be such as was agreed upon at Baltimore. What with the introduction of new Signs,' 'Due Guards,' and 'Highest Pinnacles,' &c., more discrepancies existed in the work two years after the convention than did two years previously. A new system is a paying institution. But I am digressing. The convention proposed a Grand Masonic convention, to 32-VOL. IV. NO. XI.

meet triennially, and a set of (eight) Rules for the government thereof, to go into effect when thirteen Grand Lodges approved of them; and adjourned to meet at Winchester, Virginia, in 1846. That meeting did not take place; the Grand Lodges appear to have been satisfied with one convention to systematize work. The representatives of five Grand Lodges only were in attendance, Virginia, North Carolina, Iowa, Michigan and the District of Columbia, and they, after waiting three days, adjourned sine die. In the meantime, (in 1845,) the Grand Lodge of Maryland proposed a convention, to meet at Baltimore in 1847, to assist in forming a Grand Lodge. The proposition was favored by the Grand Lodges of Arkansas, Mississippi, Illinois, Michigan, Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia, and opposed by those of South Carolina, Alabama, Pennsylvania, Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Virginia, Connecticut and New York.

On the 23d of September, 1847, delegates from the Grand Lodges of Arkansas, Florida, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Mississippi, Maryland and North Carolina, met in Baltimore, and framed a constitution for a Supreme Grand Lodge, which was transmitted to the various jurisdictions. But little attention was paid to it. R. W. Wm. P. Mellen, of Mississippi, was President, and Jos. Robinson, of Maryland, Secretary of the convention. In 1849 the Grand Lodges of the District of Columbia and Maryland each issued circulars proposing another convention to meet in 1850, to form a General Grand Lodge. The G. M. of Rhode Island framed a constitution, which was adopted by his Grand Lodge. But two Grand Lodges appointed delegates, Maine and Connecticut, and no meeting was held.

At the triennial meeting of the General Grand Bodies, in Boston, in 1850, the subject was discussed, but no formal meeting was held; but, upon the proposal of the Grand Lodge of Maine, delegates to act upon the subject, from the Grand Lodges of Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York, met at Lexington, Kentucky, in 1853.

M. W. H. B. Haswell, of Vermont, was chosen President, and R. W. John L. Lewis, Jr., of New York, and R. W. E. G. Storer, of Connecticut, Secretaries. Upon motion, delegates to other Grand Bodies then in session at that place, but not accredited to this, were invited to participate in the doings. Accordingly delegates from the District of Columbia, Kentucky, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Missouri, Alabama, Ohio, Mississippi and Virginia, enrolled their names. A committee reported it inexpedient to form a General Grand Lodge at that time, but recommended a plan, under the title of National Confederation, for specific objects, as proposed by Finlay M. King to the Grand Lodge of New York. For the further maturing of said plan, it was recommended that a convention be held in the city of Washington, in 1855.

At the convention held in accordance with that recommendation, delegates were present from the Grand Lodges of Alabama, California, the District of Columbia, New York, Maryland, Michigan, and Minnesota. The officers were M. W. David Clopton, of Alabama, President; M .W. B. B. French, of the District of Columbia, and M. W. Chas. Gilman, of Maryland, Vice Presidents; R. W. Finlay M. King, of New York, and M. W. A. E. Ames, of Minnesota, Secretaries. Two propositions were made, one by R. W. A. C. Smith, of Michigan, for the organization of a General Grand Lodge with limited powers; the other by R. W. Finlay M. King, of New York, for a National Confederation. The latter was finally unanimously adopted, to go into operation as soon as sixteen Grand Lodges adopted the proposition. It met the fate of all preceding proposals.

The Grand Lodge of Maine, satisfied that a General Grand Body is desirable, untiring in her efforts, apparently hoping against hope, has again called attention to the subject, and proposes a convention at Chicago next September.

Thus we see, brethren, that this matter has been agitated for seventy-eight years, to wit: 1780, '90, '99, 1803, '09, '22, '23, '24, '39, '42, '43, '45, '47, '50, '53, '55, and '57. A period of sixty-seven years elapsed after it was first mooted

before a convention was held. One question only that was decided then, was declared to be of sufficient importance to the Craft to repay all the expense and toil attending it. I allude to the settlement of the Michigan matter.

Nearly all the Grand Lodges have adopted resolutions, expressive of the opinion that a body, with limited and well defined powers, possessing authority to speak upon matters of general interest to the Craft, and meeting once in three years, would be advantageous to the Masonic Institution; but whilst all thus acknowledge, a majority even cannot agree upon the plan; and those that agree upon a plan, differ upon the details.

In all these years but two plans have been proposed:

1. A General Grand Lodge, a Supreme Grand Lodge, or a Grand Masonic Convention, to be composed of delegates from Grand Lodges, to meet each year or every second or third year, or as often as circumstances should require, to have general supervision over the work and lectures; decide questions of Masonic jurisprudence; to settle differences between the different Grand Lodges; between Grand Lodges and their Subordinates; to grant charters for Lodges in States or Territories where no Grand Lodge existed, and to be a medium of communication with Grand Lodges in foreign countries.

2. A National Confederation of Grand Lodges, which proposed to submit any difficulties that might arise between two or more Grand Lodges, or between a Grand Lodge and its Subordinates, if of a revolutionary character, to the decisions of the Grand Lodge, parties to the Confederacy; the concurrent decision of sixteen of them should be binding upon all.

The second proposition was reviewed so fully and ably by my predecessor, in his address on the opening of the Grand Lodge in 1856, that it is unnecessary for me to further allude to it.

The objections to the first proposition appear to be,

1. To the name General or Supreme Grand Lodge-that it carries with it the idea of State Grand Lodge inferiority.

2. Expense in attending its meetings, circulating its proceedings, &c.

3. That it would lessen the sovereignty of the Grand Lodge, by creating an absolute and supreme head.

4. It would create a great central power, that would be looked to by every restless spirit, through which imaginary wrongs might be vindicated, and by whose instrumentality strife and discord could be easily engendered between the State Grand Lodges and any of its own created Lodges.

5. It would be dangerous because it might abuse the powers entrusted to it.

6. Unnecessary, inexpedient, Utopian, innovation, &c., &c. It was urged by the friends of the measure, that there ex. ists a necessity for such a body, to

1. Systematize the work and produce uniformity.

2.

Settle differences between Grand Lodges.

3. It could speak with potential voice, as no State Grand Lodge could do, to arrest innovations in the body of Masonry, and still the voice of discord.

4. Settle or determine permanently questions of general Masonic Law or jurisprudence.

5. Promote unity by extending Masonic acquaintance. 6. Complete Masonic organization.

I have thus laid before you a summary of all the action had upon this important subject, found in the published proceedings from 1780 until the present time."

THE G. CHAP. OF GEORGIA AND THE G. CHAP. OF MICHIGAN.

WE make the following extract from the report of the Committee on F. C. of the G. C. of Georgia, which fully sustains Michigan:

"The Proceedings of this Grand Chapter, in January, 1858, are before us-the M. E. S. C. Coffinberry, presiding. There are under the jurisdiction of this Grand Chapter