Hide Articles List

13 articles on this Page



THE ANNUAL MOVEABLE COMMITTEE OF ODDFELLOWS. [SPECIALLY R F. PO R TED, ] (Continued from car Third Page.) THIRD DAY.—WEDNESDAY. The proceedings were opened this morning at nine o'clock, all the delegates being then assembled. The Grand Master, as before, was in the chair. The sub- ject taken into consideration was the following REPORT OF THE SUB COMMITTEE. r. The attention of the Directors and Trustees was, at the last A.M.C called to the immediate necessity of taking security from Messrs. Cunlilfe, Brooks and Co., Bankers, Manchester, as Treasurers of the Society, in accordance with the Friendly Societies' Act At a meeting of the Directors in August last, it was resolved, that at the next meeting, a deputation be appointed accordingly; and the result of their interview was, that at the meeting of the 3d of May inst, William Cunliffe Brooks, Esq was appointed Treasurer in th" room of Messrs. Cunliffes and Co., resigned and he has since given a bond, with a surety to the Trustees, for £2000 which bond has been produced to your Committee. Your Committee approved of this course, and recommend you to affirm the proceedings of the Directors. 1. The last A.M.C. decided that the £100 Stock in the Consuls then standing in the names of Messrs. Luff, Roe, and Bradley, should be forthwith transferred into the names of the five Trustees. In pursuance of a resolution to the effect in Novem- ber last, your Committee find that the said Consuls have been sold. Your Committee sanction this proceeding, and trust you will do the same. III. An application has been made to your Committee from the Bury District to procure the opinion of this A.M.C. as to whether on the hearing of appeals, &c., in the Hoard rooom at Manchester the Directors act correctly in closing the doors to members of the Order generally. Your Committee deem this matter not strictly within their province to consider, but have referred the delegatesr of the Bury District to the General Meeting if they think proler to bring the subject forward. IV. The Directors having called the attention of Your Committee to the Lectures, respecting the propriety of making them in con- formity wi'h the present mode of Initiation, your Committee beg to advise that this be carried into effect. Your Committee agree with the Dire If is in the construction they have put upon the 86th General Law, to the effect that the Secretary of a district is not compelled to be nominated for re- election. at the meeting held previous to the annual one, although another member be nominated for the same office, but that he may be nominated on the day of electioll. VI. It having come to the knowledge of your Committee that the Registrar of Friendly Societies has given notice to various Lodges respecting the illegal investment of Funds, and the re- aponsibility of Trustees consequent thereon; your Committee think it of great importance that all lodges should take immediate steps to invest their funds in compliance with the Act of Parlia- ment, and that in the meantime, they should, so far as they legally can, absolve their Trustees from all personal responsi- bility. VII. Your Committee concur in the rlcommendation of the Auditors that a Levy of one halfpenny per member be made to meet the current expenses of the year, and ask you to adopt the Report. VIII. The Directors having referred a question from the Rugby Dis- trict for the consideration of your Committee relative to the at- tendance of members at Anniversary Lodge Dinners, your Com- mittee are of opinion that Lodges may be guided solely by their rales as certified by the Registrar of Friendly Societies. IX. Your Committee recommend that the conduct and management of the Magazine be left in the hands of the Directors until the next A.M C. but beg. at the same time, to su^eat that anal towance be made to such persons engaged in the sale thereof. X Your Committee think it advisable that the keys of the chest, containing the deeds and other documents belonging to the So- ciety should be held by three of the Trustees, two of such Trustees being those not on the Board. XI. Your Committee approach the next subject for your considera- tion with considerable pain and reluctance, it being most unpleasant to report upon subjects affecting personally either districts or individuals holding prominent positions in the Unity, and in coming to a decision on the case of James Charles Cox' of Southampton, the late G M. of the Order-, your Committee have been actuated by a sincere desire to do justice to all parties concerned, and in fulfilling our engagements as members of the Order-to uphold its constitutional rules and principles, but at the same time to do so in a conciliatory spirit, in the hope that from this date the unpleasant feeling respecting the case which Has so evidently existed for a considerable time past may now be terminated, and mutual confidence restored between the districts and parties concerned and the Executive. A letter from Mr. Cox, addressed to the Chairmau of this Committee, has been received, protesting against the mode of his expulsion, and alleging that he has not had a fair hearing, and the Delegates from Southampon attended before us to express the feeling of their district that the report of Messrs. Roe and Daynes adopted in the Sub-Committee's report at the last A M.C was not a correct statement of facts, and also that those gentle- men did not make such an investigation into Cox's accounts and affairs as they might and ought to have done, and further to com- plain of the severity of the 27th resolution of the Directors (January reports, 1858, page 5), which imputed to the Southamp- ton district very great irregularity and gross negligence, and to which the directors in that resolution say may be attributed the opeurrences which have disgraced the district, and brought Teproach upon the Order. The delegates from the South London District also attended before its to explain the motives for and meaning of the following resolutions of their district committee, held 28th September, 1837, which were before this committee, viz:- That in the opinion of thi. Comruittee, the conduct of Messrs. Roe and Daynas, in connection with the examination ot the accounts of the Southampton District, is such as not to com- mand the confidence of the members in them as Directors of the Unity; and that consequently they ought to be called upon by the Board of Directors to resign their position as members thereof. That the next A.M.C. be requested to appoint a Committee to enquire into the manner in which Messrs. Roe and Daynes executed the duty intrusted to them by the Bord of Directors, of 1 investigating the accounts of the Southampton District,that the Unity may know how far they are, or are not, liable to the charge of concealing their knowledge of the late G.M. Cox's s defalcations. f 1, That this meeting having been informed that a circular, dated August 2 1 th has been issued by the Board of Directors ro some t districts in the Unity, the Pro. C.S. be requested to enquire (if t such i the case) why a copy has not been forwarded to the South London District." ( And also to obtain from this Committee an expression of opinion as to whether the directors had the right to demand from the a South London District the names of the mover and seconder of 1 those resolutions; it appearing that in consequence of such t resolutions coining to the kuowledue of the directors they made such dematd from the South London District, which was not acceded to. l You: Committee have given the whole of the case their most careful consideration and attention. In addition to the parties ( before named, Mussrs. Roe and Danzle, the delegates from the North London District, and also Mr. Daynes, have been examined before us, and we hava also had pro lueed and examined all J .fteC"IiH}" documents, &c., and are satisfied that a full kn .vlerige 1 has thus been obtained, and fr m which your committer have come to the following conclusions. I = ).—We are unau mou ly of opinion that the investigati n made by Messrs. Roe and Daynes at Southampton was, u ,1c. the ciicumstances, the fullest they coul,) make, and their report adopted at the last A.M.C. substantially correct—they having actually sen paid over by Cox to the Southampton Disuiet. the wli le amount then found due from hiin,and we have it in evidence th at tiiey made repeated enquiries as to whether there was any other matter or cause of complaint to investigate, and we are told in reply by the officers and trustees of the Southampton District that there was not; and the subsequently discovered defalcations were of such a cliaracier, coupled with the want ofassistance and information from the Southampton District, as fully satisfies this coiomittee that Messrs. Roe and Daynes were not guiity of either negli^euce or complicity, or as has been alleged, an attempt to conceal tie facts, and screen Cox from punishment. ?.—We are unanimously of opinion that the Southampton District had a perfect right to take the course the) did in c msing Cox to he criminally convicted before the Magistrates, and there- by under the 206th General Law virtually expeUed without a light of appeal, instead of proceeding against him under the law., of the Oruer, and that under the circu.nstanccs Cox has no groucdi of complaint as to the course pursued agahst him. At the sam time your Committee beg to express an opinion that aa a general rule districts and lodges would do well to abide by the Laws of the Order in every case where it is practicable to do so, and not resort to the Law CUrt8, except under very special circumstances, which authorise a departure from the ordinary course of proceeding. 3. We are unanimously of opinion that, although it is apparent there have been irregularities in the modes of keeping the ac- counts and minutes, and managing the funds and affairs of the Southampton District and Lodges still that the language used in the 27th Resolution of last January Quarter:y Reports was, if not unnecessarily severe and in part unmerited, at least harsh and uriconciliatory-it being our opinion that some allowance should have been made for the naturally irritated state of feeling in the Southampton District, and that nothing should, if possible, have been done or said calculated to widen the breach between thjm and the Executive and we cannot but express a hope that the present resolutions may be the means of creating a better atate ûf feeling between them. 4. We ara unanimously of opinion that the resolutions of the South London District above referred to were totally uncalled for and highly improper, as setting an example of interference with the funrtions of the Executive on the part of a district not inte- ine lun.u ns o allowed to pass unnoticed, nugnt be rested in the question, that t allow inJubordj;f Uoa towards "he°K^eciitive utterly at variance with the constitution *ndprinciple! .f "he Order, and calculated to do us .enous in- jury. Your Committee, however, have made some allowance for the South London District, as it appears that a Cox's case bad been issued by the Board and se „ „ tricts but, from circumstances satisfactorily explai « 'fll Ratcliffe to this Committee, a copy had not reached London District, thereby causing those officers and mem e that District who were acquainted with the case to feel suspicion and alarm. s. We are unanimously of opipion that no good object would have been attained by divulging to the Executive the names of the mover and seeonder of the South London Resolutions, and wfcich information, we think, was properly refused by that Div trict, and we approve of the terms in which that refusal was con- veyed and we further are of opinion that the Directors had no right to make such a demand (except for purely Unity purposes, and not arising in this case), the District generally being respon- sible to the Executive for all acts and resolutions of its commit- tees and officers. n.n .n1", 'PAr\4!:1o. +\"0.4.0 In conclusion, your wish that this painful business may now be considered as finally concluded, and be no more debated in the Unity, and that a more kir.diy and proper feeling suitable to the fraternal principles of the Order may exist between all parties for the future. XII. Your Committee are of opinion that the Trustees, with the sanction of the Directors, should take measures for the most ad- vantageous sale of such portions of the premises in Grosvenor- %treet, Manchester, as are not necessary for the purposes of the Society. XIII. Your Committee are unanimously of opinion that the officers and Directors of the Society are entitled to your tnanks for their »ervice» during the past year. XIV. That the thanks of this Committee are hereby given to the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and Secretary for their attention to the business of this meeting. On the proposition of Mr. Aitken, the report was received. The Rev. T. Price, as chairman of the committee, lead the report, clause by clause. Clauses one and two were unanimously adopted, but on clause three a discussion arose. Mr. Kenyon (Oldham) inquired whether, if the propo-' sition were carried into effect, it would deter the dele- gates of hia district from bringing forward another proposition. # Mr. Daynes explained the'mode in which the directors bad previously transacted their business, The members ) of the order were not excluded during the hearing of appeals, but only when the directors were considering the decision to which they should arrive. He thought the mode hitherto pursued was the only satisfactory one of conducting the business. Mr. Austin (Bury) intimated that he had heard of an application for admittance into the Board room during the hearing of appeals, and it was refused. Hence the delegates from his district wished the matter brought before the A.M.C. They had, however, the assurance of Mr. Daynes, and the chairman, that such was not the case, and with that he was satisfied. After some further discussion, it was resolved, on the joint motions of Mr. Austin and Mr. Daynes, that any member who wished to be present during appeals should be permitted to do so. With reference to clause 4, the Chairman stated that a letter had been received from a foreign district to the effect that the old lecture for the white degree, which was still in use in some of the lodges, was different to the present mode of initiation. The directors, of course, had no power to alter any of the rules without the sanc- tion of the A.M.C., and therefore wished the subject brought forward. A general desire was expressed that the lecture should be altered in conformity with the mode of initiation, and Mr. Aitken moved that this be carried into effect. It was intimated that a proposition would ultimately be brought forward to abolish the lectures altogether. Mr. Daynes reminded the meeting that the expense of a new lecture would be something like £200, wheieas by leaving the matter to the next A.M.C. to report upon, they would be throwing the whole matter over for ano- ther year, giving the directors the opportunity of report- ing thereon. Mr. Aitken withdrew his amendment. Mr. Roe stated that the expense in the alteration of the lecture would only be about E3 or JE4. Mr. Holmes moved that if the directors thought proper the alterations should be carried into effect at once. This was adopted. Claase 5 was adopted without discussion. With reference to clause 6, the Rev. T. Allen cau- tioned the delegates against incautious investments of club money. He had recently heard of a case in which 67 members had been robbed, in consequence of the affairs of a lodge not having been properly arranged, and the funds invested according to Act of Parliament. Mr. Powell (Morriston) asked whether the recent Act of Parliament had or had not a retrospective tendency. Supposing fraud had been committed upon any lodge before the Act came into operation, but had not been discovered until it had come into operation, could the lodge proceed for the recovery of the funds ? Mr. Roe, in accordance with a request from the chair- man, explained the course to be pursued in relation to the accumulating funds of the various lodges. Mr. Tidd Pratt had issued a circular showing that their money was at present not invested according to Act of Parlia- ment. He laid down the rule that if any trustees had invested the moneys of a lodge, although instructed by the lodge itself so to do, not in accordance with the Act of Parliament, then the Trustees themselves were per- sonally liable. Mr. Roe contended that the Friendly Society's Act had a retrospective effect It required very great care and attention in order to be properly and legally carried out. In conclusion, Mr. Roe warned the members of the society against being led astray in the deposit of their money by concerns which promised a return of X5 or 16 per cent. per annum, and advised them to be governed by the law in the matter. (Cheers.) Mr. Jennings (Hereford) referred to a case in which a town-clerk expressed an opinion that the law relating to friendly societies was so intricate as to render it impossible for him to draw up any form which would compel a co-trustee to sign any document for the with- drawal of funds invested in a security in the names of the trustees of the lodge. The Chairman then intimated that Mr. Tidd Pratt had the power to deprive a co-trustee of his authority. Mr. Glass recommended the Order to obtain the best legal advice possible in order to frame their laws for the investment of their funds in accordance with the Act of Parliament. In the course of the discussion, several delegates ex- pressed an opinion that the Act of Palliament gave power to prosecute an officer for fraud committed previ- ous to the registration of the society. Addenda were moved by Mr. Adams, recommend- ing the Order to obtain the best legal advice. Carried. On clause 7 Mr. Pratt moved that the levy proposed be refused, on the ground that the sum of £1,348 18s. 3d. now in the hands of the treasurer, was sufficient to meet all the expenses. He thought the levy of a td. was quite unnecessary. It was suggested that nothing would be saved by de- ferring the levy, and ultimately Mr. Pratt withdrew his opposition to it. The auditor's report was then read seriatim, clause by clause. A conversation ensued with reference to items of Y,4 5s. 4d. expended by the building committee, and of certain sums for gas fittings. Both matters were satisfactorily explained to the meeting. The auditor's report was then carried. Upon clause No. 8 of the sub-committee s report, a lengthened discussion ensued, it being moved by Mr. Holmes as an amendment, that the secretary be in- structed to communicate with Mr. Tidd Pratt for re- fusing to sanction the 71st General Law, whilst sanc- tioning other laws. The question in dispute was as to the introduction of the word shall" instead of expected to" attend the annual dinners of the lodge, or pay the price of the ticket of such dinner. It was also stated that Mr. Tidd Pratt could not sanction any laws without the authority of the Secretary of State, and therefore Mr. Pratt was not the blameable party. Mr. Holmes's amendment was put and lost by an overwhelm- ing majority. It was resolved to defer the consideration of clauses 9 and 10. With reference to clause 11, referring to the case of Mr. Cox, and to the conduct of Messrs. Daynes and Roe in relation thereto, Mr. Aitkin moved that para- graphs 1 to 7 be agreed to. This being resolved, Mr. Price moved the adoption of paragraph marked 1 A very long di-cussion ensued on this topic. Mr. Greenway complained of the conduct of Messrs. Daynes and Roe, and accused them of complicity with Mr. Cox. or at least of neglect. He moved that a vote of censure be passed upon them. The matter had given great dissatisfaction in the Southampton district. Both Mr. Daynes and Mr. Roe defended themselves from the aspersions cast upon them, the former in an able and forcible speech, and the result was that Mr. Greenway's amendment was supported only by three or four, every owtier hand in the room being held up for the original motion. Mr. Greenway wished to reply, but he was not permitted to do so in consequence of a resolu- tirn previously passed. The whole matter was some hours under consideration, and was very fully entered into. By their decision the meeting fully exonerated Messrs. Roe and Daynes from all blame. The day's business then closed. FOURTH DAY.—THURSDAY. The delegates met this morning at nine o'clock, the arrangements being in every respect the same as before. The first business was the election of Grand Master. William Alexander, D.G.M., was appointed without opposition. The election of D.G.M. next occupied the assembly. Mr. Gale intimated his desire of retiring from the candi- dateship, and only four gentlemen remained, out of a list of twelve nominated, who sought the office and obtained votes—Messrs. Buck (Prov. C.S., Birmingham district), Aitken (P. Prov. G.M., of Ashton-under-Lyne district), Hickton (P. Prov. G.M. of the Stockport district), and Richmond (Manchester). The numbers at first were— For Mr. Hickton 40, Mr. Aitken 36, Buck 35, and Mr. Richmond 8. The Grand Master said that Mr. Rich- mond would resign, and the delegates would again vote for the remaining three. The result was-For Mr. Hickton 43, Mr. Buck 40, Mr. Aitken 36. Mr. Aitken consequently retired, and the two first-named gentlemen were again voted for. The numbers finally were-For Mr. Hickton 61, for Mr. Buck 60. Mr. Hickton is con- sequently the D.C.M. for the ensuing year. For the C.S. of the Order, Mr. Rothwell, P. Prov. C.S. of the Bolton district, and the present C.S.,Mr. Ratcliffe, were nominated. The votes were-For Mr. Ratcliffe 105, Mr. Rothwell 7. The salary to be the same as last year. On the motion of Mr. Ginn, it was resolved that the C.S. should provide a fresh bond. The election of Directors followed. The Chairman announced that Mr. Allen and Mr. Pratt would not stand, leaving twenty-two in nomination. The votes were announced as follows :-Aitken 77, Janyard 40, Buck 102, Burgess 28, Curtis 44, Daynes 108 Gale 65, Ginn 38, Haworth 30, Jones 20, Morton 6 Naylor 18, Nield 12, Price 84, ;Richmond 43, Roe 101, Schofield (Bradford) 90, Schofield (Bacup) 23, Street 80, Waldron 7, Walsh 24, Woodcock 55. The nine highest were elected—Messrs. Curtis and Richmond being called in in the event of a vacancy. The expenses of directors and other officers were granted at the same rate as formerly. THE NEXT A. M. C. The place for holding the next A. M. C. of the Order was then discussed. Mr. Curtis proposed, and Mr. Price (Aberdare) seconded. Brighton for the next sitting. Leicester, Hereford, Shrewsbury, Wolverhampton, Chel- tenham, Burnley, Gloucester, and Oldham were also proposed by different delegates. The beauties of the various towns and surrounding districts, the conve- niences for holding the meeting, and the good which would result from holding the A. M. C., were expatiated upon at length by the various proposers and seconders of the resolutions. The matter was brought to the vote, when the following was the result:—Burnley 2, Here- ford 8, Oldham 2, Shrewsbury 19, Cheltenham 10, Glou- cester'1, Leicester 26, Brighton 32, Wolverhampton 19 Successive votes were then taken, the places lowest or the list being withdrawn, the contest ultimately beinf between Leicester and Brighton. The final numberi were-Leicester 73, Brighton 40, The Brighton dele f gate said he was much obliged to the free and indepefi- r dent electors who had voted for his proposition. Messrs. Gadd and Crispin were proposed as auditors, according to the 47th general law. The Grand Master then said a new district would have to be selected. A number of districts were proposed among others Newport, by Mr. Thomas, of Abergavenny. Bristol, Merthyr, and Cowbridge were also nominated. For Newport there were 4 votes, Cowbridge 3, Merthyr 16, and Bristol 12. Upon the last votes being taken, the two highest in the list were found to be Wellington (53), Bochdale (40). It being now two o'clock, a proposition was "made to adjourn for a short time, but the motion was negatived. The section marked 2 in the sub-committee's report, relating to the "Cox "robbery and the Southampton district, was then taken into consideration. Mr. Green- way defended himself from the charge of making an ac- cusation against Messrs. Roe and Daynes from motives of private malice after which the clause was agreed to, Mr. Greenway first expressing an opinion that the Order was bound to proceed against a defaulter, in accord- ance with the powers given in the Friendly Society's Act. On section 3, Mr. Buck moved that it be expunged, contending that the resolutions passed at the meeting were neither harsh nor unconciliatory as alleged. He further contended that there had been mismanagement on the part of the Southampton district, they having treated the directory with something like contempt in not replying to a summons sent them by the C.S. of the Order. Mr. Buck ultimately withdrew his amendment. The Grand Master said that although he had been insulted by the Southampton district, he was not at all thin skinned, and he was perfectly willing to let the matter drop. He denied emphatically the charges made against the directors. After a short conversation, the section passed unal- tered. Section 4 was next read. It gave rise to another long and conflicting discussion concerning the South London district in connection with Mr. Cox's case. Many reso- lutions and amendments were passed, and the subjeet was regarded as most tedious by many of the members present. The Rev. T. Allen, in the course of the after- noon, endeavoured to remove the causes of disunion, but it was shown that he was out of order in nioving a resolution. The seetions were ultimately all carried, but not till a good deal of feeling had been excited. The Rev. Mr. Allen expressed an opinion that the less of what had transpired in relation to the matter i which appeared in the public papers, the better. It was < not creditable to the Order. ( Mr. Glass and Mr. Price proposed and seconded the adoption of clause 5. During Mr. Glass's observations, he was interrupted by Mr. Aitken, on an alleged point j of order. Mr. Glass protested against this course, and stated that when so much valuable time had been wasted, c it was rather hard to refuse to allow a delegate to carry t out the wishes of his district. e One or two sections were deferred for further conside- J ration. s The meeting adjourned at half-past four. FIFTH DAY.—FRIDAY. The business for transaction at the A. M. C. was still very far from concluded at the* time we went to press. There were several clauses of the sub-committee's report still to be discussed, with reference to the sale of the buildings in Manchester, &c. 173 propositions for the alterations of laws were entered for discussion, not one of which was brought forward up to Friday morning. A variety of other subjects were also to be introduced. Some of the delegates expressed an opinion that all the business could not be concluded by Saturday, the period at first anticipated but, no doubt, a great effort will be made to accomplish this. The delegates met on Thursday evening to receive the Lecture," L. L. Dillwyn, Esq., M.P., Mr. Oakshot, Mr. Richards, and other gentlemen of Swansea, have been enrolled in the Order.





, ... hist Wednesday at Tyr




[No title]


Family Notices