Current:

Northern Star (1837-1852), 27th September 1845, Edition 3 of 4, Page 8, Office m the same Street and Farisn, .'"...

Page 8
Page 8
8 of 8

On this page

  • Departments (1)
    • f Winds0 Printed by DOUGAL M'QOWAN, of IT, &»»* . gttW Btreet, Haymarket, in the City of WeBtnnn » ?t0
  • Text (6)
  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      Found The Tyrant Throats To The Tortures...

      ¦ ¦ _-. ¦ ¦ / , min September 27 , 1845 . THE NORTHERN STAR . \ 0 ———— _.. . i . .. "" ¦ ¦¦ ¦ I

      Odd Fellowship. The "Legality" Of The La...

      ODD FELLOWSHIP . THE "LEGALITY" OF THE LATE "SUSAttii PENSIONS . " THEIB INJUSTICE , EVES IP " LEGAL . " A fortnight ago we indulged in a few observations on the matters in dispute between the Directors of the Odd Fellows' Institution and aconsiderable number of its members , who kaTC by those Directors been " suspended' from all " benefits" in the Order : "benefits" which they have purchased and paid for , and to which they hare as good a moral title —( we will explain , before we have done , why they are deficient

      in _legaltitle}—as any man can possibly have to any species of property whatever . Those observations have brought forth a " reply" from a "George _Cashelett , of Hyde , who avers that he is on terms of private intimacy with Mr . Ratcxhte , thc C . S . of the Order ; therefore , we presume , we may consider such " reply" to express more than the individual opinions of the person whose nameit bears . 'The sufficiency of that " reply" we shall examine , ere these remarks are closed .

      T he m ain q u est i o n t o be d e cided , as the matter now stands , is , were the Directors of the Odd Fellows ' Institute JUSTIFIED by the laws of the Orders in " _susjKnding" 30 , 000 of its members from all communion with the rest of their brother members , and from all the "benefits" they had purchased and paid for ? This is the real question which has to be first considered ; for on the answer to this question depends some all-important consequences . It often happens that in disputes of thc nature of that which has torn the OddFellows Society into fragments , thc real points at issue are lost in the individual contests that are sure to arise under such circumstances ; and

      ail thc attention and force of the respective parties to thc original quarrel are oftentimes concentrated and spent on little , petty , but exciting personal squabbles , and the great cause of the division left to work anotlicr sj > Iit at another day . Such IS the _COUKSE WHICH THE PEESEXT DISPUTE IS TAKING : but the members ofthe Order , both tho " _susp > ended" and ihe ( at present ) nnsnspsndcd ones , will do well for their own interests , if they see to it that thc extraneous and petty personal matters that daily arise , eccnpy their own proper place in , Hie background—to be disposed of when the main question of all shall have been duly considered and justly settled . It may bc all very well to inquire , at the proper time , whether it be true that among the " disaffected " in the Manchester District , are

      twelve individuals who were once "detected" in an "attempt to cheat the Order , by sending in goods of an inferior description to those they had contracted to supply : " and it may also bc of service to inquire whether Mr . Ratcliffe does still attend at races , and fact on them to a large amount , after he _luts solemnly pledged himself to abstain from tke practice : but neither of these inquiries will explain the reason why 30 , 000 members have been "hung up" from the privileges and benefits they had purchased ; nor show that the directors ofthe Order had LAW for their most extraordinary step . Let us have all due inquiry into all alleged abuses and defalcations , in their order of import aud date : bnt let not the bandyings of personalities from one side to the other sink out of sight the great question of all .

      That great question is the one of "suspension . " If the power lately exercised by the Board of Directors ie alawfulone ; if the Board be properly invested with It bylaw ; if they havesuch power conferred on them by " rule "—no member in the societg is safe I He has only to " offend "—and Godknows _thatwhenpersonal dislikes have full play , matter of " offence" is soon found ; he has only to offend , and forthwith he is deprived of the benefits for which he has paid . ' It is impossible to overrate the importance of this ques « tion . As we said , a fortnight ago , if the Directors of the Odd Fellows'" Institution have the power , of their own will andaccord , to " suspend" any member ,

      or lodge , or district , from thc benefits wMch _tlmy have purchased , it is a MONSTROUS TYRANNY—a tyranny which the law of the land ought at once to put down . What ! a man enter a sick and burial BencfitSociety , —and the Odd Fellows' confederation , notwithstanding its high sounding name , is little more than this ; a man enter such a society ; pay to it for twenty or thirty long years , in the hope that "When sickness overtakes him , he may have the means of sustenance without straitening his friends or having to apply to the parish ; and in the hope that when death overtakes him , his children or his friends willhavetlie means ofintening him decently , and

      providing suitable mourning for his nearest relatives : a man enter a society suehas this , and pay regularly to it for a long lifetime , often stinting himself of the _yery necessaries of life "to pay his Lodge , " as thousands have had to do ; a man to do all this for such an object—and be subject to be " suspended ? ' from the benefits he has paid _ros , PURCHASED , with his own hard earnings : "suspended , " too , at the mere will and pleasure of a Board of Directors ! Talk of injustice or tyranny in the land of the Moguls—let them match that if they can ! No matter how your Directors are chosen : no matter whether your choice be confined to the Manchester

      district , or you have the "high privilege" of having one from . Bristol : no matter allthis , if suchapoweris given to your Directory , however chosen , it is an unendurable tyranny , and a fraud on those who have entrusted yon with their monies . And then again : if the laws of the Order confer no such power ; if the Directors are not entrusted with it ; if it be not "in the books , " and they have assumed and presumed to _bse it , what name shall we designate the act hy ? If it would be an UNENDURABLE TYRANNY , e ven if conferred by law , what would it be if exercised without law ? It would be double-distilled DESPOTISM ofthe worst character .

      To that language we still at hire . Nay , the act contemplated in the above paragraph , is one so utterly atrocious , so heartless , and of such a . fraudulent character , that if we could find stronger terms in which to speak ofit , we would gladly use them . We can imagine of nothing so outrageous of all the prin . pies of fair-play and honest dealing . And now , then , as to the question oflegality . Have the Board of Directors such a power conferred on them ?

      On the occasion when we used the language above quoted , we put this point very strongly . We knew it to he thc real hitch . We felt that this was the pinching point ; and we observed that there was a disposition to evade it—to smother it in a stew and ferment about personal matters . We therefore put it prominently forward ; poked it under the nose of the Board of Directors ; challenged them or their apologists to meot it . We said , this point the Board of Directors and their apologists invariably shirk . Never do we find them tackling it . Wc invite them to it . We invite them to shmo tluu they have _latv for what they have done . Let us see the law : and then

      we will express our opinion both ofit and its makers , and do our best to get itconsigned to the place where all such laws should be sent—the devil ' s kitchen fire . Again we ask them to show us this law ; and , failing that , we invite them to defend and justify their acts ! We offer our columns , free of expense . We care not who the champion is : whether he be the G . M . of the Order , Mr . Raicufeb , Mr . Ashdows , or Mr . Any-body-else . Let any one defend and justify tho acts we have narrated , and we will do our utmost to get him the situation of " operator with the bowstring" to the " grand" Turk : for it is clearthat England ' s air is not fit for him !

      That challenge has been accepted . Strange to say It is , if we mistake not , a Chartist that has _appeared as the champion I We have some recollection _rrf a person bearing the name of _Caxdeleit figuring as a Chartist ; and , if we don't err , "this is the man . " If we are in error , we crave pardon of the Chartist who has the misfortune to bear the name of our present correspondent . Be the fact as to hi 3 profession of Chartism as it may , here we have him , defending and justifying acts which cannot be out-matched in all the records of despotism that exist ! How well he _succeedsiu Ms justification we shall presentlv see .

      Previous , however , to entering on that part of our _nifsect , we will hare the Directors' own explanation . We never like to hare information at second-hand , a-w can get it at first-hand . It is a principle with _fa £ i •*?* _mmua _^' own tale ; for we think he mate * _™ - _*? " _?• beit Some _*&» - _* ago we _inti-«« waves .: Thia inhwe done , in _thepenoiw

      Odd Fellowship. The "Legality" Of The La...

      of Mr . Ashdown and Mr . C . S . Ratcuffe . We shall now let them speak collectively . Subjoined is their own account of tlieir own acts , addressed : — To ihe Members of tlie Manchester Unity of the independent Order of Odd Fellows . Ihe officers of the order are under the painful necessity of drawing the attention of the whole Unity to the proceedings which have taken place in the Manchester and Salford districts , where a vast majority ofthe members _Ii 3 ve resorted to the most disgraceful practices to bring into contempt the resolutions passed by tlie Glasgow A . M . ft , and to prevail npon the members ofthe two districts not to comply with the same , or thc instructions of the G . JL and Board of Directors .

      All who were at the A . M . C . will recollect the desenption of suspended characters that attended from Manchester and Salford at Glasgow , to poison the minds of the deputies assembled in annual committee against the officers of the order and directors , who had suspended them for not complying with the 20 th resolution of the Newcastle-upon-Tyne A . M . C . Their conductmctwith the just condemnation it so richly merited ; and , finding they were not successful in their mission to Glasgow , they returned home and immediately commenced an attack upon each officer of the order , and directors , whom they supposed were opposed to them in their nefarious designs . In Manchester and Salford the District Funeral Fund have paid to a membar on the death ofhis wife the sum of £ 10 . The A . M . C . having , hy resolution , laid down a scale regulating the amount to he paid at the death of a

      member or his wife , for the same amount of contributions , throughout the Unity , whicli will have the effect of preventing the members in Manchester and Salford receiving greater benefits than other districts ; this _w-as at once seized upon by a great proportion of the members , and in open lodges , streets , andpublic-hou » es they denounced the measure as tyrannical , oppressive , unjust , and one calculated to destroy the independence of thc order . Everybody connected with the Executive Government of the order was assailed in scurrilous songs , pamphlets , and p lacards , and offensive documents were posted on the walls of Manchester and Salford . The suspended members , together with a large number of past oflieers and members of tho two districts , now made no secret of their intention , —that they would resort to any means , however desp icable , to break up and destroy the

      instituuou . Thc Quarterly Committee of tho Manchester district was drawing near , when the independence of the district was to be declared , the laws of the order trampled upon , and the instructions ofthe O . JI . and Board of Directors set at defiance . The lodges were attended by the disaffected parties , aud inflammatory speeches and epithets , too odious to name , were applied to every member ofthe order who was disposed to conform with the General Laws of the Institution . In one particular instance an officer of the order , with four of the directors , attended a lod ge in Manchester , and a signal was immediately given to "turn him , out , " "throw him through Vie window , " when others suggested , as a milder course , that they should wrench the legs from the tables and heat out his brains .

      These circumstances are named , so that you may form some idea of tlie means that have heen resorted to excite the members . The disaffected members wero now prepared to carry out all they had professed , but wer _« short of " leaders "—they did not remain in that position long —it was soon whispered abroad that P . F . G . M ' s Johu "Whitehead and Livesey , both from Rochdale , were to draw their clearances and join lodges in Manchester , so that they could be appointed deputies to attend the Quarterly Committee . Tho officers cf the order , and also those past officers who knew P . P . G . M , Whitehead , thought this was a " ruse "—but , alas ! they were doomed to be disappointed , and they saw with regret a past officer all y himself with those who had so openly expressed themselves wishful to break _' up the institution . V . V . G . M's Whitehead and Livesey did draw their clearances and join diffcrnnt lodges , and on the subsequent _lodge-riig ht both were appointed deputies to the Quarterly Committee

      of the Manchester district . On Saturday evening , June 21 st , 1815 , previous to the Quarterly Committee being held , the town was placarded with bills , announcing a public meeting , which was to be held in a large room in Nicholas-Croft , admission one penny each . The meeting was not confined to the members of the order , any one who paid one penny could he admitted . At the meeting the members of the order were the principal speakers , and , without confining themselves to any grievance , they poured forth a volley of abuses not only on the G . M . and Board of Directors , but all who dared to carry out the General Laws of the order , in opposition to what the majority of the members of the Manchester and Salford districts had declared to be unconstitutional and tyrannical . The proceedings of tho meeting werepublishcd in the form of a small pamphlet , price one penny each , and care was taken to circulate them very extensively in the neighbouring districts .

      The G . M . and Board of Directors assembled on Monday , the 23 rd of June , and the whole ofthe circumstances were laid hefore them , when they unanimously determined that all those who had taken part in the public meeting should he made an example of to deter others from pursuing a similar course , and they passed the following resolutions : — "That the Board view with regret th » attempts that are being made in the Manchester and Salford districts to excite the members into acts of insulordimtion _, therefore , with a view of effectually putting a stop to such

      practices , the directors herewith instruct thc officers of the Manchester district to suspend , immediately , from all connection with the Manchester Unity of Independent Order of Odd Fellows , It . C . IMlj , of the Nelson Lodge ; Joseph Taylor , of the Lily of the Valley Lodge ; Benjamin Stott , of the Shakspeare Lodge ; Robert Wood , of the Duke of Cleveland Lodge ; and R . J . Richardson , of the Star Lodge—all of the Manchester district—until the next A . M . C , which will be held at Bristol on Whit-Monday , 1846 ; and you are farther instructed to make known the contents of this letter to the whole ofthe lodges in the Manchester district immediately . "

      " That , should any member ofthe order take part in any public meeting in _connection with the suspended lodges or members , they will be liable to suspension ; and district officers are requested to caution all members from attending any public meeting that may be called to discuss any matter connected with the order . ' Charged with tha onerous and _important dut y of carrying into effect alterations and changes of fa greater magnitude than any yet recorded in the history of your ins t itution , and , considering the present excited state of feeling in Manchester and Salford ( an excitement calculated to lead to the dismemberment of the unity , unless speedil y and promptl y allayed ) , the Board of Directors feel it imperatively necessary to throw themselves , freely and unreservedly , upon the support of the general body

      of the members , whilst strenuously and conscientiously endeavouring to carry into effect laws passed in strict conformity with tlie constitutional usages of the order . The directors feel that it would be ill-advised and premature to offer any opinions of their own upon the character of enactments avowedly passed to remedy great and acknowledged evils , because the change hasbeen untried , and consequently as yet inoperative . Thc functions of the board are purely administrative , and as such the present Executive are determined to uphold them in their fullest integrity , without favour and without fear , regardless of clamour and individual feeling , confident that the General Laws afford afull and effective means of redressing any evils or defects in the operation of the proposed changes , after a fair and reasonable trial . The efficacy of any law can only be ascertained after a period of practical operation , and dissatisfaction can only be justified after

      proof of the inefficiency of any measure to answer the ends proposed ; and the directors feel satisfied the Manchester Unity , as abod y , will notdepart from a course which reason and experience alike point out as the most consistent and straightforward one . Inflammatory placards and scan-ileus songs are weapons of attack as yet unrecognised by the unity ; and in awardingrprompt punishment to the parties introducing such disgraceful innovations upon established usage , the directors feel that they are justly entitled to the unqualified support of members of every shade of opinion . " When the laws of thc order cease to he operative and effective for redress or punishment , the days of the institution will be numbered , affording another melancholy addition to the long list of abortive efforts on the part ofthe working classes for ameliorating their own condition through the agency of provident associations .

      The tie which hinds the Manchester Unity , strong though it he , can be far more easily severed than united . A day , an hour , a word , will suffice to overthrow thc lahours of a quarter of a century , and every step calculated to lead to results so inimical to thc welfare of our body , require to be met with promptness and decision . The Directors feel it due to their own character and the dignity of the order to state at once and explicitl y , that during the period for which the welfare ofthe order is committed to their care they will know neither district , lodge , or brother—they will administer the laws in all their

      integrity , without fear or favour—and by the _lawii of the institution they are prepared to stand or fall . G . M . John Dickinson P . P . G . M . Morris Lemon D . G . M . R . R , Elliott P . P . G . M . William Candclct P . G . M . Henry Whaite PROV . G . M . Wm . B . Smith P . G . M . James Mansfield P . P . C . S . F . Vf . Simeon _HSX * _S _£ . ard Powel _* _PB 0 T _. C . 8 , James Roe P . P . G . M . Wilham Machan P . G . Charles Ashdown P . P . G . M . William Brown P . G . Georee _Counard P . P . G . M . Francis Smith CS . William Ratcliffe , Secretary .

      Now that is th ei r own account ' . We have looked over it carefully , to gather from it WHAT LAW they appealed to , authorising them to take the step they are so careful to tell us they unanimously resolved on . It is true that at the close we find what we trust will not turn out to be mere bombast—the expression of a determination to " know neither district , lodge , or brother "— " to administer thelaws in all their integrity "—and "tostand orfall by the laws of the institution : " but we in vain search for

      tho adducing of law to sanction the extraordinary step of" suspending" the members ofthe Manchester district" from all connection with the Order , " NOT for what they had done—but for what it was suspected they were going to do !! We say we search in vain for the adducing of a law justifting such a course ; and we are lost in amazement at the face exhibited by those who talk so glibly of " administeringthelaws in all their integrity , " and of " standing or falling by them ; " we are staggered atthe face shown by those who talk thus , if it should turn out

      Odd Fellowship. The "Legality" Of The La...

      that what , they did was not only not accordant with law but in defiance of law ! Look at the def e nce ! Wc mean the Director * -. ' own appeal to the members of the Order to support them in the course they had determined on . Examine the reasons adduced for the " suspensions . ' This is the hitch . It is all very well for the Directors to take a course , and then make the appeal ad

      misericordium to be sustained in their attempt to bear down opposition with a high hand . But what are their reasons for adopting sneh a course 1 These the members at large will inquire for , if they be true to themselves and their brethren , before they answer such appeal , or condemn , as the Board have done , thousands of their brother members without a hearing ! What then are the reasons , as set forth by the Board of Directors themselves ? What their cogency ?

      What then * force ? . Reason first } is , that some members of the Manchester District wero dissatisfied with the new scale of payments and benefits sought to be in - troduced amongst them , and to which they were to be subject : and that they expressed such dissatisfaction , " denouncing the measure as tyrannical , oppressive , unjust , and one calculated to destroy the independence of the Order . " Reason second , is , that the Executive were assailed in scurrilous songs , pamphlets , and placards , and offensive documents were posted on the walls of Manchester and Salford . Reason third , is , that a large number of the members made no secret of their INTENTION to

      resort to any means , however despicable , to break up and destroy thc institution . Reason fourth , is , that the Quarterly Committee of the Manchester District was drawiny near , when thc independence ofthe district WAS TO BE declared , the laws of the order ( "WAS TO BE . '" ) trampled on : and the instructions of tlie G . M . and Board of Directors ( "WAS TO BE !! " ) set at defiance . Reason fifth , is , that Lodges were attended by the disaffe cted parties , and inflammatory speeches and epithets applied to every member of the Order disposed to conform to the general laws of the institution .

      Reason sixth , is , that on one particular occasion an officer of tho Order attended a Lodge ; and some one , more zealous than wise , suggested that he should he turned out ; while another proposed to throw him out of the window , * and another suggested that they should wrench tlie legs off the table , and beat oat his brains . Reason ' seventh , is , that - it was wispered that " brothers" Messrs . Whitehead and Livesey , of Rochdale , were to draw their clearances , and join Lodges in Manchester , so that they could be appointed deputies to the Manchester

      Quarterly Committee . Reason eighth , is , that " brothers" Whiteheao and Livesey did draw their clearances ; did join Manchester Lodges ; and _tvere appointed depu-. ties to the Quarterly Committee . Reason ninth , is , that a public meeting was called to consider on the new scalo of payments , at ¦ which one penny each for admission was charged . Reason tenth , is , that the principal speakers at such meeting were members of the Order ; that

      they did not confine themselves to any grievance . but poured forth a volley of abuse not only on the G . M . and Board of Directors , bnt _ako on all who baked to carry out the general laws of the Order . Reason eleventh , is , that the proceedings of such meeting were published in a pamphlet , price one penny : and , Reason twelfth , is , that care was taken to circulate such pamphlets very extensively in the neighbouring districts .

      There is the whole " case , as the lawyers say , There are the "REASONS , " every one of them _, set forth in their own language , and in all tlicii force ! There is the whole dozen : what thinks the reader of them ? For ourselves , when reading them —when hearing thc play on the terms " disaffected , " " inflammatory speeches" " scurrilous songs" " offm " sim documents , " "INTENTION to destroy the institution "—whan meeting these phrases in bristling array in this formidable bill of indictment , we fancied we had been " translated" back to the days of Castuskbagh and _Sidmouth , and were reading " one ofthe documents dropped out of the green-bag of the reign of terror- ! " How true is it that tyranny and

      oppression in all ages is ever the same ! It cannot even change the phraseology in which it seeks to justify its acts . On the miserable plea of " disaffection , ' " scurrilous placards , " and " INTENTION to destroy our institutions , " was the Habeas Corpus Act suspended , and the liberties of the whole people placed in abeyance . On the charge of "the time drawing nigh when independence WAS TO BE declared ; " when "law WAS TO BE trampled on ;" when "the Government WAS TO BE set at defiance ; " or such a senseless and wicked charge as this , were hundreds immured in dungeons , and acts done , which have sent the names of the perpetrators down to

      posterity" Festering in the infamy of years . " And yet , their example could alone be followed by the Odd Fellow Directors , ond their _vei-y language copied in justification of their copied deeds ! ' ¦ But let ns examine these " reasons" a little more closely . Let us satisfy ourselves of their sufficiency . Let us reason , on the " masons . " They need it , to get out of them a justification of the course pursued . First . Those that were dissatisfied with the new scale of payments , which it was sought to make binding on them , expressed that dissatisfaction ! Tremendous crime ! Never to be forgiven ! What dare to entertain dissatisfaction of that which had been " ordered" for you ; dare to be dissatisfied with

      that which affects your " payments and your rate of " benefits : " dare to be dissatisfied with this , — and to express your dissatisfaction !—O fie ! Naughty ! most naughty ! How intolerable . How " annoying" to persons in authority , who have arra n ge d all i n app le-pie order , and who can't brook opposition from those who have nothing to do with laws but to obey them . But still we cannot see that either this dissatisfaction , or its expression , is against law . Surely there is no law in the Order to prevent dissatisfaction , nor its _expression ! If so , it has been woefully inadequate : for , for years there has been much " dissatisfaction , " and pretty loudly expressed too .

      -Second . —The Executive were assailed in scurrilous songs , pamphlets , placards , and offensive documents . What wickedness ! To dare to assail with offensive publications , men , who , in the double character of _DiRECiOKS-and-trorfcsmen to the Order , HAVE POCKETED £ 36 , 554 during the last seven years ! How scandalous that such an " offensive " fact as this should be commented on ! How unbearable too , that Mr . Ratcliffe should be told that at the Bradford A . M . C _, he solemnly pledged himself to abstain from attending horse races and betting , _*

      and that he has forfeited "his word and broken faith . How offensive all this : but still not against latv ! Very annoying no doubt ; but still not lawful ground for a " suspension : " and evon if it were , _haye the right parties—the parties who wrote and circulated _thescurrilous documents—been made alone to answer ? It is likely that they have been suspended : " for the whole district is denied " all connection with the Order ; " on the principle , we suppose , on which thc " offended" master flogged the whole school , that the " offending" party might not escape .

      Third . — "A largo number of the members made no secret of their INTENTION to break up the institution . " Here we get fairly into it ! Here we have _treason which has always been assigned by tyranny to justify its terrific inflictions . The men of Manchester , then , are punished for INTENTIONS ! not for acts ! What a miserable plea ! How likely too ! Men who had paid for a long life-time to entitle themselves to certain benefits * men who had made the Order their savings' bank , and invested in it their little means to aupport then when laid on

      Odd Fellowship. The "Legality" Of The La...

      the bed of sickness , and Winter them when dead ; men who had done this , to declare their INTENTION to break up the institution ! Incredible Tell the tale to the horse marines . They may have declared their INTENTION to break up tbe confederacy of _Directora-and-tradesmen , which had pocketed £ 3 Q , 5 Si in seven years ! They MAr have declared tlieir INTENTION of making manifest the danger of entrusting hundreds of thousands of pounds in thc hands of a man whose mania for gambling is so strong as to lead him to BREAK FAITH with those to whom he bad solemnly

      pledged his honour . Thoy may have declared their intention to break up this sort of system in their Institution * . and all honour to them if they did so declare ; but that they would be such puerile fools as to seek to break up the entire Institution , in which their savings tvere invested , is what no man of common sagacity will believe . But even supposing that they had done all that is charged , still it is not against Jaw ! There is no law to suspend a man for avowing his " INTENTION to break-up the order . " He must perform acts—acts of which the law takes cognizance , before he can be made to answer for them : and even then he cannot be lawfully "suspended" without trial !

      Fourth . Here is the grand reason of all . Do , pray , read it over attentively . Do , pray , con it over ; take it in its scope—its extent . Because the time was drawing nigh , when ACTS would have been committed which would , on proof , have JUSTIFIED " _sasiicnsion * " becausecertain measures "WAS TO BE" adopted , thc Board of Directors stepped in , and ' _unfoii' /' MKj / " suspended" those that had , as yet , done nothing against Jaw ! And this the Board did to prevent those very breaches ofthe law which would have justified " suspension , " had they been brought home . Now is not that reason satisfactory ? Could more be desired by any one to prove theguilt of those who arc excommunicated ? Bah . !—it is all a

      tortuous wriggle ofmen who feci they are m the mire , and who throw the mud about to blind those they wish not to see their dirty condition . Fifth . This reason is akin to reason first . The " dissatisfied" parties were thc " disaffected ; " and the " expression of dissatisfaction" made up thc " inflammatory speeches . " Still all in accordance with law . No breach of rule . Lodges can be

      visited , and speeches made : and it is not yet enjoined by law that the speakers are to speak in honied phrases , when speaking of the Directors , unless their actions warrant it . " For instance : it was not absolutely necessary to say that Mr . Ratcliffe had maintained his honour by keeping his pledge about gambling : and if he should , at these Lodge meetings , have been called faith-breaker , it would bc an " epithet "— but still not without evidence of being the true one .

      Sixth , Wc should like to know who " the officer " was , whose reception was so flattering ! It shows how well he is liked by those among whom he has acted in an official capacity . But we know not that likes or dislikes form a reason for " suspending " members of a benefit society from privileges they _hurepaid for ! ' It does not appear that any of the valiant proposals to ' ¦ ' turn him out , " or " throw bim out of the window , " or " knock out his brains with the legs of the table , " were acted on . Had they

      been , no doubt but the parties " offending" would have been answerable to the " general law" of the land , either for asgault , or murder , as the case might be : but even then suck acts would have been no ground for tho Board of Directors " suspending " the offenders from all connection with the Order—( Jack Ketch would have done that effectually enough ) : much less were the bare proposals or threats any reason why other parties who did not make or join in them should be " suspended . "

      Seventh . Here we arc getting to close quarters . We are hearing of the whispers . Tyranny always fears whispers ; buta mere whisperianot alwayssufficicnt evidence on which to hang a man ; nor ought it to be to cause him to be " suspended" in another

      manner . Eighth . Now we fall off in cogency . Our " reasons " get weaker . Every day ' s practice in the Order tells every member that it is lawful for clearances to be drawn ; for other Lodges to be entered ; and for appointments to the Quarterly Committee to bo made . There is no law that exempts Messrs . Whitehead and Liveset from tho privileges of the Order jnor any reason in the " REASON , " only to the Directors who enter in their black-book the names of all who do not chirp out ' Sec how wc apples swim . "

      Ninth . Horrible ' . To think of _disoussing in public the "benefits" of Odd-Fellowship . Shameful : but still lawful . The reason for such public meeting we must have . ' On this head we transcribe what we have formerly said . The Board of Directors have arranged a new scale of payments , to come into operation in January next . This step i s o n e that deep ly concerns the whole Order . It is a change , and a material change too , in the mode of conducting their business . It moreover introduces a new } mnciple into the management of the institution . Hitherto many matters of detail have been left to the lodges

      themselves , it only being required of them that they conformed to the general laws , and paid their quota of general expenses . Amongst other things the rate oflodge contributions and lodge benefits were left to be determined on by the parties themselves—it being held that each lodge would best know its own requirements , and how to arrange to meet them . The new scale breaks down this principle of independent action . It provides , that for such and such benefits you must pay after suck and such rates . There is in it the principle of centralization , in opposition to the principle of independence of

      control . It was natural that such a step would excite remark , at the very least . It did more ; it excited discussion . Some parties contended that it was a step not at all needed , or at all warranted by the facts of the case . Others contended that it would prove to be highly advantageous ; that it would place the Order on a firmer basis than it had hitherto occupied ; that it would effectually prevent those lamentable failures of lodges from want of means to fulfil their engagements , which thoy had often had to witness ; and others again contended that it was part of a deep laid scheme to get possessed of centralised

      power , and eventually a control over all the funds of the society . In this state of mind , a meeting of the members of the Manchester District was called , to consider the subject . We opine that such a course was perfectly fair . We opine that Mr . Ratcliffe and his coadjutors have not yet gone the length of denying to the members of the Order the right of forming opinions for themselves , and of expressing those opinions too , if they think fit . Surely we have not yet got the powers of thc Inquisitors of Spain , as well as the despotic assumptions of the ( once ) Dey

      of Algiers " chntralised" in the Order of Odd Fellows ! And yet it is difficult to account for the conduct of Mr . Vf . Ratcuffe and the Board olBirectore on any other ground . Because this moating , to discuss a matter which concerned them , was held ; and because five certain individuals attended it , —( all five did not take part—only attended it ); BECAUSE they did this , they were "suspmdid" by Mr . Ratcuffe and the Directors , t ' n utter defiance of the laivs of the Order , which provide certain modes of TRIAL after due notice to the accused !

      -Tenth . Same as reason first and fifth . Dissatisfac tion was felt : it was expressed : and this was " abuse . " Still all was in accordance with law . Eleventh . Precisely same as the last . If the members have a right to form opinions , and to express them , they have a right to publish them for that is but a _vamtion in the mode of expressing opinion . If they have not a right to form opinions , or express them , of course the "reason" holds good ; and the Odd Fellows ' Institution is formed on a very liberal basis !

      Twelfth . Contained in the two last . And now , then , what ia the end of all this ? what the conclusion to which we are forced to come ? Why , that in the " _reawms '' adduced by the Board of Directors ! for their " _uwpinjlonjj _, " not _Qaescin _*

      Odd Fellowship. The "Legality" Of The La...

      tilla of justification can be found-only the tyrant s constant _plea-NECESsm- of example ! Not one atom of law fov the acts which deprived 30 , 000 members of the benefits they ha d purchased an & paidfor ! Not a shred of . a reason why all law and right , should be so shamelessly . trampled on . The rules expressly state " that any member breaking the general laws of the Order shall be TRIED by a Committee of his whole Lodge , or by the district ; and that fourteen days' notice shall be given him previous to trial ; such notice " s } ecifying the cliarge ; " and all that we have above seen is a miserable and abortive attempt on the part of the Board of _Director to justifg their flagrant departure from such law . Having thus disposed ofthe Directors' own defence , and shown that their " reasons" are utterly untena-. _ . . .. . _ . < .: _ _-, - _ i _ xi . _~ _<•„«»« + ' _=

      ble , besides being paltry and shameful , we now proceed to give the defence offered for them by the private friend of Mr . Ratcliffe , Mr . George Candelett . Here it is : — TO TnE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN STAR . "Hear me , and then strike me . " Sir , —I have for the last few weeks waited with anxiety for thc appearance of your long-promised remarks upon the whole matters in dispute amongst the Odd Fellows , whicli I " suppose lfind in your _, last week ' s paper , given as an introduction to the communications from Mr . Ratcliffe , the C . S . ofthe order , which said communication you say "docs not j explainnor meetnor settle tlie real question at

      , , issue . " True , O king . It does not settle the real question at issue ; nor yet do I believe that Mr . llatcliffe would wish to evade the real question at issue , by trying to carry the war into the enemy ' s camp , and put his assailants on their defence for what they did when tlicy had the power . No , no : such is not Mr . Ratcliffe ' s intention . I have it in private from Mr . Ratcliffe , that he will not only retort but prove , if you like , to thc satisfaction of auy tribunal , if called upon to do so , that he is innocent of what hath been anonymously laid to his charge . It is , sir , a most surprising circumstance to mc that you will give insertion to such anonymous communications as those emanating from tlio " Old Odd

      Yellow , " reflecting on private character . If the " Old Odd Fellow" hath scores of witnesses to prove the guilt of Mr . Itateliuc , wliich would amount to a breach of thc resolution of thc Bradford A . M . C , out with it . By so doing , he would render thc society a service . I think him incapable of doing so . __ There is something in general in anonymous writingspeaking behind a curtain , that is suspicious ; especially when directed against private character . If what the " Old Odd I * How" states be true , why not identify himself with his sublime effusions , instead of leaving the matter mysterious ? Why uot give a few of those assertions some validity , by giving proof beyond mere assertion , instead of endeavouring to

      create suspicion , to destroy confidence in Mr . Ratcliffe and the Board of Directors , the object of the speeches of the mcal-housc meetings , and of the remarks of " Probe . " I may be told this is not the real question at issue . Mr . Ratcliffe refers to these worthies in the Manchester district , not , as you would insinuate , for the purposeof evading your programme of " real question at issue , " but to show that they arc not the " meek and lowly innocents " thoy would you should understand they are . No but for thc purpose of showing that one out of the five individuals that were suspended , Mi * . Stott , formed one of the Beard of Directors in 1842 , which suspended a great number of members and lodges for

      dividing tlieir funds to sustain themselves during thc strike of the above period : and some , be it understood , upon the mere report that they had done so , which afterwards turned out to be fallacious : suspended too without any trial , or arrangement Thus introducing thc " gagging precedent" or " suspension of habeas corpus , " as it hath been termed . Those " suspensions" did not take place in 1813 , as " Probe" telleth you , when G . Richmond , J . Mansfield , W . and H . Ratcliffe , J . Peiscr , T . 'J cfls , E . K . Davies , It . R . Elliot , and Win . F . Burdett were in power . Thus I shall be able to show that " Probe " and his co-patriots are up to the neck in the dirt . When the Board of Directors of 1813 come to give an account of their stewardship to the A . M . C . at

      Bradford , there was a sub-committee appointed out ofthe General A . M . C , to examine their proceedings . This Bradford A . M . C . was the most numerously attended meeting the order ever had : and can Messrs . Hullv , Stott , Wood , and Hardy say their voices were ever raised , against a single sentence in the report of that committee , all of which individuals are now writhing under wounds inflicted with instruments of their own manufacturing ; and all of whom were present at the A . M , ft , where this _p-ecedent ivas sealed and acknowledged by thc representatives of the unity , and placed in tlie hands of all succeeding boards for use in similar cases of emergency , whore the dismemberment of the unity

      is threatened . If they cannot recollect how they acted themselves , when this precedent was made , very probably it will be recollected by them , how tlie deputies from Hydo , _nJMdleton , and Oldham acted in the matter ; one of whom , William Candelett , at present one of the Board of Directors , pointed to the consequences that were likely to ensue from the acknowledgment of th precedent . Yet it was no use . Vesting the Board of Diveetovs with the power of suspending went ' oKs to trial was determined on . ' But , sir , I will now approach the real question at issue . You ask why five individuals were " suspended , " in the Manchester district , some of which neither took part in

      promoting , or in the proceedings ofthe meeting , for which they were suspended . Sir , for thetruth of promotion ofthe meeting , you would dowell to read the documents again—the documents on which you found your comments , especially the address from tbe Manchester ; district . But what of this , you may say ; are they to bc cut off from all connection with thc order , merely because they were the promoters of a meeting ? No , no ; God fovbid that such , should be the casei It is essentially necessary that you sliould have a hint or two concerning tho charactev of the meeting , for thc PROMOTION OF _WUICH THEY WERE SUSPENDED . Firstly , it was a meeting convened by a scurrilous placard , at the charge of a penny admission to the

      public ,, no matter whether they were members or not . Secondly . it was a meeting at which anindividual took part who was not a member at all of the order : and thirdly , it was not a meeting to consider " Ratcliffe ' s sliding scale . " It could not be so , inasmuch as Mr . Ratcliffe never submitted any scale of either payments or receipts to the last A . M . C ; neither directly or indirectly did he submit anything to- the last A . M . C , affecting our finances . The present question of our finances- lies entirely between Mr . reiser of Manchester and Mr . Smith of Birmingham . I think , sir , then , this is something near the question at issue . Such being the CIIARACTERof the meeting , I think , sir , together

      with the tenor of the speeches I issued from theMealhouse meeting , and what is given in the above , itis pretty evident tliat their OBJECT was of a serious nature , most vitally affecting thc unity , and- called ion rROMPT INTERFERENCE FROM THE BOARD , _tvllO are merelv- administrators , and NOT MAKERS OF LAW NOR PRECEDENT . You ask for tub law , if any , under which the above five individuals were suspended . Here , sir , then , you have is as follows ;—Inthe 19 th page , No , __ 63— " any Lodge admitting expelled , suspended , or illegal persons , or in any way giving them countenance or aid , by allowing them

      thc use of any regalia or lodge property , such lodge shall , from the time of committing such acts , become suspended from all benefits and privileges of the order , until they shall satisfy the quarterly eommitteu of the district ; and if such practices be persisted in or repeated after notice being given them of thc illegality of such proceedings , they shall be expelled the order . " I remain , yours , George Candelett , Olive Branch Lodge , Hyde district . September Mth , 1845 .

      Has Mr . Candelett mended thc matter ? Is the juttification more apparent than it was ? Has he adduced law for his positions ? No : but he shelters the Board of Directors under a PRECEDENT which he himself furnishes reason to condemn ! And here we are again , cheek-by-jowl with tyranny ' s apologists . Thc two only pleas which are set up to justify every rascality—every assault on freedomevery abridgment , of liberty—every act of oppression , is set up by the Board of Directors and then * defender . "Necessity" is the one ; "Precedent" is thc other ' . What bitter shifts we arc put to , when we have to learn our lessons in such a school !

      And now , then , for this " precedent . " Because some men , in 1842 , set the laws at defiance , and trampled on all risht , and got indemnified for so doing , that is a REASON why another set of men should trample on all law in 1845 ; deny all right ; and ROB 30 , 000 individuals of that which they have purchased with their hard-savings ! Such is the teaching of this apostle of liberty ! Why , man , _Castlereaoh and Sidmouth act the very precedent ! They were aware of " dissatisfaction ; " they

      were aware of its " expression ; " they charged INTENTION ; " they called the people "disaffected ;" they spoke of insubordination ; " they complained much of " inflammatory speeches , " and " offensive documents * . " and they suspended the Habeas _Corjms Act , and imprisoned hundreds for months together ; taking them to dungeons in distant parts of the eountry ; never telling them why or wherefore they were apprehended ; never confronting them before a magistrate ; but turning suchai had not had their bowels shaken out of them , or bad not cut their own

      Odd Fellowship. The "Legality" Of The La...

      throats to escape the tortures they were subjected to out of prison without explanation , either why they had been putin . br why they were turned out . _Andfoj all this they obtained a bill of Indemnity ! Therefore thc precedent was set : but would it be tolerated _?»« , were Sir Robert Peel and Letter-spying _Giuhj _^ to seek to act on it ? Let George Candelett , foC ( j as he is of tyrannical precedents , answer . As to what the defender of lawlessness and _des . potism says of the " CHARACTER ofthe meet , ing , " and the " OBJECT" of the party who got , up and attended that meeting , it is really too puerile , and washy for serious notice . It is but another phase of the tyrant ' s plea—necessity . The same rcasonino _* _ttimafatn csnanA t . ho . tortures thev were afi & tx _& AAi .

      would justify any enormity , however atrocious . Let us put a case to this George Candelett , _Support him to be a member of a society which invests its money in a Governmental Savings' Bank ; and . suppose him ct Chartist ( as we suppose him to be ) , and attending a Chartist meeting , speaking of i _* _^ tyranny and oppression to whieh the toiling mil / ions are subjected both socially and politically ; suppose him further to denounce this tyranny , and par . ticularJy that insidious and crafty portion of it , the Savings' Banks , whicli makes tho poor minister to their own scourging and degradation ; and suppose him , for so doing , "suspended" from all " benefit "

      that he might have iu the particular Savings' _Banlhis frugal savings were "invested" in , what would he say ? The act could be "justified" on his own grounds quite us well as he has justified the Odd Fellows' Board ia robbing 30 , 000 mon of tlt-c rights and privileges their hard-savings had bought them . More than enough could be , and would be , said about the " CHARACTER" of thc meetings he had " attended" and the "object"lie had in view . But there is one feature more wanted , to make out ' parallel ease complete . Suppose the rest of hi ?

      bro th er m em b ers , when his illegal " suspension " was known , were to sympathise with him ; denounce the act as one of gross oppression , and refuse to acknowledge its validity ; and suppose them for such standing up > for the right to be "suspended" in a body , b y thc power which had " suspended" himself , without colour of law or authority : we bid Gko bos Caxdelett to suppose all this : and further , to sup . pose a flaming mouther of "liberty" to come lor . ward to defend thc despotic and oppressive acts ; aad then , when he lias so supposed , we bid him ask _hia . self what he thinks of himself .

      One word about the law George _Caxdkleii has quoted . We should have been disposed to think hinj a mistaken man , but for that quotation . The dfe . honest use he has made of it , however , leaves on the mind a very mean opinion of his morality . Thc law he quotes , is one that follows on " susperi « sions" that have taken place AFTER TRIAL—after the party accused has had fourteen days' notice of such trial—after he has had the " charge" furnished

      him—and after he has confronted his accuser , ami made Ms defence . If after all this he be found guilty , and expelled or suspended , it is right to prohibit lodges from admitting or aiding him . But this law cannot apply to the illegal "suspensions "— " suspensions" without trial—without notice—without de . fence ! Thc quoting of such law under such circumstances shows to what miserable shifts thc apologists of lawless acts are driven to .

      Here wc close for the present . The observations on this head of our subject have extended furtheL than we originally intended . They arc , however , all to the purpose—the real question * at issue . As we said in the beg inning , if the Board of Directors in any institution are allowed to exercise such a power as has in this case been assumed and shamelessly pufe in force , no member is safe . It may bc his turn to " side with" the Directors to-day in putting dowrc "dissatisfaction" lie may not sympathise with-, he may be thc victim to-morrow because ofhis own " dis * satisfaction . " Therefore , all are interested in the question : both those who are " suspended , " and those who may be .

      Tho subject is one we must return to . It has yet to be viewed in several aspects : the legal one among tlie rest . We shall also have something to say on the new scalo of payments before we have done . We shall have something , too , on the _question of representation ; and fancy we shall be able to show that thc present mode is not quite so perfect as " W . S _., " of Belfast , writes it . Nay , we incline to the opinion _, that we shall be able to show it the most _unsatiafaeiorji that could have been devised . Perhaps next week will produce another article on the subject . Below arc several letters , two of a personal nature —one of a more general nature . The personal portion we shall , in our discussion of the question , keep distinct from the other branches : but we shall not

      neglect it . Important considerations are bound up ia the personal matters tliat we have seen agitated : and we shall have something to say on the rni'DE . YCK of entrusting hundreds of the thousands of pounds iit the hands of a confirmed , gambler—ono whose mama , is so strong as to lead him to violate mo 3 t solemn pledges , and lose Ms honour .

      To The Editor Op The Northl'bx Stab. Sin...

      TO THE EDITOR OP THE NORTHl'BX STAB . Sin , —In yourpaper , for the last throe weeks , remarks have appeared , pro and eon , referring to thor betting transactions of G : S . Ratcliffe . Now , having been witnesstosomeoftliatindividual ' _sproccedings at thc late Newton races , and the subject having become one of importance , from the publicity it has attained , I think it my duty to state publicly what Isaw , so that the veracity of the writers in yonr journal may he put in its proper position . I attended the second day ' s races at Newton : ; and on taking my place ir the railway carriage at Manchester , RatcliiFe _, who

      was booking for a place , asked iae if wc had any room . We had for one . He got in , and rode to thu race course . Just previous to the race for the cup , C . S . Ratcliffe came to within a couple of yards ot thc place where I stood , on the adjoining stand . _* nod of recognition passed between us ; after which hb BEGUN TO BAWL OUT " I ' ll BET £ 20- TO _^ f I NAME THE WINKER FOR THE NEXT RACE AT T _™ ' This he called out at least a dozen times . Re " _° called out several times , " £ 20 to £ 10 Tardlu and Itowena against Vie field . " ( It singularly happen _^ that these two horses were first and second . ) ' 1 ms _uflG taking at ourparfcof _tllcstand _, _alldhe _llothe _/* _l _^ _. _1 _Wf _' wneic

      make any bets , removed to thc other end , _, w some time , I hard him calling out the same , m far as " the roll of notes " is concerned , I i ' iiI » ? any ; but it may readily be presumed he could not offer such large amount of bets without having considerable sums of moncv with him . There was _w »" mc Mr . Johnson , memb er ofthe Poor Man ' s I ncna Lodge , "Rochdale district , who will , if nccofsa * 7 . affirm and corroborate what is stated above l" * ** , ' cliffe ' s letter of last week , he refers to thc proc _^ ings of thc Bradford A , M . C . I am _astomshcJ > w should have done so , * for it was at that very _»> e < _f _^ ! where , to save himself from instant dismissal , he , it ] _theivholeof the deputies , _tublicly i * _ledo * _--i > hW _& _J NEVER TC" ENGAGE in BETTING _TRANSACTIOXS _AOAff . , expressed himself sorry for what he had done > _•' . . _tri . _4 « . _«• - _U' + \ . _« . .. 1 J 1 .. r _« .. ™ :. » _lilnv / ii ! _tl-OW * _autiA ii nuuiu _vitlf iui "i -

      , -u _, _Muav _vuvij i gi _>« _,... , __ __^ never _oeuecu on . a racecourse _agaimvhilstin then '; vice . The perilous situation he was then in . , 1 1 '„ i r i all that both himself and his friend Ma _nsfieW _^ do to allay the opposition his conduct lw « _* , . relative to his turf transactions ; but after the _*< _* «¦ \ pledge he gave , and the smooth speech of "lan ? ? jl 8 who likewise pledged himself to the same eiiect , « deputies overlooked the past in the promises tor future . In proof of what I have stated above ? * six deputies from Rochdale , of which nwnhif j- «» one , went to tho meeting prepared to vote asa * . Ratcliffe ' s re-appointment : but in _consequent w pledges given , we recorded our votes in his favour . , After what I above stated relative to Bramoro , •» „ which is known to hundreds , I think the P _* ! - and " veracity" of 0 . S . Ratcliffe mu 3 t stand in very unenviable position . Dear sir , yours respectfully , Thomas Lrvspr . PaBt Officer of thc Rochdale Dfltn « _- Rochdale , Sept . 15 th , 1815 . ( Continued in our first page . J

      Apropos Reform.—We Perceive That Som T R...

      Apropos Reform . —We perceive that som t railway companies have determined on _^ T _^ % _a carriage to each train exclusively devot ea _^ ladies .-We are happy to perceive those gen ™ improving in the " fender ' . " department _l-w _^

      F Winds0 Printed By Dougal M'Qowan, Of It, &»»* . Gttw Btreet, Haymarket, In The City Of Webtnnn » ?T0

      f Winds 0 Printed by DOUGAL M'QOWAN , of IT , _&»»* . gttW Btreet , Haymarket , in the City of WeBtnnn » ? t 0

      Office M The Same Street And Farisn, .'"...

      Office m the same Street and Farisn , . _'" ' _viighed _ol prietor , FEARGUS O'CONNOR , _Bsi _*> *? ? rBraadoO « William Hewitt , of No . 18 , Charles-street , ° tlie g . street , Walworth , in the Parish ofSt . _* " * v _» _^ io ton , in the County of Surrey , at the _Offiw . , , &(¦ Strand , in the Parish o St , _MaryJf-f . * " _* _OityofWegtminster . . . — _^ Baturday , September _!^ , S _'

  • Citation
    • Northern Star (1837-1852), Sept. 27, 1845, page 8, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/ns3_27091845/page/8/