Difference between revisions of "BethesdaV"

Revision as of 18:33, 1 November 2012

BETHESDA LODGE (VALPARAISO)

Location: Valparaiso, Chile

Chartered By: George M. Randall

Charter Date: 12/14/1854 V-534

Precedence Date: 08/27/1853

Current Status: unknown

NOTES

In the committee report on Grand Master William Sewall Gardner's address, presented in September 1869, a description of this lodge's activities is described (Page VII-376). The lodge is "well ordered and prosperous" as of this date, with "nominally about one hundred members." By direction of the Grand Master, the lodge is excused from the capitation tax, since "the maintenance of Lodges in foreign countries . . . is necessarily attended with expenses which are not demanded of Lodges in the immediate vicinity."

REPORT ON AMERICAN LODGES IN VALPARAISO

From Moore's Freemason's Monthly, Vol. XIII, No. 11, September 1854, Page 321:

In the report of the Grand Secretary of the Grand Lodge of California, submitted at the' annual communication of that body in May last, we find the following statement:—

Pacific Lodge, at Valparaiso, returned her Dispensation, with a statement that they have dissolved the Lodge, not being able to work to their satisfaction, or the satisfaction of others, and preferred to give up their Dispensation rather than do wrong. This, if so, would be commendable ; but the Grand Secretary has been informed by a Brother, who was in the Lodge at the time of its agreement to dissolve, that the reasons they set forth are not true; but on the contrary the Lodge has not dissolved, but received a Dispensation from Massachusetts, and under which they are now working, and that he remonstrated with the Lodge against such ac¬ tion, for which they had no good reason, and no reason at all, except their dues to the Grand Lodge would be less, and they could give the degrees for a less sum than thirtyfive dollars, as required by our Constitution. If the above statement be correct, the Lodge has acted in bad faith towards this Grand Lodge, and deserves to be deprived of any authority under which to hold a Lodge, until such time as she makes full reparation to this Grand Lodge ; and we trust the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts will revoke their Dispensation. If the Lodge be dissolved, all her jewels, furniture, books, clothing, and property whatsoever, revert to this Grand Lodge, which she of right should claim. Much pains was taken to forward to this Lodge every thing requisite for her guidance, and duplicate copies of papers and books were sent, with all the instructions necessary, and all asked for. They have not sent up their books, (nor a transcript) and no report sufficiently explicit to ascertain what amount is due the Grand Lodge up to the day of her dissolution. Though if she persist in dissolving, all she may have, as above stated, belongs to this Grand Lodge.

On this statement the Grand Lodge adopted the following resolution :—

Resolved, That this Grand Lodge solicit the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts to instruct Pacific Lodge, at Valparaiso, to comply with onr Constitution, touching its dissolving its allegiance to this Grand Lodge.

It is to be regretted that this matter, in its present crude and indefinite form, should hare been brought so prominently into the proceedings of the Grand Lodge of California. It is possible, in view of the above statement, that there has been something, if not positively wrong, not altogether strictly regular, in the proceedings of some of our Brethren at Valparaiso, in their efforts to establish an American Lodge in that city. But it is also possible that the Brother, from whom the information given by the Grand Secretary is derived, may have been mistaken, or not precisely informed, as to the ac-tual reasons and considerations which led to the dissolution of Pacific Lodge and the surrender of its Dispensation. The informant is quite po¬ sitive in his statements, and there can be no doubt that he has represented the facts fairly and impartially, according to his understanding of them. But, as suggested, it is possible that he may have been mistaken; and the benefit of this doubt, we think, should have been given to the Brethren at Valparaiso.

The statement of our Brother the Grand Secretary, was designed for the information of his Grand Lodge; and it furnished a sufficient basis for the appointment of a committee of inquiry. But, we respectfully submit, that it was hardly sufficient to authorize any further or more decisive action on the part of his Grand Lodge. We think that body had not before it the necessary information to enable it to act with a full and clear appreciation of the true condition of the case. And we are more fully impressed with the opinion, that the facts disclosed, are not such as to authorize the G. Lodge of Massachusetts to comply with the request contained in the resolution subsequently adopted. The resolution is predica¬ ted on an ex parte and verbal statement, the whole character of which is liable to be changed or materially modified by the explanations of the parties implicated. These explanations should have been sought through a committee of inquiry, and presented to the Grand Lodge in a definite and reliable form. A proper basis of action would then have been established ; a resolution to meet the precise character of the case could have been framed ; and whatever might have been its import, it would have carried with it the authority which ascertained facts always give to opinions. Any proper request, predicated on such a basis, emanating from the Grand Lodge of California, or from any other of its sister Grand Lodges, we are certain will ever receive from the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, the respectful consideration to which it is entitled. But with no other information than that afforded by the report of the Grand Secre¬ tary of California, it is difficult to conceive how the Grand Lodge of this Commonwealth, is to comply with the terms of the resolution.

And this embarrassment is greatly increased by the fact, that it has never, nor has its Grand Master, issued any Dispensation for the organization of a Lodge at Valparaiso, under the name of Pacific Lodge. If there be such a Lodge at Valparaiso, it is as wholly independent of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, as any subordinate Lodge in the State of California; and there would be the same impropriety in its assuming to instruct that Lodge in its duties, as there would be in its assuming to control the action of California Lodge, No. 1, at San Francisco. Our Brethren of the Grand Lodge of California will perceive from this, that their proceedings were premature, and that they have made a request of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts with which that body cannot comply, as the case now stands. They evidently had not the requisite information in possession to enable them to act intelligently, and to arrive at just conclusions. This has naturally led to embarrassment; and, it may be, caused them, though unintentionally, to do injustice to the motives of the parties implicated. It may appear in the end, that the true reasons for the dissolution of the Lodge in question, are those assigned by the Brethren surrendering the Dispensation. We are the more inclined to entertain this opinion, because we cannot think that the mere matter of difference in the fees, would be such a consideration, with the respectable Brethren constituting the Lodge, as to induce them to do an act which, by any possibility, could be construed as dishonorable to themselves as Masons, or disrespectful to their Grand Lodge. And this opinion is strengthened by the fact, that the American Lodge, now in operation there, has fixed the fee for the three degrees conferred, at about fiftytwo dollars. It would seem there¬ fore to have been wholly immaterial, so far as Pacific Lodge was inter¬ ested in the matter, whether the minimum fee of its parent Grand Lodge, was twenty or thirtyfive dollars. This reason then, we think, falls to the ground. (Fifiy dollars is probably as low as the degrees can there be given.) The only other reason assigned, is of hardly more force.

It is proper to state, that there is a Lodge at Valparaiso, working under a Dispensation from Massachusetts. It was granted on a petition bearing date May 1st, 1853, to nine Brethren residing in that city. One of the petitioners hails from California. The other eight are from the Atlantic States. The Dispensation bears date August 27th, 1853, and authorizes the petitioners to organize under the name of Bethesda Lodge. They did so organize and made their report to the proper authority. At the date of the petition, it was understood that there was no American Lodge in the place; and this was doubtless true; though we have reason to believe that a petition had previously been forwarded, by other parties, for the Dispensation from California, under which Pacific Lodge was subsequently organized. But however this may be, Bethesda Lodge was immediately organized on the receipt of its Dispensation, and has continued in an active and highly prosperous condition to the present time. If it has ever had any other connection with Pacific Lodge, than that of fraternal intercourse, or if there has been anything like a fusion of the two bodies, the fact has not come to the knowledge of the Masonic authorities of Massachusetts. Indeed, no such fusion could lawfully take place. The Grand Lodge of this Commonwealth does not recognize the right of a Lodge, working under Dispensation, to admit members, or to change its appointed officers. It holds the petitioners alone responsible for the acts done under the authority of the Dispensation. When the Charter has been granted, and the Lodge constituted and registered, as such, in Grand Lodge, the petitioners are authorized to admit members, elect and instal their officers, and do all such other matters and things as pertain to complete and perfect Lodges; not before. The members of Pacific Lodge could not therefore affiliate with Bethesda Lodge, or hold any other relation to it than that of visiting Brethren. This would hardly seem to be a sufficient motive to induce them to dissolve their own existing organization, if they were in a condition to sustain it, and " to work to their own satisfaction, or the sat¬ isfaction of others." This they say they were not able to do ; and being unwilling to " do wrong," voted to "give up their Dispensation."

It is probably true that a discussion took place in Pacific Lodge on the evening of its dissolution, in which the Massachusetts Dispensation was referred to. It would be singular if the fact were otherwise. But it can hardly be true, as stated on the authority of the Brother " who was in the Lodge at the time," that the reason for the dissolution was, that the Brethren composing the Lodge, had "received a Dispensation from Massachusetts"; unless, indeed, it be assumed that the petitioners for Pacific Lodge were identical with the petitioners for Bethesda Lodge. Of this we have no evidence ; and in the absence of such evidence it is difficult to conceive of any satisfactory motive for such a proceeding. We have the fact, that when the petition for Bethesda Lodge was sent forward, Pacific Lodge had not been organized, nor was there an American Lodge at Valparaiso. We are also credibly assured, that a petition had previously been forwarded to California for the establishment of Pacific Lodge. But that the petitioners in both cases were the same Brethren, nowhere appears. On the contrary, we have before us the names of seven of the most prominent and active Brethren of Pacific Lodge, neither of whom signed the petition for Bethesda Lodge. This could hardly be so, if the petitioners for both were identical. We think therefore, (in the absence of all positive information on this point,) the most probable theory is, that the petitioners were distinct classes of Brethren ; and that, acting without consultation, and independently of each other, they bad incau" tiously been led to apply to different sources for authority to establish two Lodges where but one was required. This error, as might have been expected, probably soon manifested itself ; and the Master of Pacific Lodge, on whom, we are informed, the ritual-duties of the Lodge mainly devolved, having left for California, the Brethren found themselves unable to do the work of the Lodge to their own satisfaction, or that of their visiting Brethren. Under these circumstances, and being unwilling, as they say, "to do wrong,"—that is, to do the work in an ineffective and improper manner,—they at once resolved to surrender their Dispensation and unite with Bethesda Lodge. This we think the most probable theory, if not the exact state of the case.

Such are the facts as they have come to our knowledge. We give them for the information of our Brethren of the Grand Lodge of California, and in the hope that they may aid them in their future inquiries. We can entertain no doubt that the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts will be most happy to comply with the request of her sister, whenever it shall become manifest that it is her duty, and that she can do so with a proper regard for the just rights of those who have a parental claim upon her. She will countenance no deception or irregularity in any Lodge or Brethren under her authority.

YEARS

1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

DISTRICTS

1867: Chile District

LINKS

Massachusetts Lodges