Proceedings of the Grand Lodge of Illinois - University Library

28o JOURNAL OF PROCEEDINGS f xw Tu ?i da T{:
) Nov. 18. 1313.
benefits to sick members is the distinguishing characteristic of our
Order and may be regarded as the fundamental principle of Odd Fel-
lowship." (Thornton's Code, Sec. 1470.)
The Constitution of the Order provides a Visiting Committee of
three members, one of whom shall be the Noble Grand, whose duty it
shall be to keep themselves informed at all times as to the condition
of a brother who has been reported sick. They shall report to the
Lodge to what benefits he is entitled. The brother who is sick is thus
fully surrounded with full and ample protection so far as his sick
benefits are concerned. Should the Visiting Committee for any reason
fail to be informed of a brother's sickness, the brother himself can
inform the Visiting Committee of such sickness, and he can do this
without any feeling of constraint, for his sick benefits are a right to
which he is entitled, and not a charity in any sense whatever. The
Lodge is, in this manner, put upon its duty and given an opportunity
to investigate and relieve, and the sick brother fails in his duty if he
neglects to so inform his Lodge. It is wrong for a brother to leave the
facts of his sickness depending upon the mere recollection of others,
who may forget in a short time. What the law of the Order provides
for and demands shall be made a matter of record on the books of the
Lodge. In this case there is no evidence of any kind to show or tending
to show that during the whole eight weeks for which Brother
Davis claims sick benefits, his Lodge had any knowledge whatever
of his sickness. There can be no reasonable excuse for such negligence
on the part of Brother Davis. The law of the Order gave him
the opportunity of compelling the Lodge to do its duty in case such
duty was being omitted or neglected. The Lodge is not to blame for
failing to do that which it has no knowledge is necessary to be done.
In this case Brother Davis is clearly in the wrong by failing to
notify his Lodge, and thus enabling the Lodge to protect itself from a
charge of a neglect or failure to do its duty. The cases are few indeed
when, if the brother does his duty, the Lodge fails or neglects the
faithful performance of its corresponding duty.
The opinion of your Committee in this case is that the action of
the Lodge in refusing the benefits claimed should be sustained and the
appeal dismissed, and it is so ordered.
HENRY PHILLIPS,
HENRY A. STONE.
W. E. P. ANDERSON,
OWEN SCOTT,
CHESTER M. TURNER,
Committee.