-
Articles/Ads
Article LODGE DEBTS AND INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY. Page 1 of 1 Article LODGE DEBTS AND INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY. Page 1 of 1
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Lodge Debts And Individual Responsibility.
LODGE DEBTS AND INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY .
A CASE of considerable importance to members of Masonic Lodges and Chapters was decided last week at the City of London Court , when a well known Masonic jeweller sued an individual member of a London Chapter for a sum of ten guineas—the price of two jewels supplied for presentation . In the course of the evidence it was admitted that an account had
been sent in to the Chapter , and it was urged on behalf of the defendant that the Chapter was liable for the debt , and not he personally . This , it appears , is not the law of the land ; Mr . Commissioner Kerr , whose judgments are invariably sound , remarking that a plaintiff in such a case had the right to sue any member of the Chapter he could get hold of ,
while if judgment were given against all the members of the Chapter as defendants , the plaintiff could then issue judgment against any one of them he chose . Under the circumstances , the solicitor for the defendant advised his client to consent to iudement , and
seek his remedy elsewhere , and although in this particular instance the remedy may be easily forthcoming , the decision opens up a wide field for consideration , if not for actual alarm . We think the general opinion enjoyed by Lodge or Chapter members is the same as that expressed on
behalf of the defendant in this case . Most Masons recognise they are answerable for a share of their Lodge or Chapter debts , but few , we imagine , know they are individually liable to be sued , with no prospect of a victory-by pleading thev are one of manv
who owe the debt . This is not the first time we have had occasion to speak of the unsatisfactory basis on which the finances of Masonic bodies rest . It would bo wrong to say that the majority of our Lodges and Chapters are in debt , but any one with experience on the subject will agree that a large nnmber are
financially involved , and now that so distinguished a judge has explained the law on the subject we may look for further developments , ancl , it may be , complications , in this respect . What with easv coiner
Treasurers , obliging caterers , and enterprising Jewells , our Lodges and Chapters have every inducement afforded them for spending more than is actually to hand , and although subscriptions may be in a p'ear sufficient to cover the excess , they are not
jwwciys a reliable asset , while the recent action m lhe City of London Court proves that liabilities stand , not only against the Lodge or Chapter as a body , but Against individual members also . We cannot believe lhis discovery will be received with favour in manv
garters , but if it will lead to improved financial Practices it will not do any harm . One can imagine . flings of a sensitive Mason when he sits down 0 an elaborate banquet at his Lodge—well knowing 0 ] | ^ edit will be taken for the account for a month two—now that he understands the caterer has the
Lodge Debts And Individual Responsibility.
power of serving him with a writ for the whole amount the next day ; and ono can also picture the feelings of the proud Past Master retiring from the chair of his Lodge , and having the usual Past Master ' s jewel pinned on his breast—with all the
fulsome flattery customary on such occasions—when he remembers that the jeweller may summon him next day in the local county court for the five or ten guineas charged for the bauble—as was done in tho case
already referred to . Really expensive entertainments and costly decorations will lose a large part of their charm when they bring with them such unpleasant considerations .
Looking at the matter from another point of view , we think the thanks of the Craft are due to the jeweller who figured in this case for having opened the eyes of Lodge and Chapter Members to the law on the point , and if ever a person was in the position of
killing the goose that laid the golden eggs this is the one . Instances are by no means rare of jewels being ordered for presentation for which it was well known the Lodge or Chapter could not pay cash on delivery . In such cases individual members have been frightened
to protest , lest they might be accused of disloyalty to the brother or companion to be testimonialised , but now they have such a good and sound excuse for personal protest as will , we imagine , be made use of
The Royal Kent of Antiquity Lodge , No . 20 , haa arranged with Bro . James Stevens P . M . P . Z ., for tho delivery of his interesting Lecture on the Ritual and Ceremonial of the Symbolic degrees in Freemasonry , at Chatham , on Wednesday , the 5 th proximo .
when members ol the mutual admiration society existing in Freemasonry desire to decorate each other at public expense , and on the credit of future income , Worshipfnl Masters and Principals will consider , too , the amount of risk they run in busying themselves
with the ordering of their own presentations , even though they have the sanction of the Lodge or Chapter to pledge its credit . In the case more particularly referred to , the defendant had ordered the two jewels
m dispute , and supplied the inscriptions to be engraved on them—one being for presentation to himself , the other for another member of the Chapter ; and thus , by putting himself prominently forward , he was singled
out for particular attention by the plaintiff . While we regret , then , that the case should have found its way into court , and should have been reported at length in outside papers , we look upon the matter as
a blessing m disguise , so far as the Craft is concerned , but whether it will prove an unmixed advantage to those whose principal business with Freemasons is done on a credit basis yet remains to be seen . We predict
otherwise , and we anticipate the day is not lar distant when the plaintiff in this case will regret the action he took to recover his money , ancl so forcibly explained the law on the subject .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Lodge Debts And Individual Responsibility.
LODGE DEBTS AND INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY .
A CASE of considerable importance to members of Masonic Lodges and Chapters was decided last week at the City of London Court , when a well known Masonic jeweller sued an individual member of a London Chapter for a sum of ten guineas—the price of two jewels supplied for presentation . In the course of the evidence it was admitted that an account had
been sent in to the Chapter , and it was urged on behalf of the defendant that the Chapter was liable for the debt , and not he personally . This , it appears , is not the law of the land ; Mr . Commissioner Kerr , whose judgments are invariably sound , remarking that a plaintiff in such a case had the right to sue any member of the Chapter he could get hold of ,
while if judgment were given against all the members of the Chapter as defendants , the plaintiff could then issue judgment against any one of them he chose . Under the circumstances , the solicitor for the defendant advised his client to consent to iudement , and
seek his remedy elsewhere , and although in this particular instance the remedy may be easily forthcoming , the decision opens up a wide field for consideration , if not for actual alarm . We think the general opinion enjoyed by Lodge or Chapter members is the same as that expressed on
behalf of the defendant in this case . Most Masons recognise they are answerable for a share of their Lodge or Chapter debts , but few , we imagine , know they are individually liable to be sued , with no prospect of a victory-by pleading thev are one of manv
who owe the debt . This is not the first time we have had occasion to speak of the unsatisfactory basis on which the finances of Masonic bodies rest . It would bo wrong to say that the majority of our Lodges and Chapters are in debt , but any one with experience on the subject will agree that a large nnmber are
financially involved , and now that so distinguished a judge has explained the law on the subject we may look for further developments , ancl , it may be , complications , in this respect . What with easv coiner
Treasurers , obliging caterers , and enterprising Jewells , our Lodges and Chapters have every inducement afforded them for spending more than is actually to hand , and although subscriptions may be in a p'ear sufficient to cover the excess , they are not
jwwciys a reliable asset , while the recent action m lhe City of London Court proves that liabilities stand , not only against the Lodge or Chapter as a body , but Against individual members also . We cannot believe lhis discovery will be received with favour in manv
garters , but if it will lead to improved financial Practices it will not do any harm . One can imagine . flings of a sensitive Mason when he sits down 0 an elaborate banquet at his Lodge—well knowing 0 ] | ^ edit will be taken for the account for a month two—now that he understands the caterer has the
Lodge Debts And Individual Responsibility.
power of serving him with a writ for the whole amount the next day ; and ono can also picture the feelings of the proud Past Master retiring from the chair of his Lodge , and having the usual Past Master ' s jewel pinned on his breast—with all the
fulsome flattery customary on such occasions—when he remembers that the jeweller may summon him next day in the local county court for the five or ten guineas charged for the bauble—as was done in tho case
already referred to . Really expensive entertainments and costly decorations will lose a large part of their charm when they bring with them such unpleasant considerations .
Looking at the matter from another point of view , we think the thanks of the Craft are due to the jeweller who figured in this case for having opened the eyes of Lodge and Chapter Members to the law on the point , and if ever a person was in the position of
killing the goose that laid the golden eggs this is the one . Instances are by no means rare of jewels being ordered for presentation for which it was well known the Lodge or Chapter could not pay cash on delivery . In such cases individual members have been frightened
to protest , lest they might be accused of disloyalty to the brother or companion to be testimonialised , but now they have such a good and sound excuse for personal protest as will , we imagine , be made use of
The Royal Kent of Antiquity Lodge , No . 20 , haa arranged with Bro . James Stevens P . M . P . Z ., for tho delivery of his interesting Lecture on the Ritual and Ceremonial of the Symbolic degrees in Freemasonry , at Chatham , on Wednesday , the 5 th proximo .
when members ol the mutual admiration society existing in Freemasonry desire to decorate each other at public expense , and on the credit of future income , Worshipfnl Masters and Principals will consider , too , the amount of risk they run in busying themselves
with the ordering of their own presentations , even though they have the sanction of the Lodge or Chapter to pledge its credit . In the case more particularly referred to , the defendant had ordered the two jewels
m dispute , and supplied the inscriptions to be engraved on them—one being for presentation to himself , the other for another member of the Chapter ; and thus , by putting himself prominently forward , he was singled
out for particular attention by the plaintiff . While we regret , then , that the case should have found its way into court , and should have been reported at length in outside papers , we look upon the matter as
a blessing m disguise , so far as the Craft is concerned , but whether it will prove an unmixed advantage to those whose principal business with Freemasons is done on a credit basis yet remains to be seen . We predict
otherwise , and we anticipate the day is not lar distant when the plaintiff in this case will regret the action he took to recover his money , ancl so forcibly explained the law on the subject .