2010 GLCPO Constitutional Amendment Proposals Report

In December 2009, three Constitutional Amendment Proposals were submitted to the Grand Secretary:

1. To remove the term “free by birth”, which the UGLE (England) Constitution had removed in 1847;
2. To correct the reference to “no innovation”, which the UGLE Constitution had corrected in 1986;
3. To require the Grand Secretary to report the number of Grand Lodge members to the GL.

The Proposals stated the reasons, as well as the specific sections of the Constitution to be changed.

In April 2010, the Grand Secretary mailed the Amendment Proposals to the Lodges. The text had been
altered and the reasons removed. The Proposals were labelled “Irregular”, with no reasons given.

In July 2010, at the Annual Communication, on the Motion to Adopt his report, the Grand Secretary was asked: "Why does the Grand Secretary report the number of lodge members but not the number of Grand Lodge members?"   He first implied that the Grand Lodge consists only of Grand Lodge Officers, then, only of the delegates, but he did not answer the question that was asked.  He seemed not to understand this question, even though it was the exact subject of one of the Proposals.

On the Motion to Adopt the Report of the Committee on Constitution and Jurisprudence, the proposer formally asked the Chair of the Committee about each of the three proposals:

1. "Why did the Committee alter the text of the Proposal?"
2. "Why did the Committee find the Proposal "Irregular"?"

Grand Master Daniels, who was not a documented Constitution Committee member, pre-empted the Committee Chair from answering the questions, stating that he himself could “answer the whole question". The Grand Master, while still presiding, then declared "they are ritual changes, not constitutional amendments". The Grand Master interrupted and silenced a follow-up question stating "I assure you they were given full and due consideration".

In December 2010, the official Proceedings were published. These Proceedings differ from the actual deliberations in several particulars:

1. They misstate the question put to the Grand Secretary. 
2. They misstate the response from the Grand Secretary. 
3. They misstate the Proposal text that was submitted to the Grand Secretary. 
4. They misstate the questions put to the Chair of the Constitution Committee. 
5. They do not show that the Grand Master had answered ex-cathedra, instead of the Committee Chair.
6. They do not show that the GM had not addressed the question about text alteration. 
7. They do not show that the GM had disallowed questioning of his counter-factual assertion.

The Proceedings do show that the GM was speaking contrary to fact when he declared, on behalf of the Committee, that the Proposals were not Constitutional Amendment Proposals.  This is evident despite their text having been surreptitiously altered by the Committee and the Grand Secretary before publication.

These Proceedings are published at http://www.archive.org/details/grandlodge2010onta pages 71, 76, 77.

"In Freemasonry we have nothing to hide. The Grand Lodge publishes its Proceedings every year, disclosing all business transactions." -- Daniels, 2009
                                                                                                                                                © Renzland 2011.05.19