has been the Masonic law upon this subject for more than one hundred years, in spite of the fact that our Proceedings themselves have been in error for the last twenty years. The attempt made in 1904 (see 1904 Mass. 34 and 66) to make one change (accomplished later, see 1909 Mass., 64 and 65) and to correct our records in this regard by constitutional amendment was rendered abortive by the technical attitude of a Committee whose report was accepted and adopted before those present at that Communication-who were prepared to pass upon the main question-realized the niceties of the point of order suddenly sprung upon them. Indeed constitutional amendment was unnecessary. A ruling of the Grand Master, had it been formally requested, would have set the question at rest. As it is now, the Brethren generally conform to the old and proper rule. Some, however, have followed the error which has crept into our records.

A Past District Deputy Grand Master has requested of me a decision in answer to the following question:

"Does a Brother who has once received the title of 'Right Worshipful' as District Deputy Grand Master lose that title when he retires from the office?"

I reply in the negative. I rule that District Deputy Grand Masters, past or in office, are as a matter of Masonic right to be called "Right Worshipful."

The Grand Lodge itself has plenary authority to make a change in this title should it see fit so to do. This is not one of the matters where the decision of the Grand Master is final and may not be interfered with by the Grand Lodge.

Unless and until, however, competent authority makes a change this decision will stand as a statement of the Masonic law of this Jurisdiction and Past District Deputy Grand Masters shall be styled "Right Worshipful."

On account of the large number of Lodges in the State the District system has been regarded as "absolutely indispensable in the proper administration of the affairs of the Grand Lodge." (See 1857 Mass. 41; 1869 Mass. 104.)

Certain duties of the District Deputy Grand Masters are pointed out in the Grand Constitutions in Part First, Article VIII, Section 10; Part Third, Article IV, Section 2; Part Fourth, Article I; and Part Fifth, Section 3.

These duties, however, are not exclusive. The Grand Master has the inherent right to commission the District Deputy Grand Masters to perform, in his name and behalf, such duties and services as he sees fit. In the language of Most Worshipful William Sewell Gardner as spoken to the Grand Lodge December 28, 1869 (page 158),

"In their several districts it is expected that they will be Deputy Grand Masters de facto as well as de jure."

"I have striven," he said, "to strengthen them in their official stations, and to dignify their office.'

The District Deputy Grand Masters, therefore, have all of the authority specifically assigned to them by the Grand Constitutions as above referred to, and also such delegated authority as the Grand Master sees fit to entrust.

The District Deputy is neither the representative of his Lodge nor of his District to the Grand Lodge. He is the personal representative of the Grand Master within the

Masonic jurisdiction of the District, performing in the name and on behalf of the Grand Master such services as that officer would perform personally were it not that the multiplicity of Lodges renders it impossible. It is for this reason, among others, that there should not be any rotation in passing the office around to the several Lodges, as some seem to expect. Your present Grand Master, like many of his predecessors, has selected for appointment the Brethren for whom he entertained a personal preference, who seemed to him to be the best available under existing circumstances, irrespective, in the first instance, of the Lodges from which they hailed. Where no available Brother seems preeminently fitted, then suitable attention has been given to considerations arising from affiliation.

"RAINY-DAY" FUND.

On May 11, 1915, I addressed a second RAINY-DAY FUND APPEAL to those bodies to whom one was addressed last year, as follows:

"With the approval of the head of each Grand Organization in this Jurisdiction which is recognized as Masonic by the Grand Lodge, I sent about a year ago to each local body an appeal in the hope that each would consider its ability and willingness to aid in the maintenance of our Masonic Home and other charities during these early years and until our invested funds grow large enough to yield sufficient income for the demands made upon us. It was therein indicated that it would be some years before our charity funds would produce large enough income for the support of the Home unless unexpectedly large gifts or bequests are received, and you, therefore, were urged to consider an annual appropriation for this purpose for these years while it is a struggle to maintain our charities and until they are able to stand alone, governing your generosity by your financial

ability and resources. You will also recall that it was suggested that contributions be not taken up, but that it was hoped that your body would appropriate according to its means and ability, either from your general revenue or from the income of your charity funds not otherwise needed, to a fund to be known as "The Rainy Day Fund,'' the whole of the fund to be available for maintenance of the Masonic Home and for general charity.

The response to this appeal was exceedingly gratifying. Within a year from the issuance of the appeal, contributions were received from 215 out of 251 Lodges, 29 out of 82 Chapters, 4 out of 31 Councils, 7 out of 41 Commanderies, 11 out of 21 Scottish Rite Bodies, and from a number of individuals. Of the total number of contributions but thirty-seven were "hat collections”—so called. In every other case appropriations were made by the Bodies themselves.

The need is no less urgent this year than last, for although our income has slightly increased, yet there are greater calls being made for assistance both within and without the Home (especially the latter) than ever before in the history of the Fraternity. There are now fifty residents in the Home, and their per capita expense has been reduced from $748.13 in 1912, and $572.90 in 1913, to $393.27 in 1914 -a reduction of three hundred and fifty-five dollars per capita from the first year of operation. Those who have carefully considered the matter believe it is a conservative estimate to say that this year we shall require from eleven to fourteen thousand dollars more than our income. On account of this the Grand Lodge has appropriated three thousand dollars from its general revenue. This has already been expended this year, yet the Grand Lodge ought not to appropriate more while still in debt, as it is, for about two hundred thousand dollars, secured by a mortgage upon the Temple in Boston. In behalf of the Board of Masonic Relief, I therefore again plead for your generous assistance.

Of those bodies who contributed last year-and they are the great majority-we earnestly entreat a duplication of the gift, or an increase if you have so prospered that your financial condition permits. Of the very few bodies who did not contribute to the fund last year, we ask anew a consideration of your financial condition in the hope that you will find yourselves able this year to do your share in the great work. May I add that the terrible and piteous stories of suffering and privation of our Brethren across the sea and their dependents call louder than words for assistance which we cannot render

unless sufficient contributions are made to our funds to enable us to take care of our own calls at home seasonably, and then have funds to spare to send abroad. While this new call adds to our financial burden, yet we should rejoice that it also adds to our opportunities for service. It is not only our earnest hope but also our sincere belief that nearly all will join in demonstrating that our charity is real and not verbal.

Please make checks payable to the Board of Masonic Relief and indicate that they are for 'THE RAINY DAY FUND,' sending them to room No. 207, Masonic Temple, Boston.”’

The results of this appeal for 1914 and up to today for 1915 are as follows:

Instances have recently been brought to my attention where a Lodge has worked two different degrees simulta