THE HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY;

 FROM THE BUILDING OF THE HOUSE OF THE LORD, AND ITS PROGRESS THROUGHOUT THE CIVILIZED WORLD, DOWN TO THE PRESENT TIME.

 

THE ONLY HISTORY OF ANCIENT CRAFT MASONRY EVER PUBLISHED, EXCEPT A SKETCH OF FORTY-EIGHT PAGES BY DOCTOR ANDERSON IN 1723.  TO WHICH IS ADDED THE HISTORY OF THE CRAFT IN THE UNITED STATES AND A WELL AUTHENTICATED ACCOUNT OF THE INITIATION AND PASSING OF THE HON. MRS. ALDWORTH, THE DISTINGUISHED AND ONLY LADY FREEMASON.

 

BY

 

J. W. S. MITCHELL, M. D.,

P. GRAND MASTER, P. G. HIGH PRIEST, AND P. E. COMMANDER OF MISSOURI.

 

VOLUME 2.

 

PHILADELPHIA, PA.:

AMERICAN PUBLISHING HOUSE.

 

1858

 

CHAPTER  I

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

WE think it, will be seen, when we come to detail the history of Modern Masonry, so called, that the Encampment degrees, called Orders of Knighthood, were invented and introduced into France about the middle of the last century ; but as the generally received opinion is, that they are but a continuation, with slight modifications, of the Christian and military Orders of the eleventh century, it becomes our duty, in deference to said opinions, to present, at least, a historical sketch of the Hospitalers and Templars of the Crusades.

 

But, even at the threshold, we feel that our situation is an embarrassing one. The reader can not fail to perceive how difficult is the task to make our sketch both truthful and interesting, if, at every step, we are forced to feel cramped for want of room. To collate the history of the Orders of Knighthood, in a manner congenial to our feelings,,and to the full satisfaction of the student of history, we should require as much space as a large volume would afford; while such is our arrangement, and such the wish, we think, of a large majority of our readers, that we can only claim to occupy a few pages upon this important branch of our history. Believing that a liberal public will be prepared to make due allowance for the circumstances under which we write, we will proceed, as best we may, to the accomplishment of our task.

 

 As the acts of the celebrated false prophet Mohammed Iaid the foundation for the original military Orders of Knighthood, it will serve the better to illustrate our subject, to briefly notice the life and character of this remarkable man.

 

 Readers, not given to thinking closely,.are predisposed to re. gard Mohammed as having been the very worst man of his day. or that he acted under the influence of a peculiar species of  IQ

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

 derangement. But when we remember that it is the nature of men to seek for power, and, when attained, equally their nature to abuse it ; when we reflect that the rise and fall of nations. in all past ages, tend to show that there are times when the "strong men shall bow themselves," and the weaker shall rise up and take their places; when great nations are destined to be humbled, and obscure tribes, in their turn, wield the scepter of power‑we say that when these things are known to follow in the train of human frailty, we shall not be so much surprised at the wonderful power acquired by Mohammed and his followers.

 

The close of the sixth century beheld the setting star of Rome's long continued and proud glory. True, she was not yet humbled, for Heraclius, who was Emperor in the early part of the seventh century, made some well‑timed demonstrations, which seemed, for a while, to plume anew the Roman eagle. By his splendid achievements, he caused his banner to be unfurled beyond the Tigris, and had the proud satisfaction of seeing it wave over most of the plains of Assyria, and he was so elated with success, that lie was about laying plans for sending the Roman eagle still further, when a new and unlooked for enemy appeared.

 

At the critical period when Rome and Persia were engaged in mortal strife, Mohammed made his appearance. He was born about the end of the sixth century, at Mecca, in Stony Arabia, and so remarkable did his career prove, that it would seem lie was sent into the world to scourge and humble the proud nations of the earth.

 

His biographers claim that he dewended from Kedar, the son of Ishmael, and, hence, his followers hold that he was of the progeny of Abraham. His parents were idolaters, as also were the tribe to which he belonged. He was left an orphan at an early age, and was raised and educated under the direction of Aboo Taleeb, his uncle; afterward he entered the service of Khaidjah, a rich widow, who made him her factor, and soon after gave him her hand and fortune. Mohammed was naturally subtle and ambitious, and this sudden acquisition of wealth served to nerve his arm for bold and daring achievements, and, doubtless, laid the foundation for that blood and carnage which at one time threatened to deluge the whole of Christendom.

 

At the time he made his appearance, the religion of Arabia was divided into a variety t1 crc,eua. These were Idolators, Jews, Christians and Schismatics. Mohammod saw, as by intuition, that a new religion could be sucäessfully introduced. Suddenly he pretended to become a strict item, and retired Into a cave near Mecca, where; under the cloak of religious fervor, he devised and matured his schemes. This being done, he affected to make a confidante of his wife, telling her that the Angel Gabriel bad made to him special revelations from heaven. He often affected to be in a trance, and,, on such occasions, professed to be filled with heavenly extaties, caused by his direct communication with God's messenger. He charged his wife not to breath8 to any human being a word, in relation to this wonderful occurreIIce, wisely foreseeing that this was the most certain way of producing an effect upon the ignorant multitude, whom he felt convinced would soon have, as a great secret, an exaggerated account of his communion with heaven.

 

And in this he was not mistaken, for his wife, believing the truth of all lie said, in the joy of her heart, could not withhold the wonderful tidings from a few particular friends, under the pledge of secrecy ; these communicated the news to a few of their friends, and very soon it was currently reported that Mohanitned was a prophet. As soon as he became surrounded by a few friends, upon whom he could safely rely, he proclaimed his divine mission, clothed himself in the richest oriental dress, covered over with emblems and hieroglyphics. To prevent the oppoò sition of any and all creeds, he bad so prepared his doctrines, that all were enabled to recognize the shadowing forth of their own peculiar faith.

 

After the death of Aboo Taleeb, the authorities of Mecca, having become alarmed at the growing popularity of this impostor, proscribed him as a blasphemer, and he was compelled to fly for safety to the city of Yatrib.

 

This flight is termed in the Koran the Hejira.

 

The first year of the Moslem era is A. D. 822.

 

After the proscription at,Mecca, Mohammed informed his dis^iples that his, mini.steriug angel had brought him a scimiter from heaven, to be used in subduing all his opponents and eu m*w The_ Arabian tribes were addicted to depredatory war1a svd, with great enthusiasm, flocked to his standard, willing 3" MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

hltnrlly led whithersover he chose; and soon this unprinciy E,d impostor became a powerful military chief, a merciless conqueror, and the scourge of the East. Nor did blood and carnage cease with the death of him who instituted the sword as the strong arm of his religion.

 

His followers continued to wage war in all directions, not waiting for provocation, but with the avowed purpose of compelling all to embrace the Mohammedan faith. They invaded Palestine and Syria; took Antioch, Jerusalem, and Damascus ; dethroned the Persian Monarch, and subdued Egypt and the whole of Northern Africa. The islands oú Cyprus, Rhodes, Candia, Malta, and Sicily, were invaded and brought to bow before the mighty Juggernaut.

 

In the early part of the eighth century, they seemed upon the point of accomplishing their great aim‑the subjugation of the whole Christian world.

 

At this period, they carried their bloody banner beyond the Pillars of Hercules, and founded a new empire in Spain.

 

But, happily for the civilized world, the giant strides of these bloodthirsty Infidels were checked by internal feuds, caused by a struggle for power in their own ranks.

 

The supreme authority became a fruitful source of contention and party strife, and, as there were quite a number of Califs who claimed to be the legitimate successors cl' the Prophet, the Moslem world was employed in deciding these disputes, instead of unitedly subjugating foreign nations.

 

When we remember that the Cross of Christ had remained planted upon the walls of Jerusalem, for near three successive centuries, under the protection of the Christian Emperors of Byzantium, and that, from the reign of Constantine the Great, the Greek and Latin Christians had annually made Jerusalem their place of pilgrimage, to obtain the remission of their sins at the Saviour's tomb; it may be readily seen that the conquest of the Roly City, by the followers of Mohammed, created dismay and lamentation throughout all Christian lands.

 

The Mohammedans professed to reverence Christ as a prophet, but they did not hesitate to levy and enforce the collection of a neavy tax upon the Christian votaries who flocked to His sepulchre.

 

The struggle for power between the Califs renderea d pilgrimage to the Holy Land one of great personal dangn‑ 9m l ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

13 even those who escaped violence, were subject to encounter deprivations and hardships on the way. A suDersitious belief pervaded Christendom that the reign of anti‑Christ was at hand, and, during the tenth century, the whole `Vest continued to pour forth its thousands of Palmers to the Holy City. These pilgrims carried a staff and leathern scrip.

 

On their return home, they generally carried some of the dust of Palestine, as also the sacred palm‑bough (hence they were called Palmers), and hung it near the altar of their Parish church, as a sort of pious trophy. For a time, the Califs protected the pilgrims for the sake of gain, and, after their arrival in Jerusalem they were preserved from violence for the same reason. But after the lapse of years, even this comfort was denied them, and they were insulted and robbed by the Infidels.

 

But, the causes which led to their greatest hardships, arose from a disunion of the Latin and Greek Churches.

 

This dispute arose so high that the pilgrims found it almost impossible to obtain shelter beneath friendly roofs, even with those bearing the name of Christian.

 

About the middle of the eleventh century, some merchants of Italy undertook to provide an asylum for the Latin pilgrims. In their commercial intercourse with Egypt, they, by means of presents, secured the friendship of the Calif Moustrassenbillah, and obtained from him permission to build a Latin church within the walls of the Holy City. Accordingly a chapel was there erected near the Holy Sepulchre, which was dedicated to the Virgin, under the title of Mary ad Latinos.

 

To this were added two hospitals, or houses of reception, for Latin pilgrims who might be sick or destitute.

 

The hospital was dedicated to Saint John the Almoner.

 

History informs us that this Saint John had been Patriarch of Alexandria, who, for his deeds of benevolence, was surnamed the charitable. Hallam's Middle .dges, informs us that " when Jerusalem first fell into the hands of the Saracens, he sent money and provisions to the afflicted Christians, and supplied such as fled into Egypt.

 

Under the patronage of Saint John the Almoner, the Orders of Knighthood were first established, but when they became numerous, and assumed a military character, they removed this Saint, and thence dedicated their Orders to Saint John the Baptist.

 

Soon after the erection of the hospital, several pious pilgrims determined to return no more to their native homes, and thence devoted themselves to the service of the sick and afflicted wanderers, who continued to pour in from Western Europe. This hospital was kept up mainly by alms annually collected in Italy, by the benevolent founders. Within its walls the sick were kindly nursed and skillfully treated, and those who had been stripped of their little all, by the robbers with whom the road was infested, were clothed and fed, and all who died received Christian burial.

 

The Hospital of the Almoner furnished the germ, the founds; tion of the Orders of Knighthood, whose splendid achievements; for near two hundred years, caused them to be denominated " the sword and buckler of Christendom in the Paynim war." The Hospitalers continued to increase in numbers, and to extend their relief to all Latin pilgrims who required aid, until the fame of the Institution extended over the Christian world.

 

For more than sixteen years, this charitable Association was permitted, silently and efficiently, to bestow alms, and offer relief to suffering humanity; but then a new enemy appeared. The Turkomans, a nation of barbarians, who, by their invincible valor;,crossed the Caspian, trade conquest of all the country bordering on the Euphrates, and turning their attention westward, suddenly burst upon Palestine, and, by order of Malek Shalt, the most renowned warrior of the Si1jookian race, the Saracens were driven out of Jerusalem and the garrison massacred. In this barbarous attack the most inhuman butcheries were perpe.

 

trated.

 

The Hospital of St. John was despoiled, and avarice alone saved the Holy Sepulchre from the destroyer's hand. By augmenting the tribute to be paid by each pilgrim, the bar barians made this the means of a valuable revenue.

 

In many instances, the tribute demanded was beyond the ability of the poor Christian pilgrims, and it is recorded that some expired at the gates of the city; without being able to behold the Sacred pomb.

 

In view of the foregoing facts, it is easy to account for the wonderful excitement which soon after pervaded all Western Europe.

 

Those who were so fortunate as to be able to ittarh the hirdshipF4 and escape the dangers, incident to i sgb to the Holy Land, returned with an account of the dinner in which the Holy Sepulchre was desecrated, and the n sufferings entailed upon the pilgrims.

 

These "o'er true tales" were repeated, until the very mentiorti of Palestine *Ie Wflated to stir the blood of every Christian, and nerve %e eta of the Christian warrior.

 

For a time, the excitement ofd without even the suggestion of a remedy.

 

At this sh obscure Frenchman, Peter; surnamed the Hermit, who f 'experienced the inhuman treatment of the Turkothrew himself at the feet of Pope Urban II., and fit His Holiness to arouse the Princes of the West to a sense of the insult, and demand that a sufficient force be t to drive the enemies of the Crops from the Holy Land. The Spre lent it favorable ear to the pleadings of the Hermit, but during to lead in so great an undertaking, he encouraged the pious enthusiast to visit the Christian countries, with a view ‑9, stirring up the people; promising to embrace the first favor itble opportunity to give encouragement to the scheme.

 

Thus ‑eh

 

; Pemr, his body emaciated by fasting, traveled vi*eat ‑oevering for his head or feet, making speeches every Vi**

 

he singular humility of the man,* his holy life, his fine i

 

ve all, the well‑told story of the pilgrims' aritiudesdd all Europe, till there was scarce a man or WOMM who waa not carried away by the excitement.

 

In lese Gin a year the people of Christendom were in arms, and opposition would have been useless from their rulers, but, so far from being the etc; the enthusiasm seems to have especially per4d the higher Tanks. In this state of things, the Pope called A*6E Grand Councils, and had no difficulty in inflaming the `mood: To the common people it seemed that their rulers '

 

>tm slow is their movements, and thus an inconsiderato W d" ftrsbed to the standard of Peter the Hermit, to the ri

 

of

 

ty thousand, and besought him to lead them to the y Lind

 

The majority of those had sold everything they ò For a description of the personal appearance of Peter the Hermit, m Yuolw Si"y of da 2WkL t wwft possessed, and esteemed it an honor to employ the last shilling in the holy cause. Husbands deserted their wives‑wives rejoiced in the cause which led to the separation‑widowed mothers sent forth their sons, firmly convinced that it was the will of God Led on by the Hermit and his Lieutenant, Walter Senavier, this rabble army reached Constantinople. Every species of vice, to which such a multitude might be supposed to be subject, was perpetrated.

 

Thousands of women, mostly of the lower order, but including many of high respectability, followed in the train. Already had intemperance, prostitution, and almost every vice marked their progress, and rendered their approach a source of uneasiness and alarm to Alexis, the Greek Emperor. The atrocities perpetrated by this so called army, so disgusted the Hermit, that, after in vain trying to reform them, he left them immediately after they entered Asia.

 

Walter remained, still endeavoring to restore subordination, but all in vain. Seduced by a false rumor, that the rich spoils of the city of Nice were to be had without resistance, they rushed headlong, in disorder and confusion, upon the city, when, by the preconcerted plan of Soliman, the Turkish Sultan, they were surrounded by the Infidel army and slaughtered, almost to a man.

 

Thus ended the first expedition in the Paynim war.

 

The loss of this rabble army neither dismayed nor dampened the ardor of the grand army, which was soon to follow, under proper discipline, and commanded by Kings and Dukes.

 

When this great army rendezvoused at Constantinople, and went into winter quarters, it is said, " a more glorious army the sun never shone upon." t

 

The Knights and their attendants alone amounted to one hundred thousand fighting men; the pilgrims, bearing arms, to about six hundred thousand.$ The first warlike demonstration of this army was against the city of Nice, where the Hermit's army had perished.

 

Soliman was prepared for their reception by having thrown a numerous garrison of Turkomans into the city, which, being strongly fortified, he supposed himself able to cope with the Christians, and for six weeks resisted, but was then con.

 

ò Fuller.

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

t Gibbon.

 

i Ibid.

 

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

17 polled to capitulate, or surrender, under a stipulation that the City should be left in possession of the Greeks.

 

The news of this victory gladdened the hearts of thousands at home, who had felt deeply grieved at the inhuman butchery of the Hermit's army. And now, more than ever, the clank of Christian steel, like a storm god, filled the air.. Western Europe was literally in arms for the Crusade. On the other side, all the warlike tribes of Asia, as one man, rose to repel the invaders,

 

The Sultans of Aleppo, Bagdad, Antioch, and Persia, levied mighty armies; but, with a knowledge of all this, the enthusiastic Christian leaders marched boldly on.

 

At Dorylteum, a bloody battle was fought, in which four thousand Christians and three thousand Paynim Captains were slain. The camp of Soliman was taken, and his army disbanded. This victory was followed by the conquest of most of Anatolia., and, thus victorious, the grand army descended into the Syrian plains, where they found Tarsus in possession of Tancred, one of the Christian leaders, who had approached by a different route.

 

At the beginning of winter, the army of the Crusaders approached and besieged Antioch, the once renowned capital of‑Assyria. It was surrounded by a double wall, and garrisonad by twenty thousand veteran troops, who, for seven months, resisted every effort of the Christian army, and fell, at last, through the treachery of one of the inhabitants (1098). During this protracted siege, the Christian army lost, by pestilence and famine, upward of one hundred thousand men, and many of the eurvivors were reduced to the necessity of feeding on carrion, and even human flesh.

 

Discord prevailed among the leaders, end crimes the most detestable disgraced the Christian banner. When the Crusaders left their native homes, Jerusalem was possession of the Turks; but the Calif of Egypt, who had soveral times been driven from possession of the Holy City, took advantage of the approach of the Crusaders, to send on army into Palestine,,which drove the Turkomans from every town, and soon planted his standard again in the Holy City, This news neither surprised nor dismayed the Crusaders.

 

To them it was of out little moment whether their enemies were !A MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

the Turkomaris or the Fatimite dynasty, and, hence, when Mostati, the Egyptian Calif, proposed a treaty which pledged his' friendship, but provided for his continued possession of the Holy City, and the immediate return of the Christian army, the officers of the latter rejected the proposal with scorn, and sent the Calif word that they would open the gates of Jerusalem with the same keys which they had used at Nice, Tarsus, Antioch, and Edessa.

 

In May, 1099, the remnant of the Christian army took up their march, and such was the terror which their victories had produced, that they were enabled to pass unmolested through Tripoli, Sidon, Tyre, Cwsarea. Jaffa, and Ramla, and, finally, beheld the towers of the most famous city in the world. The ehout of exultant joy, which burst from the lips of those in front. was taken up and carried back upon the line, until the whole gave forth one continued roar of applause.

 

The more pious manifested their joy by casting themselves upon the ground, kissing the earth, and moistening it with their tears.

 

On the 7th of June, 1099, the army of the Crusaders encamped before the walls of Jerusalem. And here we might pause, and find lamentable cause for a sad commentary upon the fortunes of war. The Christian army, thus far, had lost too battle : victory had perched upon its banner, and triumph marked its onward march, yet what was its present appearance, compared with that which it presented in the plain of Bythynia ? Of the seven hundred thousand fighting men, scarce twenty‑two thousand, capable of bearing arms, encamped before the Holy City, the hope of seeing which had served to stimulate all who had left their homes and their friends.

 

The number who fell in battle was comparatively small, but disease, desertion, and those left to hold possession of the conquered' cities, had thus reduced the glorious army, and left to this small remnant the honor of contending for possession of the tomb of our Saviour. At this period, Jerusalem was not the impregnable city it had been,. when it so proudly resisted the attacks of the sovereigns of Babylon and Rome, nor was it defended by that band of brothers who fought in defense of the city of their fathere. From the :days of Adrian, the Jews had been scattered over ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

19 the face of the earth, without a home, without friends, yea, without a spot of earth upon which they could walk in broad day, shielded by the mantle of justice. No wonder, then, that this persecuted race. stood aloof, and, unconcerned, beheld the bloody conflicts for the possession of the home of their fathers. They were encouraged to take up arms for the Saracens, only by the prospect of imprisonment and starvation.

 

On the other hand, they had nothing to expect from the Christians but injustice and stripes.

 

The walls of the city included Golgotha,, Bezetha, Moria; and Acna.

 

Mount Sinai, once a populous portion of the city, had long been deserted, and was not now within the walls.

 

The city was defended by forty thousand regular troops, under command of Istakur, the most renowned General of the Calif. Twenty thousand of the Mohammedan inhabitants also took up arms.

 

All the Christians in the city were thrown into prison, including Peter Gerard, the Superintendent of the Hospital of St. John, whose well known piety and universal benevolence, had won for him the admiration of the Infidel inhabitants.

 

To annoy and cripple the efforts of the Crusaders, the v: ells and cisterns in the neighborhood had been filled up, and all the adjacent timber, capable of being used in the construction of warlike engines, was collected and burned.

 

The Counts of Normandy and Flanders occupied a position northward of the city; Godfrey and Tancred, on Mount Calvary; and Raymond, of Toulouse, to the South of Mount Sion. On the fifth day of the seige, the first attack was made by the Crusaders, and, so furious was the onset, that amid a storm of arrows and fire‑balls, they broke through the first barrier, and boldly attempted to surmount the walls of the escalade ; but the want of engines and ladders rendered their bravery and zeal of no avail, but subjected them to be driven back to their camp, with great slaughter: To the mortification of this defeat, was added extreme suffering for provisions and water. So extreme was their thirst, that many dug holes in the ground, and pressed the damp earth to their lips. Godfrey and Raymond then selected some Genoese mariners, from Jaffa, who built two large moveable towers out of timber brought from Lichem, thirty miles distant.

 

20 NODERN,FREEMASONRF.

 

On the night of the 15th of July, these towers were silently rolled to the fortification.

 

Drawbridges were made to extend from the tops of the towers to the battlement.

 

And now, when the sun rose upon the inhabitants of the city, they belield theso great towers standing at their walls, crowded with chosen warriors, impatient for orders, and an opportunity to grapple, in mortal strife, with their Moslem foe.

 

The besieged, with great fury, hurled fire‑brands against the towers, and, so dexterously was this done, that Raymond's tower took fire, and burned so rapidly that it.was deserted.

 

Godfrey had posted himself on the summit of the other, and for a time, unaided, his bowmen maintained the battle.

 

" But, at the hour," says the Monk Robert, '' when the Saviour of the world gave up the ghost, a warrior named Letalde, who fought in Godfrey's tower, leaped the first upon the ramparts.

 

He was followed by Guicher ; Godfrey was the third, and all the other Knights rushed on after their Chief."

 

Each, as he leaped upon the ramparts, threw away his, bow and arrows, and drew his sword, " at the eight of which, the enemy abandoned the walls, and ran down into the city, whither the soldiers of Christ pursued them, with loud shouts." The Moslems were pursued from street to street, from house to house, and were indiscriminately mowed down; for such Was the panic, that no regularly organized resistance was made.

 

At about three o'clock in the afternoon, the standard of the Cross was seen to wave in triumph on the walls.

 

Thus was the Holy City rescued from the hands of Infidels, after having been controlled by the enemies of Christianity, for more than four hun dred and sixty years.

 

Here, again, we find food for reflection.

 

One would suppose that the fol!owers of the meek and lowly Saviour would, after achieving a great victory, have the consistency to display the principles which He taught, by showing mercy to the vanquished; but, alas for human nature 1 it is too much the same., in both the civilized and savage breast.

 

The victory of the Crusaders was, indeed, a glorious triumph; for it was acquired under the banner of justice, and the result of that bold and daring ' Knolls.

 

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

21 brag, which alone could have prevailed.

 

But how was its brilliancy tarnished, and the holy cause disgraced, by the forn city, yea, the brutality of the conquerors?

 

For three whole days, an indiscriminate massacre was kept up, accompanied by a licensed pillageeof the city.

 

Old and young were put to the sword, and even suckling babes were inhumanly put to death. Nor was this arrested until the Crusaders were worn down with the fatigue of killing, after having slain ten thousand wretched and helpless human beings.

 

But, more inconsistent still, these human butchers had no sooner tired of their work of death, than they washed the blood of their victims from their hands, and, bare‑footed, walked to the tomb of Christ, kissing it with (as they would have the world believe) holy fervor, and Sending up their anthems of praise, and repentant groans to the bar of Justice.

 

Anon, their enthusiasm was so hightened, that they fell at the feet of Peter the Hermit, praising God as glorified through him.

 

At the time the city of Jerusalem was taken by the Crusaders,

 

' a large army was on its march from Egypt, Bent by the Calif to its succour. This army the Crusaders routed before it reach ed the city.

 

The victory secured, for a time, exemption from molestation, and the Christians were.enabled to attend to the evtablishment of their civil and religious institutions.

 

By the feudal polity, the conquered territory was divided among the ew oommanders, who, after taking formal possession, suffered the Moslem peasantry.to remain in vassalage.

 

Godfrey is represented as being a devoted and good man, and hence one of his first'accts was‑the institution of several new churches:

 

He also mwde it his duty to visit the Hospital of St. John, which he found crowded with wounded soldiers, and so loudly did its inmates extol the Hospitalers, that Godfrey was moved to regard the Institution as worthy of being sustained by substautial aid, and, accordingly, bestowed on it the lordship of Montboire, in ‑Brabant, with all its dependencies.

 

His example was followed by the principal chiefs of the Crusade.*

 

Thus, in a abort time, the Hospitalers had the revenues of a great number of rich towns, both in Europe and Asia.

 

0 Sutherland.

 

$2

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

To the period of which we have been speaking, the Hospital of Saint John had been simply a secular Institution, but when Gerard was made Rector, and the large benefactions were entrusted to his care, he proposed to the brothers and sisters the propriety of becoming a religious fraternity.

 

The number of Hospitalers had now greatly increased.

 

Among those who first determined to devote their lives to these charities, and took the habit of the Order, were Raymond du Puis and Dudon de Camps, of Dauphiny, Gastus, of Berdihz, and Canon de 14Iontaign, of Auvergne.

 

Others not less pious and equally respectable followed their example, and it is proper to remark that the Institution was well supplied with devotees before it received the above named patrimonies.

 

Gerard, seeing that these men and women had formally renounced their homes and their relations, in order to devote their lives to acts of charity, readily imagined their happiness would be promoted by making the links that bound them partake of the holy religion, and, therefore, proposed that they should dedicate themselves at the altar, as the servants of the poor and distressed, and of Christ and His cause.

 

His suggestion met with a hearty approval, and, accordingly, they solemnly renounced the world. The Brotherhood assumed a uniform habit, which was a plain black robe, with a white linen cross of Light points, fastened on the left breast.

 

Here is the foundation upon which was finally established the great power and influence of the Orders of Knight. hood:

 

No sooner did this remarkable Brotherhood renounce the world, and take upon themselves monastic vows, than Pope Paschal II. commenced. lavishing upon them his favors: He confirmed all their endowments, exempted the property from tithes, and conferred on the brethren the privilege of electing their Superior, independent of all ecclesiastical or‑secular influence.

 

Thus endowed, and thus protected by the head of the Church, it is easy to perceive why it was that the noble band increased, and, with their increase in numbers, wealth also increased, and their popularity became universal. Godfrey was soon left with but two thousand infantry and three hundred horse.

 

The small remnant of the once large army returned to Europe, and such w+ts their account of the battles, and the ORDERS of KNIGHTHOOD.

 

2s ;

 

mphs, that a new zeal filled Christendom with martial qhamor. New companies of Crusaders were formed everyImbere,and resolved to make the attempt to reach the Holy ,.City, and strengthen the hands of Godfrey.

 

Multitudes of pilSr mp abandoned their homes, and, headlong, bent their way to *e tomb of Christ.

 

From the character of this motley crowd, it could but be expected that a large number 'would reach Jerusalem, worn out with fatigue, and totally pennyless, and hpace the Hospitalers found constant employment in mitigatò their suffering.

 

These Palmers, on their return home. far and wide an account of the charitable deeds of the Hospitalers, and so universally were they beloved, that, ere long,olmost every Province in Christendom had given the Hospital manorial rights.

 

Being thus enriched, the Rector erected a fine'ehurch on the _ spot which tradition stated was the retreat of Zacharias, the father‑ of John the Baptist, to whom he dedicated it.

 

He also ‑ increased the buildings necessary for the Hospitalers.

 

But his master‑stroke of policy, was to. connect the Institution more closely with the countries from which it had received endowtpents; to which end, he established subordinate Hospitals, or Commanderies, in"many of the maritime Provinces of the West. here is the origin of the term Commanderies, and of the sub erdinate Institutions of charity.

 

They were so situated, that ey were of inestimable value to the Palmers who were ou their pilgrimage to‑ the Holy Land.

 

Here they found an asylum hem want and penury, and guides to ‑conduct‑*them on " their, 'gay, and guard them from the enemies of the Cross.

 

Of these subordinate Commanderies, we may mention the houses of St: Miles, in Provence; Tarento, in Apulia ; Messina, in Sicily, and Seville, in Andalusia. These Commanderies were severally protected, and granted special privileges by the successive P Godfrey lived to govern Jerusalem but little more than one year, and was succeeded by Baldwin, his younger brother, who, not having the pious scruples of his predecessor, assumed the title, and was proclaimed the first Christian King of Jerusalem. Baldwiu's reign was, literally, eighteen years of warfare..Bv a~ MODERN FREEMA30NRt.

 

his valor and warlike skill. he greatly extended the Christian possessions. During an expedition to the frontiers of Egypt, ~n 1118, he fell a victim to the fatigues of war, and, like hig brother, his remains were consigned to a tomb in the church of the Holy Sepulchre, an honor bestowed upon none but Latin kings in after time.

 

About this period, the venerable (,lerò.rd died, and the Hoapitalera unanimously elected Raymond du Puis as their Chief.

 

With this Chief originated the military character which, in after years, so distinguished the OTdere of Knighthood. Raymond was tried in courts and camps, and when he came to rule over a band of religious friars, whose lives ,were pledged to deeds of benewlence and pure bereeftcence, he became discontented with the simple robe of the Hospftaler, and, thez~afore, favored the project of uniting the duties of the monk with those of the soldier.

 

For this purpose, he gave. to the Fraternity a martial Constitution, which bound the Brother= hood to defend the holy places, and, soon after, it was eo amended, as'to require them to wage perpetual war against the enemies of the Cross. The condition of things, when Raymond was elected Chief, seems to have justified hie plans ; for, all ovw tire country, regularly organized bands of robbers, onsaposed of 5aracena, were to be met with, who watched every opportunity to fall upon Christian pilgrims, and deprive them of their littla ~ll.

 

The Tnrkomans were ever on the watch for a favorable opportunity to rush upon,and destroy the unfortified Christian towns, and massacre the inhabitants.

 

On. the other hand, the Egyptians neglected no opportunity to harraas the Christians; from which,, it will be seen that the Latins had no respite, and it is not wonderful that even the Hoapitalera were willing to take up arms in' defence of the holy cause.

 

They did not abandon their. attention to the sick and wounded, but voluntarily took an obligation to be ready, at all times, to leap into .,heir saddles, and, at the point of the lance, to repel. their enemies.

 

Raymond organized the Hoapitalera into three classes.

 

The, 5rst class was composed of men of patrician ancestry, and high military station ; ~ the second of priests ; and the. third of sere ing men.

 

The first class, he termed Knights of Justice, wta ODDn8 OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

25 rpointed to bear arms, and who enjoyed all the dignities p(kder. The priests were divided; the one part, to perreligious services in the field ; and the other, to attend to iW dufe&

 

There was still another class, called Sergena, itf Knights, who served either in the field or hospital, as k,.,be necessary.

 

This class, afterwards, acquired great ,md added much to the military renown of the Orders of ` iaimdidate could be received into the first class, unless he ~W‑t#at he was of noble descent.

 

At the introduction dk

 

ther,hetook the monkish vows of obedience, poverty, cbasfpy, and the Knightf, in addition, bound themselves to with their swords, the Christian banner.

 

The banner John had a white cross on a red field, and it was agreed spy Knight who should abandon it, or otherwise dishonor Botherhood. in the Paynim war, should be publicly deprived Fps antis and his‑knightly habit.

 

J~wh ww the prevailing enthusiasm for military glory in the f ..was,. that, ere long, the ranks of the devoted Knights trowded with young men of high birth and fortune, from fr1t;istiau land.

 

The Brotherhood could no longer claim osed of Latins, and, for the better regulation of the division of the Order was made to suit seven different viz : of Provence, Auvergne, France, Italy, Arragou, and Germany.

 

7'~a ifrst fame acquired in battle by the Knights was at the O*pg of Antioch, in bloody battle against the Turkomans r

 

nR in 1119.

 

0ant this period,* Hugh de Paynes, Geoffrey de St. Omer, iothee gentlemen of France, formed the praiseworthy keWording protection to the Palmers, on their pilgrimage 4t #lie Holy Land.

 

They imitated the Hospitalers &log their Association consist of both military and religFor several years these nine Knights, destitute of protection from the head of the Church, continued 0 i pilgrims, and guard them against the assaults of m

 

et of Father Hay given the origin of the Templare in 1117.

 

26

 

MODERN FREEMABONRY.

 

rocbers, etc.

 

So obscure were they, that, for several years, no new members joined them, but true to their solemn vows, they continued, with unabated zeal, to devote themselves to the assistanae and protection of the unprotected small companies of Palmers.

 

The fact of their union and their zealous devotion to so praiseworthy an object, reached the ears of the King, and, finally, those of the Pope, and they were, by both, encouraged to persevere.

 

The Pope gave his sanction to their desire, like the Hospitalers, to constitute themselves a military Order. Thus, from this Association of nine poor and friendless men, sprang the Knights Templar, who, for more than twq centuries, equaled, and, in many respects, rivaled, the Hospitalers in power and influence.

 

The Hospitalers encouraged this new Association, granted it means, and, in various ways, assisted to give it character and permanency.

 

The members of this new Order were originally called Soldiers of the Pilgrims.

 

They wore a white mantle over their military dress, as their distinctive insignia, to which was afterwards added a red cross (a symbol of martyrdom), emblazoned on the left breast. Their helmets, in token of humility, had no crest, and their beards remained uncut.*

 

Their banner was of white linen, striped with black, and ornamented with a red cross.

 

Hugh de Paynes, the founder, traveled over a great part of Christendom, in order to make known the objects of the Association, and add to the members.

 

On his return, in 1129, he brought with him three hundred young men of noble families.

 

The Constitution of the Templars, as did that of the Hospitalers, required chastity and obedience‑"and the Ancient Templars are said to have been so outrageously virtuous, that they held it a tempting of Providence to look a fair woman in the face, and scrupled to kiss their own mothers."t

 

From the foregoing historical facts, our Companion Sir Knights will be %ble to gather some truths, which should have due weight in considering the ancient usages of the Order. We shall not undertake to advise a change in the present dress or regalia of the Order, and certainly not to introduce our ancient brethren'@ Ces Mill.' liirnry 4( Cbtvank

 

t Southerland ORDIRS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

‑dread of lovely woman, but we would like to see Sir Knights ‑vtisfied with a regalia approximating more nearly to that Vueiently used.

 

There seems to be no definite understanding as ''the proper dress of a Knight Templar when on parade.

 

We have seen hats and plumes, chapeaux and plumes, of all shapes emd colors, and yet we find that, as a token of humility, our aacient brethren wore no plume or crest of any kind upon their belmets. Why, then, should we seek to do so? The first important support given to this new Association, came from the thaoas Bernard Clairvause, who ably advocated the second *asade.. He gave his special patronage and personal influence $a behalf of the Templars, and was the means of greatly enrich ing their treasury, and adding to their ranks.

 

There were many `gentlemen who, not willing to devote themselves to the servile daties of the Hospital, were nevertheless inclined to devote themselves to the cause of the pilgrimage, and these preferred to join the Templars, as theirs was more strictly a military Order.

 

Before the second Crusade, the Templars had repeatedly distinguished themselves in battle ; indeed, there existed a generous Avalship between them and the Hospitalers, and, in no instance, were either known to shun danger or falter in battle. On the watrary, the Brotherhoods were always foremost in battle, and ss[o wonder that they were soon regarded as the strong arm in The Paynim war.

 

The second Crusade was mainly furnished by France and Germany, and consisted of upward of two hundred thousandwe can not say men, for certain it is that a part of these soldiers, in the second Paynim war, were ladies. There were bands of high born dames, headed by Eleanor, of Guienne, the toneort of the French King.

 

These modern Amazons put on military insignia, and appeared in the parades, but history has ‑failed to award them any further distinction in arms. For this, liowever, an apology might be found by the women's rights party of the present day, as, it might truly be said, that but iew laurels were won in the second Crusade, even by the veteran 'seldiers.

 

In the few noted battles in this Crusade, the Hos ‑pitalers and Templars most distinguished themselves.

 

Conrad SH

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

and the French King, who had the united forces, besieged Damascus, and, but for treachery, occasioned by a wrangle for authority over it when taken, the Brotherhood world have achieved a victory. The treachery spoken of was the work of the Latin Christians of Syria and Palestine, who had learned that Conrad and the King of France had determined to give the government of Damascus to the Count of Flanders, Thierri Soon after the failure of the siege, the two leaders of the army became disgusted with the conduct of the Christians of Syria and Palestine, and, with the remnant of their followers, returned to their homes. having done but little more than " march up the hills, and then march down again." Raymond Du Puis had been Grand Master of the Hospitalers near forty years, and had never yet seen his Knights flee in battle.

 

In 1158, the greatest battle since the taking of Jerusalem, was fought on the plains of Putaha, between the Turkomans and Christians. This was the last witnessed by the venerable Grand Master and here, too, he was permitted to behold the undaunted bravery of the Brotherhood, and the victory of the Christian army, after the fall of six thousand Turkomans.

 

Raymond Du Puis died in the sanctuary of his Order, A.D. 1160,'beloved by all Knights and Christians. ‑ Auger De Bulben, a Knight of Dauphiny, succeeded Raymond, by the unanimous voice of the Brotherhood, who lived to fill the office but about three years.

 

The next Grand Master was Arnaud De Comps.

 

He was advanced in years when his brethren chose him as their head, and lived but a short time, and was succeeded by Gilbert De Sailly.

 

Down to this period the Hospitalers and Templars had moved on in harmony, hand in hand, in all battles. But the King of Jerusalem, having conceived a plan for subjugating . Egypt, mainly with a view to the immense treasure to be thus gained, applied to the Hospitalers and Templars to second his scheme, promising to share with them the spoils.

 

The Grand Master of the Hospitalers readily gave his consent, but his will was subject to the Council or Chapter.

 

This body was much divided, for it had to be admitted that the contemplated in vasion had no connection with their duties, either as Christian 29 sights or Hospitalers, but the temptation was too strong to ~It3'egisted, and the majority decided in favor of the invasion at the King. Large sums were borrowed to meet the expenses, *#d the Grand Master proceeded to hire mercenaries, until his force became a formidable one in numbers. The Templars Vtwmptly spurned the bribe tendered them, as the cause was in no way connected with their duty, and, moreover, because the !invasion would be in direct violation of a treaty signed by the A'ing, and approved by the Hospitalers and Templars. This Wcwdition of Amaury, the.Kipg, proved a total failure, as he bean deceived and out‑maneuvered by the Turkoman and ptian commanders. The expedition returned in 1169. The afad Master, Gilbert, became so universally unpopular, because 4( faise reasons which he had used to obtain the consent of the Council to this unfortunate expedition, that he was forced to resign his office.

 

Gastus was next chosen Grand Master of the Hospitalers, but his government lasted only a few months, vW Joubert, of Syria, was chosen as his successor.

 

About this time, their enemies had made such inroads upon the Christian possessions, that the King of Jerusalem became alarmed, far fear of the total expulsion of the Christians from Palestine, sod sent out an able messenger to beseech the Western Princes to; send another Crusade; and historians say that he left his .kjAgdom under the care of the Hospitalers and Templars, conjglutly, and repaired to Constantinople to solicit the immediate aid of the Emperor Manuel. And now a new enemy appeared, in the person of an Armenian Prince, Milon by name, who, according to some historians, is represented as having been a Templar, while others speak of him as an apostate Hospitaler, who renounced his covenant, to prosecute a claim he had to the ,Aomeignty of his country. It seems that the Latins had favored * pretensions of another aspirant, and this so incensed him spinst the entire Christian band at Jerusalem, that he sought tW most dastardly means of revenge. He entered into a league with the Infidels, and proceeded to overrun the Principality of Autioeh with fire and sword, and soon appeared on the frontiers of Judea. This apostate Knight practiced greater cruelties than wan the Turkomans.

 

Against the Hospitalers and Templare ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

31 feeling indignant at the impudent request, and the unwise course pursued by the King, ran upon the envoy and slew him with hit sword. The King was enraged at this conduct, and demandel of the Templars that Du Mesnil be instantly given into his hands. This the Templars refused to do, alleging that their guilty brother could only be tried by their own laws, and the head of the Church, at Rome.

 

This answer of Odo, the Grand Master of the Templars, was in strict conformity with the privileges granted by the Popes of Rome, nor was it givers with a view to shield the murderer, for he was already in irons, awaiting his legal trial.

 

But this defiance of kingly power was not likely to find favor in palaces, and certainly not in the one at Jerusalem, for, in defiance of Odo's will, the King took Du Mesnil and threw him into prison, from which it is not likely he would have escaped, but for the death of the King, which soon after occurred, 1173.

 

Amaury was succeeded by his son, Baldwin IV., who was not only under age, but a sickly and indolent youth. Raymond, Count of Tripoli, was appointed regent until the King arrived of age.

 

This Prince bad several battles with Saladin, in the first of which he won a great victory, and caused his enemy to make his escape upon the back of a dromedary ; but his triumph was of short duration, as he suffered a terrible defeat at Jacob's Ford, on the Jordan.

 

In this battle the entire Christian army fled, except the Templars and Hospitalers, 'who alone maintained the battle, and, being so few, comparatively, they were mowed down, neither seeking or receiving quarter. The Grand Master of the Hospitalers, Joubert, now in his old age, was covered with wounds, and bravely fought until he saw nearly all his Knights perish, and then threw himself into the Jordan, and succeeded in swimming across it.

 

The Grand Master of the Templars was borne down and captured by the enemy. Saladin offered to exchange him for one of his relations, but the fearless Grand Master refused the proposition, alleging that it would disgrace the Order, who were pledged to conquer or die; ░‑)r their head to set the example of surrender with the hope of being exchanged. It is said, that in this battle, a Templar, named James De Maille, mounted on a white horse, ,32

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

fought so bravely, that the Saracens gave him the title of Saint George, and hoping thereby to acquire his great courage, actually drank his blood.

 

The disasters consequent on this defeat were well nigh fatal to Christianity in Palestine. The Christian army was disbanded, the whole country was overrun by the barbarians, the King was an inefficient, sickly monarch, .Ioubert was incapable of service by reason of his wounds and great age, and Odo, the Grand Master of the Templars, was in close captivity. Tinw were both Orders without a leader. In this eitiemity, the venerable Grand Master of the Hospitalers, over‑estimated his physical powers, by throwing himself at the head of a few chosen Knights into the castle of Margat, to defend it from a strong force sent against it.by Saladin.

 

The defense made by the Knights covered them with honor, as did all their battles. The otd Grand Master beheld the ramparts strewed with the bodies of his brave Knights, and, yet, true to the pledge of the Order, lie spurned the demand to capitulate.

 

At this the enemy became enraged, made a desperate attack, and succeeded in carrying the fortress.. 3oubert, though courting death, was compelled to behold the last of his companions hewn down at his post, and then found himself a captive, tb be thrown into a dungeon, where he was cruelly deprived of the very necessaries of life, and thus terminated his illustrious life, in 1177.

 

The Order elected Roger De Moulins, a Norman Knight, as his. successor.

 

About this time, a series of misunderstandings and petty quarrels rendered the military Orders nearly as hostile to each other as they were to the Infidels. Christian charity and true piety no longer held together the bonds of union, but instead thereof a spirit of rivalry, fed by a desire for office and distinction, created jealousy and hatred, until the cause which they had sworn to mantain was in danger of being lost. For remedy the King appealed to the Pope, who, well knowing that the welfare of Palestine depended mainly upon the united efforts of the Orders' of Knighthood, issued an order commanding them to abandon their feuds, and sign an article of recon,iliation, based upon their pledge to mantain the cause of ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

39 fanity in Palestine, etc., which they reluctantly obeyed, kh, for a time, restored harmony, but afterward seemed to redpen and make wider the breach.

 

in the period above to the year 1186, every thing bad ned unsettled in the kingdom whose crown thus changed New efforts had been made at the Courts of France Ingland for a new Crusade, with but partial effect, and the dealers and Templars continued to wrangle about place. !1611' the storm, so long threatened, burst upon the kingdom. had succeeded in making a traitor of the Count of Trit d, being thus aided by a willing tool at Jerusalem, marcharmy, composed of chosen men, into Palestine, in 1187, Wd siege to Acre.

 

The Grand Masters of the Hospitalers ~Wd:Templars threw themselves into the fortress with a strong 'ready of Knights, who now seemed to forget their quarrels, and unite for the safety of the kingdom.

 

The commanders deteruipned to give battle to Saladin, and, accordingly, marched out '`ore day, and fell upon the sleeping enemy.

 

For a time, conZ3 and confusion took possession of the Saracens, and tory seemed to declare in favor of the Christians, but the ttan presented himself in the midst of his panic‑stricken ldiers, and, by his well known voice, rallied them in battle y: The Knights, to a man, fought bravely and well. The d Master of the Hospitalers repeatedly charged 'the enemy skill and courage. but, at last, his horse received a deadly and, and fell, with his rider under him. The Hospitalers, ig him fall, formed around his body, which thus became the centre of mortal conflict between Christian and Saracen.

 

The ~OodT of the brave De Moulins was found buried under a pile of "dead, chiefly Turkomans and Saracens.

 

He was interred at with the honors of the Order, lamented by all the nation. ier, of Syria, Grand Prior of England and‑Colonel Gem I of the infantry of the Order, succeeded to the Grand chip .

 

To avert suspicion, Raymond, the traitor, proposed to Saladin ;tte should attack his own possessions, and accordingly laid Tiberias.

 

The town fell into the Sultan's hands. but Princess, being ignorant of her husband's treachery, retired s 34

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

with the garrison into the castle, and made preparations for resolute defense.

 

These facts were communicated by Raymond to the King, urging, at the same time, a large force to defend the important place.

 

The King adopted his perfidious advice, drained all his fortresses of the troops for their defense, and croa ded his ranks. with citizens and peasants, who were totally ipor. nt of war, and, thus prepared, took the field.

 

The traitor occupi;,d a. prominent position in this army.

 

On arriving near the po: ition of Saladin, Raymond prevailed with the King to select a position where he knew water could not be procured:. Within . wenty‑four hours, the King discovered his error, by perceiving that lie must either have water or suffer a defeat,and he ordered an attempt to be made to force a passage to the river. The Templars, with their accustomed bravery, volunteered to lead the van, ankrushing upon Saladin, they charged the Saracen line with so much effect that it was immediately broken.. But, at this eventful moment, when it was made the duty of the Count of Tripoli to follow and support the charge, the traitor turned his‑back and fled. His command returned to their former position, and thus the Templars were left at the mercy of the enemy, and were all slain or made captives.

 

The Christians, having failed to make a passage to water, were compelled to pass another night, suffering the torments of thirst. All discipline was lost sight of, and, in this condition, Saladin attacked them, and, with very little resistance, annihilated the entire army.

 

The carnage is represented as being dreadful, as the Infidels showed no quarter, and the life‑blood of thirty., thousand Christians ran in currents among the rocks.

 

Among the captives taken by Saladin were the King, the Grand Master of the Templars, and a. great number of Lords. The Grand Master of the Hospitalers, after performing many feats of valor, and seeing the battle irretrievably lost, cut lxi& way through the enemy and fled to Ascalon,and soon after died.. Saladin spared the lives of all except Reginald De Chatillon who was not improperly put to death, as he had certainly con ducted himself with less humanity than the great majority of barbarian commanders. It, is worthy of remark, that Saladin was not only one of the wisest, but, we. drink, the very best.

 

OHDSES OF HNIG$TBOOD.

 

35 $Wton with whom the Christians had to contend.

 

Deeds of lsevolence and acts of kindness and. mercy were performed by k 1m;

 

all occasions, and these traits of character, together with his sense of stern justice, were witnessed on the occasion above Referred to, While he demanded of Reginald De Chatillou immediately to renounce his religion, and struck his head off on 11ie‑refusal, he did not do so without reminding him of his crimes. He further exhibited his noble traits, by sparing the lives or his other captives, without exacting a. similar indignity. They wore *at prisoners to Damascus.

 

The kingdom of Jerusalem seemed now to be drawing rapidò 1~ to a close.

 

The King and the principal nobility were in captivity, and the military Orders were nearly extinct.

 

The remnant of the Hospitalers met, it is true, to choose a Grand Master, to fill the place of their venerable Chief, who fell at the battle of Tiberias ; but, so far from hearing wringing, for elfice, that of Grand Master was no longer an object of competition, but so evidently pregnant with hardships and perils, that the Brotherhwid, with difficulty, prevailed upon Ermengurd Daps to accept it, which he did, under a solemn conviction that and his companions were only left the privilege of seeking an honorable death, and which, he hoped, would occur before the final fall of Jerusalem. This Grand Master was installed in; 1187.* Soon after the events above recorded, Saladin, who had. Rot been inactive, but continued his conquests, laid siege to Jerusalem, which was now defended: by only a few thousand Christians, a great portion of whom were followers of the Greek Church, end, therefore, hostile to the Latin rule. The Queen, seeing no hope, offered to capitulate, but Saladin, knowing the weakness of her forces, rejected her proposition, and. declared that, if the city did not immediately surrender, he would scale the ram ‑ ports, and avenge himself by an indiscriminate massacre of the the inhabitants, upon whose skirts still hung the Moslem blood shed by Godfrey, of Bouillon.

 

This answer fired the Latins to desperation, and, to a man, they determined to die in defence "One or two historians say thatlis installation took place !n 1151.

 

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

37 ‑the Christian temples to be broken, " and the Patriarchar which had originally been a magnificent mosque, built the Calif Omar, on the ruins of the former Temple of lomon, was carefully purified with rose‑water, and again ted to infidel rites." :After being compelled to admire the character and liberal ng of Saladin, we are surprised to learn that he descended klJielow his high reputation for wisdom and religious toler to order the great cross which surmounted the dome ;fee, L'ttitriarehal church to be torn down, and, for two succesxWe, to be dragged through the streets of the city.

 

*ad now, after near a century of war and bloodshed, in the Christian world bad more or less participated, the ,Sepulchre was once more in possession of the MohamIone, and nowhere in Palestine did the Christian Cross apas' a rallying point to its followers, except at Antioch, &,.and Tyre; and very many Of the fugitives‑from Jernsw xWding their cause as forever lost, left the country and iu the West.

 

0 6utherland.

 

CHAPTER II.

 

Tsa lose of aerusalem, it is, said, so wrought open the fags of Pope Urban III., that he fell a prey to grief.

 

Dismay and sorrow pervaded Europe. The Cardinals at Rome repounced all temporal pleasures, and declared 'themselves and 'flocks as unworthy to wear the name of Christians, so lax

 

as the Holy City remained in possession ‑of the barbarians ; but these loud professions of piety and valor, were afterward proven to be professions only, for when William, of Tyre, besought their personal services in another Crusade, they could only be inducted to recommend others to,engage in it.

 

Philip II., of Prance, and Henry II., of England, agreed to settle their diffictilties, and unitedly enter upon a new Crusade, for the deliverance of the Holy Land from Mohammedan rule, and measures were forthwith adopted to raise the means for fitting‑ out a largo force. Before the expedition was in readiness, Henry died, and was succeeded by his son, Richard I., who was afterward known as Coeur de Lion.

 

He immediately took steps to carry out the plans of his father, in furtherance of the Crusade.

 

Frederick Barbarossa, of Germany, and about seventy of the Princes of his empire, entered heartily into the enterprise, and, indeed, all Christendom, Spain excepted, took part in the new Crusade, the Christian communities alone w thholding their contributions, under the pretest that they should not be taxed to carry on wars, it being their business to pray for the prosperity of Christian arms.

 

The Crusaders commenced arriving at Acre in 1190, and famine began its work of destruction in the. Christian ranks. Here originated a new Order of Knighthood. The German Crusaders, finding that famine and disease were carrying off their brethren‑in‑arms, knew not where to look for relief. About this time, a company from Bremen and Lubeck arrived OBDSRS OF KNIONTHOOD.

 

38 ‑and feeling compassion for their countrymen, who were from Alisease, aggravated by exposure, benevolently Çortuth iplan :of making a large tent from the sails of the ship tbiatlont'the sick were nursed and cared for by those who vAuKamed their services, and thus originated the Teutonic. &4w of Knights, which was confined to the Germans. By an oiiitttvf Pope Celestine, dated February, 1192, this new Order required to frame its laws after those of the Knights Hosso far. as related to benevolence, and after the Templars.

 

ug military operations.

 

This Association was known IM, title of the Teutonic Knights of St. Mary, of Jerusalem. Awiirdrass wns:a white mantle bearing a black cross, trimme& with gold.

 

e' King of France arrived before Acre, which had been beedged by the forces raised by the lute King of Jerusalem, amposed of newly arrived Crusaders, and the then military DrdwL

 

The King of France did not see proper to make ail ANvoWt to :take the city, until the arrival of the King of Engjwi4which.took place on the 8th of June, 1191), who soon after nguished'himself by his bold

 

acing, whence he was styled Awa on hearted King.

 

Mainly owing to his skill and braver* AL*ondactiRg the attack, the city capitulated on the 18th of and the standard of the Cross was once more raised in ,tiatnaus city.

 

But glorious as this conquest was esteemed `0 tua ,dearly purchased, as it is computed that more than one `Imadred thousand Christians perished before the walls, ‑mainly is famine spa# disease.

 

Hospitalers, since the fall of Jerusalem, had held theirr rid quarters at Margat, but now they substituted Acre. Their mod master baying died, they elected Godfrey de Duisson, aged Knight, in 119:1.

 

Tire taking of Acre constituted the only achievement of im, ittanoe effected by this Crusade, for, soon after it, Philip of aeturned to his kingdom, and desertions continued to Uo. ~&e ranks of Richard, until he was left powerless.

 

$ut ‑shad :quite z sufficient force to retake Jerusalem, and, burning desire to 'do ,sa. had approached within. a day's march 4 ‑tile city, and Saladin, feeling his inability to hold ovt 4A

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY against him, was revolving in his own mind the terms of capi. tulation, when, from some cause, a panic fell upon the Christian army, which being composed of volunteers, Richard was not able to restrain them from a determination to abandon the country, and return to their homes. And thus terminated the third Crusade. Richard, on his return to the West, was thrown into an Austrian prison, and soon after died.

 

Scarcely had the Christians deserted Palestine when Saladin sickened and died, beloved by his people and respected by his enemies.

 

Indeed, it may be truly said, that the character of no Christian, engaged in the Paynim war, stands out more resplendently than that of Saladin, who, though a barbarian in name, possessed all the wisdom and virtue of the most refined of his age.

 

Grand Master Duisson died, and was succeeded by Alphonso, of Portugal, 1202. This Grand Master undertook to reform the habits of the Knights so far as to confine them to poor and spare diet, and otherwise to enforce obedience to his will in all things, which rendered him unpopular, and he was compelled to resign.

 

He was succeeded by Geofrai le Rot, a Frenchman, 1203, who found the Order resting on their arms because of the six years' truce, signed by Richard and Saladin.

 

But a failure in the Egyptian crops was producing universal distress in Palestine, and thousands were dying of famine daily.

 

It is said, at this period, the Hospitalers possessed principalities, cities, towns, and villages, both in Asia and Europe, and held, within Christendom, no less than nineteen thousand manors.* The Templars had also large possessions, though nit equal in value to those of the other Order.

 

And, now that Palestine did not require their united services in the field, their ancient jealousies were renewed, which led to several battles, and peace was only finally restored by the interposition of the Pope.

 

About .'this time, another Hermit, or Bernard, made his appearance, in the person of Fulk, a priest of Neuilly. By this man's cunning, the spirit of chivalry, which had only subsided in Europe, was revived, and soon a large number of ' Manor, as here used, signifies the tillage of a plow and two oxen.‑MATasw Aum ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

41 Ir em and men of renown assumed the insignia of the Cross, and. .ph.cing themselves under Boniface, engaged to prosecute another Crusade to the Holy Land. This Crusade engaged the Doge of Venice to transport them by sea to St. Jean d'Acre, but not being able to pay the sum agreed upon, entered into the employment of the Doge, and fought his battles, and afterwards hired to a Greek Prince to do likewise, and thus the Crusade, while it won, as well as wore the name of the fifth Crusade, was, nevertheless, not a Crusade to the Holy Land.

 

In 1206, both the King Lusignan and his consort died.

 

On their death, Mary, daughter of Isabella and Conrad, of Tyre, succeeded to the crown.

 

Palestine being thus again destitute of a king, and the Christians, being convinced that nothing short of an able and efficient Prince could preserve order within, and prevent attacks from without Palestine, sent to the King of France, requesting that he would name a proper person to espouse the Queen.

 

The Sovereign nominated John, of Brienne, a noble Knight of Champagne. The Christians of Palestine built their hopes high upon this union, not doubting the ability of their chosen champion to bring with him a large and disciplined army, but, with his utmost exertions, he was only able. to take with him three hundred Knights. But his fame as a warrior, was of itself a host, and, immediately after espousing the young Queen, lie mounted his war steed, determined to signalize his honey‑moon by deeds . of valor on the frontier of the enemy.

 

But his efforts were vain, as the Sultan was able to bring against him a force which he had not the power to resist. For a remedy, he represented to the Pope the deplorable condition of the Christian cause in Palestine, and besought his aid. The Pope summoned the Princes of the West to meet him in Council, but various causes prevented obedience to this mandate until June, 1215, when a deputation from almost every monarch is Christendom, together with a great number of priests, assem. `bled at Rome.

 

The result of this Council was a unanimous determination to send out another Crusade.

 

Andrew, King of Hungary, was the first leader to unfurl his banner.

 

Joined by the chivalry of Austria and Bavaria, he embarked, with his fol lowers, in Venetian vessels, having despatched an invitation to 42 MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

the Grand Master of the Hospitalers to meet him in Council at Cyprus.

 

The Grand Master, attended by his officers, accord ingly obeyed this invitation.

 

The King manifested the highest veneration for the courage and warlike skill of the Hospitalers, and, at his request, was received as a member of the Order. In giving testimony afterwards in behalf of the Knights of Saint John, the King said : " Lodging in their house, I have seen their feed daily an innumerable multitude of poor; while the sick were laid in good beds, and treated with great care, the dying were assisted with an exemplary piety, and the dead were decently buried.

 

In a word, this noble militia are employed sometimes, like Mary, in contemplation, at other times, 'like Martha, in action ; and thus ‑consecrate their days t(, deeds of mercy, and to a maintenance off constant warfare against the infidel Amalekites, and the enemies of the Cross." The King of Hungary remained with the Crusaders but little more than three months, and though having done but little for the cause, he returned home, leaving the Christian army destitute of a great leader. But this misfortune was soon remedied by the arrival of William, Count of Holland, who broub rt with him quite a large addition to the Crusaders.

 

In a Grand Council called by the King of Jerusalem, it was determined to turn their arms against Egypt, and, first, to attack Damietta, the strongest fortification in that country.

 

Landing near the mouth of the Nile, they debarked, 1215.

 

In this action the Knights distinguished themselves by being al*ays foremost in encountering danger.

 

After long and continued efforts, made with the,most enthusiastic zeal, a machine, invented by the German Crusaders, was brought to bear against the town, and the post was taken. At this timelarge reinforcements arrived in the camp of the Crusaders, and, at their head, was Cardinal Pelagius, a proud, overhearing priest, as Legate from the Holy See.

 

_ Grieved at the straightened condition of his favorite city, Saphadin terminated his reign, by dividing between his sit eldest sons his dominions.

 

Damietta fell to the portion of Coradine, who set his heart upon its delivery, and, being urged on by the same spirit of chivalry which bad actuated his father, he no 'sooner learned the improbability of his being ‑ible to o8D')M oX XNIGRTsOOD.

 

43 Ahrow assistance into the garrison, than he commenced negotialions, and, in his zeal fertile sufferers within, he offered to give I`he Christians Jerusalem, Thoran, and several other cities, and Ao restore the Holy Cross, which his uncle Saladin had taken at Tiberias. The King and the Grand Master of the Hospitalers inclined to accept the offer, but the Legate Pelagius imjected it, and his arguments prevailed with the council.

 

At 'last, after a siege of seventeen months; the city was taken ; and tye‑witnesses tell us that it wore the appearance of one vast l 'tomb‑more than eighty thousand men having perished, and the 'few who were left were so reduced by famine, that they had 'barely strength to crawl from door to door. This victory was Poon after avenged by the enemy, who so hemmed in and sur. rounded the Legate, with water let out of the river, when lie had 'been seduced to a given place, that, no means of escape effering, Ire agreed to restore the captured city.

 

Thus terminated this unfortunate Crusade.

 

The Knights of St. John expended, in this expedition, about eight thousand byzantines in the public service, and yet they did not entirely escape the tongue of slander, as it charged them with appropriating to themselves some temittances from Europe‑all which, however, they triumph. aomtly proved to be false.

 

In 1222, a Grand Council was held at Ferentino, in 'the 10ampagna di Roma. This Council was attended by the Pope, the Emperor Frederick II., grandson of Barbarosa, John de '$rienne, King of Jerusalem,‑ the Patriarch of that city, the Legate Telagius, Guerin De Montaigu, Grand Master of 'the $ospitalers, and Deputies from the Templars and Teutonic Orders.

 

Frederick, who was not inclined to bow very obsequioasly to the Holy See, was induced to take' an interest in' the cause of Palestine, by a promise of marriage to Violante, only daughter of the King, and heiress to the crown of Jernsatem.

 

Thus bethrothed, he promised to lead, within two years, ample forces to expel the Infidels from the Holy Land.

 

But 1here is good reason to believe that the Emperor was better Oessed with the "pomp and circumstance of war," than with 4he 'hardship and dangers of the battle‑field, for he made ,acuses, and delayed this promised expedition four years, and ,44

 

MODERN FREEILA$O1RY.

 

then, being overtaken by a storm at. sea, had a, fit of ague, and, rider the advice of his physician, put into the first harbor, where he remained inactive, until the naturally ill temper of Pope Gregory IX. was so excited, that he publicly excommunicated ,him. This holy curse was, in those days, fatal to every prince, .for all. believed they were doing, God's service, to treat with contempt prince or peasant, against whom the thunders of the Vatican had been poured out.

 

The churches were closed, Lent .was proclaimed, and the people were prohibited all indulgences and pleasures, and Frederick found himself to be the occupant of a throne, without the obedience of his subjects.

 

This Prince .boldly stood out against the tyrannical mandates of the Pope .for a long time, but was finally compelled to supplicate for mercy.

 

During all, this time, the Christians of Palestine were in a deplorable condition.

 

Living under a truce, the military Orders were out of their element, as it were, and were wrangling with each other.

 

The reinforcements sent by Frederick were insufficient, and the Grand Master of the Hospitalers, being most of the time in Europe, they were without a leader in whom . they had confidence.

 

 In 1228, after his excommunication, Frederick arrived at St. Jean d' Acre, where it was not known that he was under the holy curse, but the Pope was not tardy in sending a dispatch with this intelligence, when the Hospitalers and Templars, always obedient to the Holy See, refused to follow his standard. But Frederick had the friendship of the Teutonic Knights, and, with the forces he could command, unfurled his banner, and took up his march. The Hospitalers and Templars could not hear the Christian war‑cry and remain inactive, and, hence, were soon found following, under pretense of protecting the probable retreat of Frederick's army.

 

This Prince knew well the importance of the friendship of these Orders, and soon compromised with them, by agreeing that all orders should be issued in the name of " God and Christendom." Thus were the Knights reconciled, by withholding the name of Frederick from all orders, though known to be issued by him. This army entered Jaffa without opposition; and commenced rebuilding the fortifications. But intelligence soon reached Frederick ORDF'IG9 OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

that the deadly hatred of the Pope was being displayed against him, by an attack upon his Italian dominions.

 

Frederick had, through his agents, sought a reconciliation with the Pope, but His Holiness spurned all overtures, and made war against his authority. This unholy war of Christian against Christian, by order of the great head of the Christian Church, caused all Europe to stand aghast, and especially did all Christendom look with horror upon this deadly strife, when they beheld the merciless butcheries perpetrated to avenge personal hatred.

 

Frederick finally entered Jerusalem in triumph, but here Ira was compelled to behold the extent to which a blind worship of the edicts of the Pope was capable of leading ; for now he was to be crowned King of Jerusalem, but there was no one who dared place the crown upon his head, and he was compelled to take it from the altar of the Holy Sepulchre, and place it upon his own head, and request the Grand Master of the Teutonic Knights to pronounce an eulogium.

 

Here follows some testimony, greatly reflecting upon the honor and integrity of the Hospitalers and Templars. A plot was laid for the purpose of delivering up the Emperor into the hands of the Saracens ; and, though historians differ in their version of its origin, the weight of testimony tends to prove that the Pope was at its foundation, and that he commanded the Knights to perpetrate the dastardly deed, in order that he might be .rid of his enemy.

 

Certain it is, that information was communicated to the Sultan of Egypt, that the Emperor was about to return to Italy, and, immediately before his departure; he would visit Jordan, in order to bathe in its sacred waters, and suggested that a band of Saracens be sent to intercept and put him to death, or make him a prisoner.

 

But the Sultan; proving himself to be more of a Christian, Infidel as he was; than the head of the Church and his sworn followers, received the proposal with abhorrence, and promptly sent the treacherous epistle to the Emperor.

 

This noble act of Coradine led to the most happy results, as it produced negotiations, and, finally, a ten years' truce, and, straage to say, the terms were altogether in favor of the Christians, which must have resulted more froni 46

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

a sympathy felt by Coradine for the Emperor, or. account of the malignant persecutions of the Pope, than from any fear of the Christian army. By this treaty, Jerusalem, Nazareth, Bethlehem, Tyre, and Sidon. were restored to the Christians, with full liberty to rebuild their fortifications. Equal privileges, both civil and religious, were guaranteed to Christians and Mohammedans within the Holy City, and all that was reserved exclusively to the Mohammedans, was the Mosque of the Temple, with the court and enclosure, where they believed their Prophet commenced his nocturnal journey to heaven.

 

No sooner did Frederick return to Europe, than his personal influence decided in his favor the war which the Pope had waged against him. But the moment the head of the Church was whipped at his own game, he availed himself of his imperial prerogative to wreak his vengeance, by adding to the excommunication of Frederick a bull, which absolved the sub jects of the Emperor from all allegiance to him as their lawful prince..

 

This crowning act of Iwly meanness at. once had the effect to humble Frederick, and cause him to supplicate for mercy.

 

Frederick, being now otherwise occupied, failed to send assistance to his subjects in Palestine, and he ceased to feel or care for the country, and, but for the supervision the Hospitalers and Templars exercised over the country, the very order of society, necessary to its existence, would have been destroyed.

 

In 1230, the Grand Master of the Hospitalers died,. and w4b succeeded by Bertrand De Texis.

 

During the Grand Mastership‑ of Texis, a serious dispute arose between the Bishop of Acre and the Hospitalers,. in relation to tithes. The Bishop was foiled at home, and an appeal to the Pope. still further condemned his cause, and justified the course of the Knights, whereupon, this malignant priest instituted a catalogue of charges against the Brotherhood, of a most. serious character. He charged, before tho Pope, ,that the Knights were false to their vows of chastity; kept loose women in their houses;, protected robbers, murder em and heretics. and altered the wills of those who died ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

47 under their care, etc., etc.

 

These charges were most probably as false as were the principles of the Bishop who made them. but such testimony of their truth was furnished, as induced the Pontiff to believe them true, for he dispatched an order, threatening punishment, unless speedy reformation was produced. It is rather singular that we can find nothing on record, going to show that the truth or falsehood of these charges were ever established by investigation, and thus, with the generally upright conduct and consistent morals of the military OrderR, tending to prove them entirely groundless, we are not permitted so to declare by any court of inquiry.

 

In 1231, Bertrand De Tesis died, and ‑was succeeded by Guerin De Montacute.

 

In 1236, Montacute died, and was succeeded by Bertrand De Comps.

 

Palestine, being now deserted by the Emperor, and notbeing subject to his representatives, was divided against itself. In all these disputes, the Hospitalers and Templars were found to be in opposition to each other.

 

Their ancient jealousies were always revived when they were resting upon their arms.

 

In short, it would seem, from the history of these Orders, that their noble bearing and high moral integrity were best seen on the battle‑field. The Hospitalers were no longer the humble attendants upon the sick, but arrogant tyrants, under the influence which their immense wealth bestowed upon them.

 

The Templars, though not so wealthy, were, nevertheless, possessed of large estates, and they, too, had become slaves of their passions. At this period, had not the Sultans of Egypt and Damascus been at variance, Palestine could have been easily overrun and conquered ; but both these Sultans were striving for the friendship of the Knights, and, hence, neither was inclined to make war upon the Christian possessions.

 

Indeed, so feeble had been the forces of the Latin Christians from the days of Saladin, that, at almost any time, Palestine could have been wrested from the followers of the Cross, had there been concert of action between the Mohammedan rulers.

 

About this time, another effort,was made in Western Europe to get up AM another Crusade into the Holy Land.

 

The truce 'a

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

which had been sinned by the Sultan of Egypt and the Emperor Frederick had expired, and the Sultan, hearing of the contempla ted Crusade, determined to drive the Latins out of Jerusalem. Soon after, the vanguard of the seventh Crusade landed at Acre, under command of Thibald, Count of Champagne. The Infidels allowed them to reach Ascalon without opposition, but, near Gaza, they were completely defeated by an inferior body of Saracens, and Thibald returned in haste to Europe.

 

The Earl of Cornwall, brother of Henry III., King of England, arrived soon after Thibald's departure. Cornwall brought with him the chivalry of England, and boldly advanced to Jaffa. where lie was met by an envoy from the Sultan of Egypt, with a proposition for a new truce. This led to a treaty, whereby it was stipulated that Jerusalem should become entirely a Christian city ; that the Christians should possess all the villages betweeu the capital and the coast, and that they should be at liberty to fortify all the restored posts. To this treaty the Hospitalers gave their assent, but inasmuch as they had refused to sign the one previously entered into by the Templars, the latter, influ enced by spleen, refused their approval of this.

 

This produced great confusion, for, notwithstanding there were two truces, one of the Orders continued at war with the Sultan of Egypt, and the other with the Sultan of Damascus, and these two Sultans being at variance, there seemed but little hope of terminating the matter by amicable negotiations.

 

But whatever feelings animated the bosoms of the jealous Knights, all Christian hearts were once more rejoiced to behold the insignia of the Cross, from the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea. Priests now returned in swarms to the city of Jerusalem. The churches were cleansed and reconsecrated, and the Hospitalers expended everything in their treasury, and levied contributions from other Command cries, in order to insure the rebuilding of the fortifications.

 

Grand Master Bertrand de Comps died in 1241, under the following circumstances : The Turkomans having invaded the territories of the Prince of Antioch, lie entreated the assistance of the military Orders, and the Grand Masters of the Hospitalars and Templars promptly responded to the call, led their Knights to the scene of war, and gave the Infidels battle. In this bloody ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

49 Conflict, both armies fought with intrepid valor.

 

Indeed, the Infidels fought so resolutely, that the Grand Master of the Hospitalers became enraged, and threw himself headlong into the midst of the, enemy's squadrons. .This daring act was mainly instrumental in defeating the enemy, but the Grand Master came forth so wounded, that he survived but a short time.

 

t The Chapter chose, as, the nest., Grand Master, Peter de Ville.

 

bride.

 

I'G CHA"PTRR 11r.

 

THE Christian population of the Holy City had uow increased to about six thousand, but the rebuilding of the walls advanced but slowly. Thus defenceless, the Korasmians, a savage people from the shores of the Caspian, who had been driven from their deserts by the arms of the Moguls, now, like an avalanche, poured into Palestine, in 1243.

 

These " Parthian shepherds" practiced their peculiar Pagan rites, and were equally hostile to Christians and Mohammedans, and Christians and Mohammedans saw it to be alike their interest, to unite and drive back this threatened tornado. of merciless beings; but their combined efforts were vain.

 

Had Malek Kamel, the late wise and generous Sultan of Egypt, lived, it is quite probable that the result would have been different; but his successor, Nogemadin, stood aloof.

 

Feeling himself secure, he cared little for his brethren of Aleppo and Damascus, and still less for the fate of the Christians of Palestine.

 

He not only refused to take part in the struggle, but, professing to have some cause of complaint against the Templars, hb communicated with the' Korasmian leaders, and informed them of the defencelessness of Jerusalem.

 

The Korasmians had been driven, with merciless barbarity, from their homes, and, with no less barbarous feelings, they aought a new home, careless in what direction it might be found, or at what expense of blood. Barbacan, their Chief, no sooner received this information, than, at the head of twenty thousand horse, he speedily entered Palestine, before the Christians were aware of his intentions.

 

The military Orders, as we have intimated, were generally quarreling in time of peace; but the war‑cry of the Cross united them as brothers. They were now the only hope for the defence of the Holy City, and they at once saw that resistance would not only be vain, but, finally, fatal to the ir habi. tants, and, therefore, all were enjoined to evacuate the city, and ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

5 1, repair to Jaffa.

 

The Knights went not to Jaffa ; but, taking to the open country, prepared to seek a favorable opportunity to give the enemy battle.

 

Some of the inhabitants of the city, who could not bring themselves to consent to leave it, threw up some temporary defences, and determined to remain. The Korasmians found no difficulty in overcoming this feeble opposition, and, entering the city, sword in hand, spared neither age nor sex.

 

That they might celebrate their victory with still more massacres of defenseless human beings, they replanted the Christian standards upon the towers, and, thus deceived, many re. turned, as they thought, to their houses and their friends, onl~ to be butchered by the barbarians.. The Holy Church of Cal= vary was profaned by these barbarians, and, that they . might seem less merciful than the wild beasts of` the forest, they 001lec'ted, and drove to the Holy Sepulchre, a crowd of old men; nuns, and helpless children, and there massacred them, as if for pastime.

 

We pause, at this point in our history, to contemplate, as we may be permitted, the wonder‑working mysteries of divine Providence. If we turn our thoughts back, and behold the, pride and pomp of the various armies sent forth from all Europe, for no other purpose than to win, by their blood and treasure, possession of that spot of ground where, it is supposed, one* rested the body of our Saviour; if we undertake to enumerate the millions of lives sacrificed, in order to keep up the show of Christian devotion, and more firmly to establish the divine and temporal supremacy of the head of the Church, and, above all, if we remember that the whole originated in a deep laid scheme to bring the world under subjugation to the See of Rome, we shall wonder less why it was that the splendid military achievements of kings and princes were made to vanish into nothingness, before a wild, unknown, and unlooked for bafld of barbarians, at a time when Christendom was beginning to regard the Holy Land as permanently and peaceably in possession of the nominal friends of the Cross. Can we believe that, if the cause of the Crusaders, concocted and put on foot by the Pope, had been the cause of Christ and His holy religion, tha God of battles wpuld have permitted twenty thousand strangeM 59

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

without opposition, to enter the Holy City, never more to be regained or occupied by a Christian people? Well might Fuller, after recounting the thrilling incidents connected with its history,, exclaim:‑" Sleep, Jerusalem, sleep in thy ruing; at this day of little beauty and less strength: famous only for what thou hast been." After the fall of Jerusalem, the Sultan of Egypt sent a body of troops to cooperate with the Korasmian leader, while tl+e Sultan of Damascus gave assistance to the Christians, at, the earnest solicitation of the Knights. Thus situated, the Koranmian strength was numerically much the greatest, and yet the Christians gained several inferior victories, till,, at length, at the urgent solicitation of the Patriarch, who, for the time, laid aside his holy calling, in order to give aid to military, operaò tions, it was determined to hazard a general engagement. All. things being, ready, the war‑cry, was heard, and the Christians_ went into the fight with high hopes of victory, tbough the enemy stood five to one in the field; and to render this inequality much greater, no sooner did the battle rage with. fierce. ness than, through fright or treachery, the troops sent by the Sultan of Damascus broke ground and fled.

 

Thus deserted,. 'out not dismayed, the Christians stood their ground, and fought valiantly for two whole days.

 

Hospitalers and Templars vied with each other,: to be, foremost in the battle, and, by their prowess; the field was strewn with the slain of their enemies:;, but their lances were too few, to penetrate the dense barriers= continually being filled up and presented against them, and, finally, borne down by the might of numbers, the Christian; Knights, one. by one, yielded up their lives at the foot of their banner.

 

The Grand Master of the Hospitale A, the Grand. Master of the Templars, and the Commander of the Teutonic Knights, each and all fell valiantly fighting at the head of their companions, and there escaped only thirty‑tree Templars, sixteen Hospitaler#, and three Teutonic Knights.

 

This disastrous and bloody battle was fought on the sew coast, near Gaza, 1244, and well nigh completed the ealwnidep of the Holy Land; for it almost annihilated: these valiant band& of military Knights, who from the. days of Godfrey htwl

 

, ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

`SH the bulwark of Palestine‑the strong arm of tire Paynim war. "The little remnant who escaped the Infidel massacre ░threw themselves into Acre, where the Hospitalers chose William De Chateauneuf as their Grand Master.

 

:Scarcely had the refugees recovered from exhaustion, and before they had time to seek reinforcements, or even to organize for defence, the Korasmians, with their Egyptian allies, encamped before Acre, at the same time that they invested ‑Jaffa. Sir Walter de Brienne, the Lord of the latter city, had been taken captive in the late battle, and now, in order to :strike terror into the hearts of the inhabitants; and induce them to yield without an effort, the Korasmians showed him, sitting ,on a gibbet.

 

But, to the surprise of his enemies, lie earnestly addressed his soldiers, beseeching them to put no faith in the promises made to them.

 

This magnanimous daring was not punished by his immediate death, but he was reserved for even a worse fate, in an Egyptian dungeon.

 

Here, again, we would pause in wonder and astonishment, xt `the handiwork of divine Providence. After the entire chivalry of Europe had, for near one hundred and ninety years, contended manfully and successfully against the united powers; of the East, for possession of the Holy Land, an obscure tribe of barbarians, unknown in the annals of warfare, indeed, scarcely heard of as inhabitants of the earth, suddenly burst upon the Syrian deserts, march to, and, almost without a blow, take possession of the Holy City, despoil and desecrate every venerated relic, and then, with irresistible force, devastate and destroy wherever in Palestine they directed their course.

 

And to render this mystery the more remarkable, this very people had scarcely accomplished the seemingly destined object of their mission, when a fatal spell appeared to fall upon them.

 

They bad scourged the Latin Christians ; but, in turn, a still more fatal scourge was pending over their own heads. Domestic quarrels arose in their camp, deadly feuds ensued, and, man to man, they were seen in mortal combat.

 

Like locusts they had suddenly overrun the Syrian deserts, and when they bad strip.. ped the country of its beautiful foliage, they commenced devour, ing each other.

 

And still a greater number fell by the hands 54

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

of the Syrian peasants, who, finding all organization and concert of action abandoned by these barbarians, pursued and destroyed them wherever they wandered over the country. So fatally did the two causes above named operate upon the Korasmians, that before the final expulsion of the Latin Christians from Palestine, this tribe of barbarians were annihilated, for, from that period, their existence is not known‑their name is scarcely mentioned in the history of the world.

 

The Patriarch of Jerusalem and his Bishops laid before Pope Innocent IV. the facts of the desolation of that City, and depicted the horrid massacre of the brave champions, in such terms as moved to tears his counselors, and they united in beseeching the Pope to summon, once more, the Christian nations to. send out another Crusade to the Holy Land. While Jerusalem wa^ being taken. and the Christian banner down‑trodden, the banner of St. John was waving triumphantly against the Moors in Spain, and the Tartars in Hungary ; and, even before the news of the fall of Jerusalem was known, the western nations were agitating the eighth Crusade; and, though their enthusiasm was not so wild as in former times, a Council at Lyons decided that a Crusade should be preached throughout Christendom.

 

Nor was that preaching in vain, when the eloquent speakers depicted the sufferings and inhuman slaughter of the followers of Christ, at the verge of the tomb of our Saviour.

 

Louis IX., of France, a Prince of the best virtues, having pious notions, partaking of extravagance, while suffering under a painful sickness, made a vow to visit the Holy Land with an army, if God would restore him to health.

 

As soon as this was known, his three royal brothers, the Counts of Artois, Poitiers, arid Anjou, and also the Duke of Burgundy, with numerous friends, announced their determination to follow him.

 

When the King assumed the Cross, he threw off all pomp, exchanging the royal purple for the pilgrim's habit.* The military Orders were everywhere encouraged by the prospect of efficient aid, and they drew from the European Bi*ry of St. Lore&, by Joinville.

 

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

55 Prf Ties their men and treasure ;but three years elapsed before the King of France was prepared to take the field.

 

0a the 12th of June, 1248, Louis went in procession to the Abbey of St. Dennis, where the Pope's Legate, in solemn form, delivered to him the Oriflamme,* with the Palmer's scrip and staff. Having made his mother, Blanche, regent of his kingdom, he embarked.for Cyprus, and arrived at that place on the 28th of August.

 

In consequence of the slow arrival of his forces, Louis was detained at Cyprus eight months, during which time he was piously engaged in advancing the Christian cause. Through his influence, a reconciliation was effected between the Hospitalers and Templars, who had imbibed some little jealousies; and now that they were once more on good terms, they consulted Louis as to the best manner of effecting the liberation of those members of their respective Orders; held as captivesby the Sultan of Egypt, and, it is said, the propriety of entering into amicable arrangements with the Mohammedan Prince; which proposition, Louis, in his Christian zeal, rejected with disdain.

 

This incident, unimportant as it may seem, gave rise to a charge of grave importance against the Templars. Though the proposition, if made at all, came equally from both Orders, yet the enemies of the Templars, only, effected anything. They charged that the Grand Master of that Order was a secret ally of the Sultan, which bad been entered into, by each opening a vein and causing their blood to mingle in the same bowl. We have examined with some care for proof of the truth or falsehood of the above allegation, and have to confess, that we are still left in doubt.

 

On the one hand, we know that the Templars had ever been governed by that well nigh inhuman law, which made it their duty to abandon any member of the Order, who would suffer himself to be taken alive by the enemy from which it would seem unreasonable to suppose they would, on the occasion referred to, not only depart from this' law; but also propose an alliance with their bitterest enemy. On the other hand, we find nearly all the writers, including Joinville, teem to favor‑the truth of the charge,

 

Fuller tells as. that the Oriflamme. the banner of St. Deanis.

 

v 50

 

MODERN: FREEMA&MY.

 

custom of giving sanctity' to' treaties, by suffering; the blood of the parties to flow into the same bowl, belonged to the Infidel nations‑that they were 'in the habit of mixing the blood,, mingled with'wiiie,'and drinking it as a sacred ‑libation. The Knights Templar, of the present day, think they have strong reasons for believing, that this,` or a very, similar =custom, was practiced by the 'Order' 'itself, and, therefore, suppose it to be of Christian origin.

 

Louis, at length;'haaing received all his forces and supplies, accompanied by his Quoen and the Princes Charles and Robert, made ready to spt sail for the Paynim coast, on Trinity Sunday, 1249: And what a'spectacle was there presented l eighteen hundred sails dotting the seas of Cyprus, ' within full view. France had been almost depopulated, and its treasuries exhaust ed, to gratify the pious King.

 

Sixty thousand men were here being led by that wild and misguided zeal which had been enkindled, mainly, by designing Popes, and had already cost Christendom millions' upon millions of treasure, and thousands upon thousands of lives.

 

 About a week after he set sail, Louis, clothed in complete armor, and overshadowed by the Oriflamm, leaped upon the shore of Egypt, and gave battle to the enemy, who wero there ready to receive him. This battle was of short duration, but though the Christians were victorious, it was not without a hard struggle, and the loss of many valuable lives.

 

At Damietta, near where he landed, Louis was ‑joined by the two Grand Masters of the military Orders, from Acre, at the head of a band of chosen Knights; and, also, by Longespee, the fellow‑crusader of Cornwall, who, on this occasion, suffered his earldom to be confiscated. rather than obey his King, and remain at home. 'Louis called a Council, and, while the older and more experkence4 soldiers recommended ,an attack upon Alexandria, and 'a cautious movement onward, he yielded to the advice of his brother, Count of Artois, ‑backed by some young and impetuous Barons, and marched direct for Grand Cairo. On their march they found no inhabitants, or appearance of the enemy, until they came near Massoura, when five hundred Egyptian horsemen came forward, and reported ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

ST themselves as deserters from the Mohammedan army.

 

The wing received them without suspicion, and made guides of them. detachment of the Templars, having advanced a considerable try ahead of the main army, the Mamalukes suddenly drew 'heir swords and charged them with fury.

 

But the Knights were not to be intimidated by Saracen war‑shouts ; they rallied 4tronnd their intrenid Grand Masters, and bravely kept their ground until reinforced, when the Mamalukes were slain to ~a ~lnan.*

 

The King came up with the enemy, encamped on the '.ink of the Asbmoum Canal, which was too deep to ford, and ‑the attempted to throw a bridge across it, but the enemy set fire to and burned the timbers as fast as they were put up.

 

At lftngth, an Arab yielded to a large bribe, and pointed out a 'lord, which the Count of Artois begged leave to secure.

 

The King, fearing to trust entirely to so rash and headstrong a `leader, hesitated, but, finally, agreed to it, on condition that Knights of the Hospital and Temple should take the van, Abe Count pledging himself to go no further until the main "srmy came up.

 

At the head of fourteen hundred Knights and ''lao hundred English Crusaders, under the celebrated Longespee, the Prince threw himself into the ford, and, though they were "stet on the opposite bank by three hundred Egyptian horse, they passed the ford with but slight loss. ‑ But no sooner was this effected, than the Count forgot his pledge, and, in despite 'of the warning of the Knights, pursued the fugitives to their `tintrenchment, and entered pellmell.

 

A panic seized the enemy, `who supposed the whole Christian army were upon them, Iastily fled, and, even the garrison of Massoura, threw open its gates, and joined their countrymen.

 

The Prince, carried away `by his success, instantly proposed to the Grand Masters, to ':proceed at once to storm the town. The Knights entreated '‑him to pause until the main army came up, urging that, as soon ~as the Saracens should discover their small number, they would tally in full force, and cause them a disastrous defeat.

 

The 'Prince answered: " I now see that it is not without reason that the Knights of the Temple and Hospital are accused of favoring Camden.

 

troops to oppose the approach of the King.

 

And now com menced the work of slaughter.

 

The inhabitants of the town, perceiving the small number of the Christians, openly attacked them in the streets, and stones, arrows, and Greek fire were showered down upon them from the tops of the houses.

 

It is Eaid that the Count, seeing all was lost, repented of his harsh language, and cried out to Longespee : "Fly, fly, for God fights against us."

 

The English Earl replied: " God forbid that my father's son should fly from the face of a Saracen ;" and, though unhorsed and wounded, he dashed into the thickest of the fight, and gave up his gallant spirit on a pile of the slain.

 

Only three Templars, four Hospitalers. and three Teutonic Knights survived. The Grand Master of the Hospitalers was captured, and the Grand 11Saster of the Templars, with the loss of an eye, and covered with wounds, cut his way through the enemy, so exhausted from loss of blood, as to be barely able to reach the King;* who, enraged at the account of the battle, charged the Egyptian army in,person, and was ever to be seen in the thickest of the fight.

 

The Grand.Master of the Templars, in this onset, received a wound in the other eye, which terminated his life.

 

The Christians and Saracens each claimed the victory of this battle ; but, be this as it may, it was fatal tt the Christians.

 

The Saracens cut off all communication between the Christian army and the coast ; the air became pestilential, from the unburied slain, and a fatal disease was added to famine. Louis was contemplating a retreat, when the Saracens burst into his camp, and commenced a general slaughter of the sick and helpless.

 

The King, though laboring under disease, seized his battle‑axe, and rushed to the scene of conflict.

 

Sir Godfrey Sergines finally withdrew Louis, and carried him to a village, where he was afterward taken prisoner, together with the Counts of Anjou and Poitiers, and nearly all his followers who remained alive.

 

Louis ransomed himself and his army, by the payment of about sixteen thousand livres, and a ten years' truce was agreed to ; and the King, with the remainder of his army departed thence, 1250, to Acre, where he remained about ò 7otnville.

 

‑t'3O

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Four years, 'not being willing to return to France without accomplishing something for the cause of Christianity. During his stay at Acre, lie received a message from the Old Man of the Mountains, who sent two of his Assasins to demand the usual tribute, or safety bribe. These messengers stated that Frederick, of Germany. Andrew, of Hungary, the Sultans of Egypt, and many other monarchs, had paid it, knowing that their lives were, at all times, in the hands of the old Chief, and that Louis must either pay or obtain the Old Man's exemption from the tribute, . ivliiclt lie was bound to pay to the Grand Masters of the Temp Tars and Hoapitalers.

 

On being asked why they did not sacrifice the Grand Masters, they replied that if a Grand Master be slain, anctlier would, at once, spring up, and nothing would be effected.

 

The King refused to pay, or negotiate with the messengers, but referred them to the Grand Masters, who declared !hat their characters as deputies alone saved them from being thrown into the sea, and ordered them to return, and tell their Chief that, if lie did not make satisfaction to the King, for the insult, within fifteen days, the Knights of the two Orders would see to his chastisement.

 

Within the time, a present of a shirt and a ring, was sent to the King, as a token of friendship and protection.

 

In the four years Louis remained at Acre, we find nothing which can satisfactorily account for that sojourn from his kingdom. True, he rapaired the fortifications of that city, and rebuilt two or three at the neighboring towns, and left some. troops and money with the Syrian Christians ; but, in all that transpired during this, or the second Crusade, made in his old age, we find nothing, save a wild zeal'for the Church, calculated to give him character or renown.

 

He almost beggared France, by draining its treasure, and made thousands of widows and orphans, by, the lives which lie sacrificed in the Paynim war ; but we are left in doubt Whether either, or both, called for his canonization.

 

Palestine being without a king, the Grand Masters of the two Orders were now in unlimited power, and none were better qualified for the trust, lead there been the proper good feeling subsisting between the Orders themselves ; but, unfortunately, ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD. ò

 

61 while they knew that. party feuds, among the Syrian Chris. `1ksns, were at the foundation of the most of their troubles, and, NW.the kingdom of Jerusalem could not be maintained, except. 1W concert of action, still were, they ever ready to burst out in.. open, quarrels, superinduced by a jealous watchfulness as to pre"dency, and an ambitious desire each felt to obtain superior military renown.

 

When engaged against the common enemy,.

 

wire ever united, and equally invincible; but no sooner : they resting under a. truce or treaty, than their quarrels "ld be renewed, leading often to bloody conflicts between.

 

s *liridual Knights, and, sometimes, skirmishes,. or hard fought "`4attles between detachments. In 1259, a battle was fought by. 0 the distinguished Knights of both Orders, and, so desperate. was the conflict, that, though the Hospitalers proved victorious; it. was not accomplished until the last Templar had fallen. Before the Templars could gather, from their European Comò manderies, a sufficient force to avenge this defeat, their attention was called off by a. demand for their united efforts against the enemy. In this year, the Grand Master of the Hospitalers, William De: Chateauneuf, died, and was succeeded' by Hugh De Revel.

 

Shortly after his installation, Pope Alexander IV. gave authority to this Order to wear a black cloak (clamydes nigras) hospital, and a red tunic and a white cross‑ in: camp, to. disdaguish them from the"Serving Brothers,"* and further honornd diem, by giving their Commander the title of Grand Master.

 

Bendocdar, the Mamaluke. who defeated' Prince Robert, and Bnally captured Louis, made his wary to the Egyptian throne ,means of superior talents, aided by assassination, and com, seneed his reign by invading Palestine. He demolished the churches at Nazareth, and fortress of Mount Tabor, and then hwested the. Castle of Assur (1265), where ninety chosen Hoe.

 

tilers were among the defenders.

 

Bendocdar, finally took the Castle, but not until. he was compelled, in the breach,. to walk over the dead body of the last of the Christiansä for every fell doing battle.t In 1266,.the Knights‑.of the Temple met a similar fate: Aft .

 

ò Sebastian Pao&

 

t Vertot.

 

62

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

ravaging all that country around, Tyre, Tripoli, and even to the vicinity of Acre, Bendocdar laid siege to Saphet, which made a brave defense, but, at length, the Prior of the Temple, who was Governor, seeing that resistance could no longer be maintained, agreed to capitulate on condition that his Knights, and other troops, six hundred in all, should have safe convoy to a Christian station. But, as soon as their arms were surrendered, Bendocdar very cooly informed them, that they had the liberty of choosing between conversion to Islamism and death.

 

The Prior at once chose death rather than apostacy, and such was the decision of all.

 

Bendocdar, maddened with with their firmness, ordered the Prior to be flayed allve, and a general slaughter of the others ensued.*

 

Thus were the Templars in Palestine, once more almost totally destroyed. Bendocdar followed up his triumphs, reduced Jaffa, the Castle of Beaufort, and marched to Antioch, which great city, through fear, threw open their gates to the merciless barbarian who rewarded their cowardice by putting to death seventeen thousand, and carried into slavery one hundred thousand.

 

He then besieged Karac, occupied by the Knights of St. John, who refused all offers of capitulation, and the Sultan finally entered the city over their remains.

 

In 1271, Louis, King of France, raised another army, larger than his first, with the hope, in his old age, of retrieving his character as a military chieftain, by driving the Infidels from Palestine. Prince Edward, of England, agreed to join him in Leis the ninth and last Crusade;, but Louis' mighty, army never reached the Holy Land. Edward having withdrawn from Louis, very soon after the Crusade took up its march, carried his little force of one thousand men directly to Acre.

 

His arrival inspired new hope in the hearts of the Christians, and, notwithstanding the small force, the Sultan became uneasy, and withdrew his troops, apprehending that Edward, a descendant of ‑ Ceeur‑de‑Lion, would snatch from him his well‑earned laurels. Edward attacked and retook Nazareth, and put the enemy to Right, but stained his name with unwonted cruelty to his ò Mills' Hint. of tlu Gtirumdat.

 

prisoners.

 

Sickness attacked his army, and he himself, suffering with disease, narrowly escaped three several efforts of a hired assassin, who, by a false tale, gained admittance, and thrice wounded him with a poisoned dagger, when the Prince dashed him on the floor, and, with the same dagger, stabbed him to the heart.* The Princess Eleanor, Edward's consort, it is said, saved his life by sucking the poison from his wound.

 

Edward assisted the Knights in obtaining a ten years truce with the Sultan, and, with his followers, returned to England.

 

And now we behold Palestine deserted by every Christian monarch, and left solely to the defense of a little broken band of Hospitalers and Templars. Thus situated, the two Grand Masters, availing themselves of the truce, started together to Europe, hoping to induce the Western Princes to send aid to the Holy Land.

 

Gregory %. then filled the Chair of St. Peter, and the Grand Masters found him using all his influence to stir up another Crusade.

 

He summoned a Council, which met at Lyons, on the 2nd of May, 1274, when it was determined again to arouse Christendom to raise another Crusade.

 

Two emperors and two kings pledged themselves to this Crusade. and great hopes were entertained for the result, but before any thing was accomplished Gregory died, and with him the enterprise.

 

The Christians in Palestine thus left unaided, were, to a great extent, at the mercy of the Infidels, who soon found reason to ‑declare the ‑truce violated, and at an end, and, sending army after army, Bendocdar and his successor took place after place, until, in 1278, Acre alone remained in possession of the Christians, and it became filled with refuges, from all parts of Palestine. About this period Henry IT., of Cyprus, was de. olared King of Jerusalem; and he obtained a truce, which deferred the downfall of the last Christian possession in Pales4ine. The Grand Master of the Hospitalers now visited Rome. and appealed to the Pope, Nicholas IV., for si3, and obtained Sfteen hundred men‑the scum of all the lta::an States, why proved to be but a band, of robbers. Acre being already 0 Fuller's Holy ‑Par.

 

6+

 

]LODERAI FREEIKAS"YY.

 

crowded with a disorganized population, the introduction of thaws, base soldiers tended but to add to the disorder, and hasten ita, downfall. Strange, that at this, the most critical, it', indeed. not the most desperate period of the, Christian cause, the Chris,, tians themselves could not be brought to submit to a sound and rational government, but, instead, there were no less than seven, teen tribunals, all claiming superior control.* The troops furnished by the Pope, soon displayed their true, character, by making marauding excursions upon the Moharw; melon settlements, and thereby, gave cause to the Infidels to declare the truce violated.

 

The Sultan, however, demanded only a reasonable indemnity, which the Grand Masters earnestly urged the propriety of granting, but there was, in truth,. no organized head to whom the appeal could be made with success, and the Sultan was driven to make preparations for. a renewal of war, and soon raised a mighty army. But on his march he was poisoned by his Lieutenant‑General, and, upon his death‑bed, enjoined. it apon his son, Khalil, to reduce Acre.

 

Qn the 5th of April, 1291, Khalil, with an army of sixty. thousand horse, and one hundred and forty thousand foot, sar. rounded the city, the last that. Christian chivalry was destined to behold.

 

Many of the inhabitants fled to the vessels in the bay.

 

By acclamation, Peter De Beaujeq, Grand Master of the Templars, a Knight of. known ability and valor, and " who had grown old in the command of armies," was called to the corn, mand.

 

The first effort of the Sultan was to bribe the Grand Master, but his. advances were met with so much scorn by the old Knight, that he very soon learned that if he entered the city at,all; it must be by force,

 

And now the last stronghold of the Christians in Palestine is attacked by an overpowering force: Again and‑ again, the Grand Master sent out a sortie, until the very. atmosphere became tainted with the blood of the Saracens, slain by. the matchless skill and, indomitable valor of the Chris. %tan Knights; but all in vain, for the enemy were too, numeroge to be conquered or driven back by the few thousand Ghrisuanq.

 

' Fa11er ORDEii3 OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

The Sultan, sure of his power and ultimat6 'success, slowly moved forward his works. He burrowed under the fortifie*~ Lions, threw down towers,‑among which was the Cursed Tower, which was looked upon as the chief defense of the city. In this tower the King of Cyprus commanded'his Islanders; and maintained a desperate conflict until night came on, but then lie prevailed on the Teutonic Knights to take his'p'.ace,and adopting the safest personal argument known to the soldier, viz., He who fights and runs away, May live to fight another day," Basely deserted his post, drew off his men, fled to the ships, and sailed for Cyprus.

 

Next morning the horns of the Saracens announced a renewal of the assault. The Teutonic Knights, though basely deserted, defended the breach with irresistable fury, but, like chaff before the storm they were swept away by the numerous foe.

 

And now they are being overpowered, the shout of the Saracens is heard, proclaiming their triumph, but, at this critical moment, the Marshal of Saint John flew to the rescue of the German Knights, and, so impetuous was the united charge, that the Saracens were driven back through the breach, leaving it almost choked up with the slain.

 

On the following day these scenes of blood and carnage were acted over again. Phalanx after phalanx of the Saracens were broken, but, as if careless of human lives, the Sultan ordered forward another and another, until the Knights were exhansteA with the slaughter of their enemy.

 

Night parted the combat ants again. The next morning the Infidels made an assault upon that portion of the fortifications where the two Grand Masters fought, who knew how desperate was the conflict, and fought as if they were seeking only an honorable grave.

 

Nor Were the Saracens less brave, but, ‑eeming determined to rival the renowned Knights, they often selected man for man, and died, shoulder to shoulder.

 

But the work of death was telling rapidly upon the smaller force‑the Knights were sinking down, one by one, until the living were so few that they could not hope for victory.

 

And now the brave Marshal of the Hospitalers has fallen in the breach, seeing which, the Grand Mast u a 05 BA

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

of the Templars turned to the Grand Master of Saint John, and exclaimed: "We can hold out no longer! The day is lost unless you make a diversion against the enemy's camp, and allow us time to refortify our post." Calling on a few chosen lancers to follow him, John De Villiers leapt into his war‑saddle, and, with five hundred horse, he dashed out of the city, into the open plain.

 

But the Sultan was prepared for every emergency ‑his cavalry soon drove back the detachment, and, on reenterò lng the city, he learned that the Governor, Peter De Beaujeu, had fallen by a poisoned arrow, that the flower of his Knights lead fallen, and that the Saracens were victorious everywhere: The Grand Master, seeing further efforts to be vain, turned his attention to the safety of the little band who crowded around ‑trim, ready to do and die at his bidding.

 

He, with his few remaining followers, fought their way to the deck of a vessel. Three hundred Templars, who endeavored to do the same, were surrounded by an overwhelming force, and they threw themselves into the Tower of the Temple; determined to perish in its ruins.

 

After several days of brave resistance (when they knew the very foundations of their retreat had been sapped), they agreed to evacuate it, on condition that they should have an `honorable departure, and that on insults should be offered the Christian women ; but, no sooner were the gates thrown open, than the agreement was violated by the Mamalukes, in their brutal insults to the women ; and again the Templars drew their swords, and fought their way (shielding the women) back .nto the tower, which, being sapped, could not bear their weight, and, falling with a crash, buried the combatants and women in the ruins.

 

And now commenced the last sad tragedy.

 

Palestine had long since become the world's bloody ground ; but Palestine had never witnessed the bloodshed and carnage of Acre. Sixty thousand persons either perished in the city, or were carried Into slavery.

 

It is recorded, by the Monkish historians. that the Nuns of the Convent of Saint Clare cut off their noses, and disfigured their faces in various ways, in order to render them. Selves ob;ects of disgust ‑to the Saracens, hoping, thereby, to escapo their insults; and truly did they so disgust the ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

!67 Xamalukes, that they instantly slew them. ' Many of the citizens 4sttempted to. escape by sea ; but a storm was raging, and they peiished in the waves.

 

Thus terminated a war that had lasted one hundred and Ainety‑four years, then, and now, called the "Holy War;` "a war," says Fuller, " for continuance, the longest; for money spent, the costliest; for bloodshed, the cruelest; for pretences. ,the most pious ; for the true intent, the most politic the world ever ,Saw." After the fall of Acre, the Sultan razed the fortifications of ;every city on the coast, with the view to deter the Christians from another attempt to invade Palestine. The military Orders were reduced so low, that they made no attempt to maintain a position in Palestine. The remnant of the Order of St. John took refuge in Cyprus, as the nearest Christian town to the country they had sworn never to abandon to the Infidels. The few remaining Templars finally assembled in the same town. The Teutonic Knights retired to Prussia, without hope of ever' again seeing the Holy Land.

 

Pope Nicholas IV. had made no effort to render assistance to the inhabitants of Acre; but, no sooner did he receive ,an account of its fall, and the expulsion of his follower than he commenced operations for the purpose of stimulating the Western Princes to send another Crusade to the Holy Land. But in two centuries of incessant wars, during which the plains of Palestine had been copiously fertilized with Christian blood, having grown wise by long experience, they could no longer be moved by the insidious appeals of the Papal throne. The East, too, was equally averse to any further sontention for a spot of ground, of no direct value to the Greek, or the Armenian schismatics.

 

The King of Cyprus assigned to the Templars and Hospi3alers, as a place of retreat, the town of Limisso, and the Grand Master of the Hospitalers, John De Villiers, summoned all ]knights, who were dispersed throughout Christendom, to repair to his banner; and, in answer to this call; the Commanders throughout Europe sent forth their Chevaliers, who poured into Cyprus, burning with a desire for revenge. The Knighto ' 1IA~bERir FRNEM'A86NRr.

 

called a Chapter, and this Council determined that, while‑ the Brotherhood would 'continue to protect the pilgrims, who still, continued to visit the Holy Land, their method of doin; so,' and the more effectually to annoy the Saracens, would be to 'become a sea‑faring Society, and operate, especially, on the Mediterranean.

 

The Kings of. England and Portugal took t' he ground that the property which the military Orders held within their respective dominions, belonged to them only upon the condi tion that they 'continued to hold possession of the Holy Land, and, tlrereforep as the ;Knights had deserted that country,, their ' property was confiscated.

 

Pope Boniface VIII., who had 'reached the Papal ‑throne by a series of crimes and artifice's, 'thundered forth his menaces, and thus procured a revocatioih "of the acts of confiscation.

 

The Orders becoming strong in numbers, the King of Cyprps became alarmed, least they, should become as powerful as they had been in Palestine, and, there. fore, forbid them the privilege of purchasing land in his dominions; and further required that they should, in common with his subjects, pay a poll tax.

 

The Pope attempted to drive him from hi*positiory by threats ; but he persisted in his course.

 

' About this time, a quarrel arose between Boniface and Philip ,the Fair, King, of France, about the Papal supremacy, and, in an evil' hour, the Templars promised that, in the event of an open' rupture, they would sustain the Pope.

 

This so incensed the king against the Templars, that he resolved upon their destruction.

 

Boniface soon after died, and his successor lived but a short time.

 

And now Philip succeeded in placing upon the Papal throne, a vile instrument, Bertrand De Gat, who, in 'order to obtain the influence of the King, and thus secure his election, basely pledged, himself to ‑the ‑performance of six articles, one of which was not named until after his electi‑)n, and which proved to be the total extinction of the Templark This corrupt and soulless Pope, Clement V., was entirely wil`Iing to` thin proposition,, as, by it, he would obtain half the "property held by the Templars. Philip instituted charges ' against the Templars, accusing them of the blackest crimes, "whereupon, the Pope summoned the two Grand Masters to ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

Fq air before him, 1306, under a pretense that he wished to ‑CpnAilt them, in relation to a new Crusade. The Pope's letter ~' reached the Grand Master of the Hospitalers, on board of his tree:, at a time when he was taking important steps to get p"session of Rhodes, and he wrote, excusing himself, to the ‑,Fops. , But Jacques De Molai. Grand Master of the Templars, gbeyed the summons. In his train, he carried sixty chosen $nights, and one hundred and fifty thousand florins of gold, thud a quantity of silver, amounting to twelve horse loads.

 

The grand Master met with a kind and honorable reception, not pnly from the Pope, but the King also, who had not yet matured Peir plans.

 

The Templars had left Cyprus without intending yo return, being annoyed by the exactions of Henry ; and it is quite probable that the Grand Master intended to establish himself and the Order in France, as his treasure was sent to the house of the Temple, in Paris.* Not yet having a justifiable pretext, Philip could not effect his diabolical designs against the Templars, and, for several years, we hear but little of them, and nothing of their military achievements.

 

The Hospitalers made a descent upon Rhodes, and, by their intrepid valor, conquered and took possession of that island, stud there established their independent government. After The reason of the Templars leaving their Fellow‑Knights at Cyprus, ie nowhere ;tstisfactorily explained; but, from allò the facts, we are inclined to believe that they disapproved of the conclusions of the Council held at Cyprus, by order of the Grand Master of the Hospitalers. The Templars were, for the most part, composed of men descended from the best families of every Christian people; they ‑lod knowmnotidng, of a seafaring life, and if they foresaw that the Hospitalers sonld. only maintain ,their independent existence as a maritime Society, by looking prizes at sea. it is not improbable that they revolted at the idea of becom ing rovers, corsairs, or pirates.

 

And this suggestion was strengthened by the 1ket that, though they were everywhere taunted with their inactivity and supine ,'rise, they never after united witb,tbe Hospitalers, even in an expedition against elite Infidel&

 

In short, it appears that, when the Templars could no longer act In concert with the Crusaders, and meet the enemies of the Cross on land, the ffreat object of the organization ceased ; and, while they declined less honorable ;,:: employment, preferred to stand aloof, hoping that the time would coat. whop thay could again take the field, sustained by the voice and means of the Christian Mdoas.

 

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

Ift ‑‑that they sacrificed human beings to an idol which they worshiped‑that they had roasted a Templar's bastard and drank his blood‑that they had sold the Holy Land to the Infidels, and, in short, that " their houses were stained with every damnable sin." Thus armed with the testimony of a wretch, who would not have been believed on oath, under other circumstances, Philip urged the Pope to execute the secret article. The Pope, by this time, seemed anxious, if possible, to avoid its fulfillment, he having become more securely seated upon his throne, and feeling somewhat more independent of the King's power, he promised, however, that, if the Knights were found guilty of the charges, their property should be taken from them, and set apart for aho purpose of redeeming the Help Land'.

 

The Pope's answer by, no means satisfied this blood‑thirsty and unprincipled Monarch. He denied the right of the Pontiff to determine the matter, and sent secret instructions to all his governors to arm themselves on the 12th of October, 1307, and, on the following day, all the Templars in France were thrown into prison. The King selected his confessor, his Chancellor, and a man named Plesian: all men who were willing to do his bidding, right or wrong, as a council to try the Knights.

 

This news created great astonishment throughout Christendom; for, though the Temple╗ load become unpopular, because of their supineness, they had not 1mu suspected with being guilty of the crimes charged against thW.

 

The Pope, feeling that he would be sustained by public pentiment, addressed a letter to Philip, reproaching him with. osurping the privileges of the Holy See, and demanding that tho Templars and their effects should be delivered into his Wds.

 

Philip answered, that " God abhorred nothing so mach as, the backwardness the Pope showed in cooperating with him ie the prosecution," etc.

 

Pope Clement was startled by the toss of this reply, and, remembering that Philip treated his predecessor, Boniface, with contempt, and plucked his beard in Italy, brought himself to a compromise with the King, wherein Wwas agreed that the prisoners, though guarded l'y the King's 0 Fuller.

 

ME 49 subjects. should be kept, nominally, under the orders of the J?ope., This state of (things produced great excitement throughout Europe, and yet, Edward II., of England, was the only Monarch who made any effort in behalf of the persecuted Templars. On receiving a letter from Philip, proposing that he should suppress the. Order in his kingdom, and confiscate their possessions, he regarded the charges as totally incredible calumnies, and wrote to the Kings of Portugal, Castile. Arragon, and Sicily, beseeching them to, treat with caution the rumors set forth against the Knights:

 

But the Pope, being now again an instrument in the hands of Philip, issued an edict, reiterating the charges, and commanding Edward to imitate the King of France, by placing the Templars,aad their goods, within his kingdom, in safe keeping.

 

Edward could stand forth boldly against the injustice and fPluimanity of kings, but he lacked the courage to disobey the elandates of a Roman Pontiff.' All the Templars in England were thrown into prison, and the persecution extended to Ireland, gcotland, and ‑Vales, but nowhere were they so barbarously treated as in France.*

 

The Templars'were thrown into prison in the dead of winter, and not only deprived of their religious habits, but of tke visits of the priests, and every other comfort gnd consolation.

 

Every stratagem was resorted to, by the King's order, to Induce the Knights to confess the charges true, promising release and honorable exemption, and such as would not be thus suborned, were put to the torture, and such shrieks and groans were heard to issue from all the prisons in France. as would have moved to tears any other than a brute in human form. Many who were put upon the rack died, proclaiming the innocence of the. Order, but all were tortured in the presence of others, who,: when called upon to confess, trembled at the ceiWnty of being torn, piecemeal, and, relying upon the promise of exemption, criminated themselves and the Order. The Pope examined‑ seventy of these in person, to whom he read a real or pretended letter from Jacques.De Molai, admitting several of MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

ò NP.ay. .

 

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

7$ the charges, and exhorting all others to do the same, and, in this trap, they were caught. But before the work was completed, the Pope and King were put to a stand, by the announcement that many who had confessed their guilt had repented, and now scorned the pardon, which, for a time, the dread of torture had induce? them to seek, by black falsehoods.

 

These were sent te. Paris, where it was announced that they had renounced Christ, and, on the 12th of May, 1310, fifty‑four Templars were burned alive, by slow fire, in the city of Paris, every one of whom died asserting the innocence of the Order.

 

The Grand Master, De )itolai, was brought forth in chains, and asked if he had any defense to offer, when he replied:

 

" I am a plain soldier, more skilled in war than in forensic subtlety, and, therefore, can not undertake the defense of the Order, or the Knight, as an advocate ; but, in any Knightly way, I should be proud, to maintain their innocence, in the face of the whole world."

 

He then asked permission to hire counsel, but was told that heretics were not entitled to such a privilege.

 

They then read over a confession, to which he had affixed his name, but so altered by ioterlining, as totally to change its very character.

 

On hearing it read, he declared that the three Cardinals who had subscribed it, deserved that death which the Saracens and Tartars visited .upon liars.

 

The Pope and King, being uncertain how the ful. 5lknent of their designs would be received by the civilized .world, delayed final action, and industriously employed the ,time in raising an excitement against the Order; but, finally, the King determined to bring the matter to a close, and held a Council with the Pope, at Vienna, in November, 1311.

 

At this Council, there were three hundred Bishops, and one of the most singular. facts in the persecution is, that only three of these ..were willing to yield to the known wishes of the Pontiff and .Philip; but openly and firmly maintained that this illustrious ,Order of magnanimous Knights, who had stood, for near two centuries, one of the bulwarks of Christendom, shc ild not be swept away without being heard; but, alasl though united, they were powerless when opposed by a bigoted dotard, occur eying the Chair of St. Peter, and a dastardly King, bent; on the wnmplishment of his fiendish ends.

 

After six months, sport 74

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

in an effort to bring over the Bishops, without effect, the Pope rose suddenly, and said that, "since they would not gratify his den: son, the Sing of France, by passing a judicial sentence against the Templars, the Papal authority should be brought to bear." Thus was the fate of the Order decided.

 

Thus did two men bring to condign punishment, a class of men, the very meanest of whom was a less disgrace to Christianity, than either the Pope or King.

 

And, at once, it was easy to be seen what had been at the foundation of this inhuman persecution.

 

Had the Templars possessed no wealth, history would never have had occasion to record the events of a persecution against them. No sooner did the Pope make known his decision, than the question was sprung: " What shall be done with the princely possessions of the Order?" The King and his partizans were in favor of establishing a new Order in France, to whom this property should be given.

 

The. Pope, seeing this would be a total loss to him, and knowing that the Hospitalers, or, as they were now called, the Knights of Rhodes, had become pliant subjects in the hands of Papal authority, took ground in favor of giving the whole property to them, which was, in effect, retaining it in his own hands.

 

A majority of the Council sus. tsined his views, and Philip was thwarted by the very moLu he had used to carry out his bloody design.

 

In the following year, 1313, the Grand Master Jacques De Molai ; Guy, Grand Prior of Normandy, brother to the Prince of Dauphiny ; Hugh De Perale, Grand Prior of France, and the Grand Prior of Acqòiitain, were finally arraigned before a commission appointed by the Pope, at Paris.

 

The persecutors, seeing that the sympathies of the people were in favor of the Templers, were anxious that these, the most renowned Knights, should make a. publio confession of their guilt, and, to insure this, promises of favor were _ held out the more willingly, because it was known that the fires that had been kindled all over France, to burn the Templars. had shocked and disgusted all Europe. The prisoners were placed on a scaffold, exposed to public view, and in sight of a pile of faggots, which, they were told, should be made to con emne them, if they did not adhere to their previous confessions ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

is An address was delivered to the people, discanting upon the wickedness and abominations of the Order, and, when condieded, the prisoners were called upon to confirm the charges i+t the hearing of the multitude. The Priors of France and Aoquitain obeyed; but when the Grand Master was permitted, he sl:ook his chains, advanced to the margin of the scaffold, and st the top of his voice, exclaimed : " It is but just, in this terrible day, and, in the last moments of my life, that I should expose the iniquity of falsehood, and make truth to triumph.

 

declare, then, in the face of heaven and earth, and to my own eternal confusion and shame, that I have committed the greatest of crimes; BUT IT HAS BEEN ONLY IN ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THE ATROCIOUS CHARGES SO IMPLACABLY URGED AGAINST THE ORDER TO WHICH I BELONG, HAVE A SHADOW OF JUSTICE. I MADE THAT d1ONFESSfON TO SUSPf7ND THE TORTURES OF THE RACK, AND MOLLIFY KY PERSECUTORS.

 

I KNOW THAT THIS RECANTATION WILL SUBJECT WE TO NEW TORMENTS ; BUT THE HORRIBLE SIGHT THEY NOW OFFER VO MY EYES, CAN NOT INTIMIDATE ME TO CONFIRM MY FIRST DEPARTURE FROM THE TRUTH BY A SECOND LIE. LIFE HAS ALREADY BECOME HATEFUL TO ME, AND, ON A CONDITION SO INFAMOUS, I BOORN To RETAIN IT.

 

WHAT GOOD PURPOSE WOULD IT SERVE ME, TO PURCHASE A FEW MISERABLE DAYS, BY THE CONFIRMATION OF 12E BLACKEST CALUMNIES ?" iF The valiant old Knight would have spoken longer, but the minions of the Pope dreaded the consequences, and stopped him. Guy, Grand‑ Prior of Normandy, made his recantation in equally strong terms, and they were both burned alive on the slime pile of faggots, on the same. ground now occupied by a statue of Henry IV.t The Grand Master said he deserved death for bavina, in a moment of weakness, stained his name with a falsehood, and with his latest breath he maintained the innocence of the Order.

 

Megeray states that it was generally said at the time, that, when Jacques De Molai was stifling in the flames, he cried out: " Clement, thou unjust judge and bar. barous executioner, I cite thee to appear, in forty days, before *e judgment seat of God."

 

It is probable that this story way 0 QertoL t Mills.

 

B

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

not circulated until after the,death of the Pope, which occurred soon after De Molai's death.

 

Thus perished the last Grand Master of the military Order of the Temple, beloved and venerated, not only by his followers, but by the great body of the people, who gathered up and preserved his ashes. And thus passed.away the most renowned, as well as the most noble, band of Christian warriors the w('rld ever saw ; for while in valor they fully equaled the Hospitalers, they surpassed them in all that constitutes the higher, the nobler, and praiseworthy principles of the soldier, the Christian,. avid the man.

 

Throughout all Europe, Portugal alone excepted, the Templars, met a similar fate, through the influence of the Pope, who desired that his servile instruments, the Hospitalers, should be placed in possession of their large estates, who disgraced themselves, and dishonored the cause they espoused, by accepting' wealth, filched from their comrades‑in‑arms by the foulest murders.

 

And, to this day, historians consider the question as unsettled, whether the Templars were guilty or innocent of the charges alleged against them. This we think strange, indeed, for when the character of the charges is considered, and when we remember the high birth, and the irreproachable character of I the families from whom all the leading Templars descended, it is next to impossible to suppose them capable of acting as was charged, for, while it might be believed that they had degenerated, and may have adopted some of the superstitions of the Infidels, it is absurd to charge that they had denounced the Christian religion, and spit upon the Cross of Christ ; and, be`side, awe would take the dying declaration of the Grand Master, especially as it was given, accompanied by self‑condemnation, ‑; against the hired testimony of thousands of the Pope's minions. That the Templars had become proud, arrogant. idle yea, drunk ards, if you will, we may admit, but that they proved recreant to their trust, mean and dishonorable‑Never! never! This merciless persecution annihilated the Templars as a military Order, but the high moral principles, which had ever an;mated the Brotherhood lived in the hearts of the remnant wti escaped.

 

p2I)EIts OL KNIGHTH00h.

 

?fi In Portugal, where the fulminations of the Pope failed to v+tuch them, the Templars were only required to change their rune from the Order of Knights Templar to that of Soldiers of‑Christ.

 

It is generally believed by Templars of the present 4ay, that De Molai, seeing his end drawing nigh, and feeling satisfied that the Templars who might escape would not be 1pertnitted to meet and elect a Grand Master, appointed his successor. That appointment was necessarily kept a secret from the world, and, hence, we have not been permitted to know on whom, it fell, but the archives in the Temple at Paris, and Che preservation of their rituals, banners etc., in Portugal, Move, as some believe, that the original Institution has been pieserved and kept up.

 

At Stockholm, in Sweden, there is an Encampment of Knights Templar, claiming that Peter D'Aumont was the Knight appointed by De Molai, and that they have ever kept up, and continued their organization; and they produce a list of Grand Masters from D'Aumont to the present day; but we have no 'proof that this organization has ever been acknowledged to possess the merits claimed, except by the Masonic, system of Vriet Observation.* In France, The Order of the Temple claim that John Mare Iarmenius was the Knight appointed by the Molai, and in proof of their having kept up the original organization, they show a list of Grand masters down to the present da‑.ò.

 

We can see no good reason for denying a continuance of the &eiety, as claimed, for, after the death of the Pope and Philip, land especially after the Templars' wealth had been given to the Hospitalers, there were none so interested against them as to ‑reader the organization either impracticable, or dangerous, buc "it is preposterous to suppose that each are right in their ,claim to the Grand Master appointed by De Molai ; indeed, there is no satisfactory proof that any such appointment was made, nor are we informed of any important end to be attained :4y, keeping up the organization, for even before the death of De Molai, no reasonable hope was entertained, that the services Gourdin of s. C.

 

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

79 views we entertain, of the claims of Baldwin Encampment, at Bristol.

 

The Order of Knights Templar was set on foot in 1119, by Hugh De Payens, Godfrey De St. Omer, and seven other gentlemen of France, having for their object, to give escort and protection to the Palmers. In 1129, the founder, Hugh De Payens, returned from a tour through Europe, with three bun dred recruits, all from the noblest families.

 

Fulk, Count of Anjou, was among the first benefactors of the Order ; he died in 1141, leaving two sons, Baldwin and Almeric.*

 

The Encampment, afterward established at Bristol, adopted the name of the first of the above Princes, who was one of the best and bravest kings of Jerusalem.

 

Previous to this period, we have no evidence that Encampments and Commanderies were gcncra'.ly established throughout the Western Kingdoms. Those who joined the Knights repaired to Palestine, and remained there, performing religious and military duty.

 

In 1182, a Crusade was preached throughout England, stimulated by commissioners from both military Orders, but, as yet, we have no account of the establishment of Encampments there.

 

In 1189, Henry II., of England, yielded to the popular cry for the Paynim War, and raised thirty thousand foot, and five thousand horse, intending to lead them in person in the third Crusade, but his death occurring, elevated his son, Richard IL, to the throne. Richard, being filled with all the enthusiasm of the age, and being ambitious to distinguish himself in t'_ie field against the Infidels, proceeded to carry out the p''‑ans of hij father, set sail from Dover, passed into Normandy, and joined Phillip Augustus on the frontiers of Burgundy, and proceeded to Cyprus, where he remained until the spring of 1191, and finally landed at Acre on the 8th of June.

 

Richard remained 1n Palestine about two years, during which period he distinguished himself by being foremost in every battle, courting dxnger so fearlessly, that, by common consent, he won the apeltzion of Ceeur‑De‑Lion, the justice of which title may be infer:W by the fact, that when a remnant of the ninth and last 10 1

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Crusade, consisting of but two hundred men, reached the Hole Land, they struck terror into the heart of the enemy, for a tint" aplely because they were commanded by a Planta‑'em‑t‑a descendant of the lion‑hearted King. Ceeur‑De‑Lion left Palestine in the spring of 1193,* and, if we consider the time of his imprisonment in Austria, his sickness and death, it brinus fully to that period when we know the Templars had i)ecorne possessed of immense estates in all the Christian nations, and nowhere were their possessions so valuable as in England.

 

Wn argue, then, that it is reasonable to conclude that Encampments k,were established in England, as. claimed by Baldwin Errcaur),ment, near the close of the twelfth century, for the purpose or lgoking after, collectinä, and transmitting the proceeds of their landed estates.

 

These encampments were situated at Bristol, Bath, and York, and the Grand Commandery was held at London, presided over by the Grand Prior, who soon after occupied a seat in Parliament, and exercised an immense influence in the councils of the nation.

 

When the persecutions of Philip the Fair broke out,Edward !I., of England, openly espoused the Templars' cause, proclainrlng their innocence C'%f the foul charges, and wrote letters to the Kings of Portugal, Arragon, and Castile, urging then to be on their guard against the inhuman machinations of the French King. Thus did he leave on record the highest testimony of the standing and noble bearing of the English Templars.

 

What though he afterward became alarmed for the safety of his crown. and meanly truckled to the command of the Pope, by throwing into prison the very men lie had defended, neither his high position, nor the cringing partiality of his biographers, could weaken the strength of his testimony, nor remove the odium which must ever attach to his name, by reason of his dastardly conduct toward those he knew to be. innocent o░ crime, and his superiors in virtue.

 

The Encampments at York and Bath long since discontinued their meetings, and became extinct. Baldwin Encampment, therefore, with much seeming propriety, claim that they are the ' Hovedem ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

81 fi

 

and only original organization of the Orders of Knightt, "A‑‑A. ;;hiesd.

 

But the Grand Conclave, a modern Institution, claims `

 

st the Encampments at York and Bath, before they dissolved, f‑reefed all power and authority in said Conclave, and, therefore, Mend for supremacy over the Order in England and Wales.

 

We incline to the opinion that, if Ancient Templarism exists aywhere (which we doubt) we may expect to find it in ildwin Encampment.

 

We have been induced to give thus much of the history ,9‑the military Orders of Knighthood, in deference to the opin0a of those who think that Templarism, of the present day, is tvontinuation of those Orders. . We have already said that ‑41e regard nothing as Masonry except Ancient Craft Masonry, aud, if this position be correct, it will seen that neither the ancient nor modern Orders of Knighthood, can have any claims to be considered as forming a part of, or, in any way, hold legitmate connection with Freemasonry. History tells us how, and for what purposes, the Knights of St. John the Almoner, Knights Templar; and Teutonic Knights were organized; and ~history also tells us what their forms and ceremony of intro" duction were. We know they first banded together for purPOses of pure benevolence, superinduced by that ardent and Founded zeal, which so remarkably characterized the Chris 4an nations, for near two hundred years.

 

We know that the ony of introduction consisted mainly of solemn oaths Btu dedicate their lives to the cause of the Almoners to the ~Aoly Land, and when they assumed, not only the habit of the r":aaonk, but also of the military, they bound themselves to die a

 

use of the Christian religion; in all which we can see appearance of Freemasonry, nor,have we the slightest testi01ony that they, themselves, ever laid claim to a connection #h our Order.

 

Ancient Templarism was strictly a Roman olic Institution, requiring its members to believe in the *th, divinity, vicarious death, and resurrection of Christ, as `God, man, the Saviour of the world, the second person in the f'Aiorable Trinity. And hence, in the days of the Crusaders, even Abwe Christians who believed in the doctrines of the Greek ;`0rurch, were not admitted into the Brotherhood.

 

6 82

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

We are pleased to see that Bro. Godrdin, of South Carolina, whose learning and research have tended in an eminent degree, to enlist the attention of the Knights Templar of the United States to a true history of their Order, has influenced the General Grand Encampment to set on foot an investigation, which, we sincerely hope, will result in the full development of facts. But we do not think, with Bro. Gourdin, that a visit to France, England, or Italy, will enable him, or any other writer, to show the legitimate descendants of De Molai, for the simple reason, that we do not think the organization was kept lip anywhere.

 

It is true that in Paris may be seen, probably, the very banners of the Crusaders, and many other relics of the ancient Orders of Knighthood, but this no more proves the continuous existence of the organization, than do the relics exibited by the modern Druids establish their legitimate descent from the ancient Society of that name.

 

We love to plod on through the mouldering pages of by‑gone days, and pluck from oblivion the gems of ancient lore, but we dare not magnify wolehills into mountains, for the sake of gratifying the marvelous propensities of the age.

 

Had the ancient Orders of Knighthood been connected with Freemasonry, the historians of the day would have known and published the fact. Had the organization of the Templars continued down to the present day, the fact could be clearly shown. We do not,say that an organization, claiming to be Templars, descended from the old stock, did not participate in the battle of Bannockburn, nor do we deny that organizations can now be found laying claims, as Baldwin Encampment does, to an uninterupted continuance, from the days of the lion‑hearted King ; but when it appears that, for a long period of time, nothing is known of Ancient Templarism, we should, with hesitation, admit that the Templarism of the eighteenth century, which suddenly made its appearance as an appendage of Freemasonry, and claiming to constitute a part and parcel of it, is truly entitled to be regarded as of ancient origin.

 

We know that the rituals and teachings of the Rose ‑~degree, as practiced in the Scotch Rite, are essentially the same as the rituals and teachings of the Templar's degree, as prao‑ ORDERS OP KNIGHTHOOD.

 

$S heed in the United States. We know that some of the first, aye, the very first Encampments established in the United States, were instituted by Consistories, or Councils of the Scotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted ; and we apprehend that when all the facts are known, it will be found that Templarism, of the present day, dates back no further than to Chevalier Ramsey, in 1740, and that Encampments were established in the United States by the same Deputy Inspectors General who planted here Rose ‑j‑ Chapters, and Consistories of Princes of the Royal Secret.

 

We regret that a want of room has compelled us thus briefly to throw out hints, in place of entering into an investigation and exhibition of the proofs upon which our opinion is based.

 

Encampments are now established in nearly all the States of this Union. In a State or Territory where there is no Grand Encampment, nine Sir Knights may petition the General Grand Encampment in Conclave, or either of the first four officers in vacation, for a warrant, which, when issued, runs until the next meeting of the General Grand body.

 

In States where Grand Encampments exist, the authority, in like manner, emanates from those bodies.

 

The Grand Encampments meet annually, and the General Grand Encampment meets triennially.

 

The Encampments are authorized to confer three degrees, viz., Red Cross Knight, Knight Templar, and Knight of Malta, or St. John, of Jerusalem, but, so far as we have been able to learn or appreciate them, there are, in fact, but two degrees: The degree, so called, of Malta, or St. John, of Jerusalem, crept in, we suppose, by means of a bungler, who, not knowing enough of the ritual to confer it properly, satisfied himself by simply adding a few words in the ceremony of dubbing, and thus, by the addition of a few signs and words, but imperfectly understood, constituted a Knight Templar also a Knight of Malta, and so the matter stands to this day.

 

We may be asked to explain how a union was effected between Freemasonry and this foreign Institution, and though we can not be positive, we think it fair to suppose that it was forced upon Masonry much as was the Illuminati in France and Germany. Encampments have ever confined the Orders of Knighthood to those who were in possession of Ancient Craft 81

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Masonry, which, together with the name assumed by the Encampments, viz., Christian Masonry, tended to produce a quiet, acquiescence, in this assumed alliance, without pausing to inquire into its propriety. All the Modern Rites make Ancient Craft Masonry their foundation ; not, perhaps, because of any attachment or partiality to the principles taught by our Order; but to lead Masons on to a toleration of the various systems, well knowing that any, the most ridiculous, or dangerous doctrines, may be taught under the banner of our Institution, weighed in the scales of long centuries without condemnation. Scotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted, now struggling for that power in the United. States, which it has long since attained in France, and elsewhere in Continental Europe, attempts to do nothing, save under the cloak of Freemasonry.

 

They confer no degrees, except upon Master Masons, and though they claim the original right to confer all the degrees in Masonry, we suppose it would be difficult, yea, impossible for them to show, that they had acquired that right in a constitutional or Masonic manner. All these foreign degrees have been insidiously palmed on Freemasonry, and ignorance of their character and history, but especially a careless inattention to the claims of Freemasonry, to be kept and transmitted, pure and uncontaminated with foreign institutions, have thus far caused the brethren to lose eight of the importance of standing aloof from all and every other association. We do not object to the Encampment degrees, if given to Christians as an association, outside of, and unconnected with Masonry. They are properly Roman Catholic degrees, originally designed, we suppose, to unite the members of the Church, and all Catholic families, by strong ties of fraternal interest and obligation, to arrest and put a stop to tho alarming conversions being made to the Protestant religion in the eighteenth century; and though the degrees, as given in the United States, have passed out of their hands, and have been so modified, as to suit our locality, it does not and can not justify us in giving consent to, much less encourage, the application of the name of Freemasonry to them, as, by so doing, we sanction a union where none cau properly exist, and practice a fraud upon the world, by calling that Freemasonry which has no Masonry in it.

 

ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD.

 

85 We think Freemasonry teaches every moral virtue inculcated by the Holy Bible. We think the system. as a whole, and in all its parts, is perfect‑perfect beyond the inventive genius of man.

 

It can suffer no alterations without material injury, and can amalgamate‑with nothing without su$ering corruption. The Christian religion is alone its superior, and yet, an amalgamation with that, even were it possible, would tend to destroy its identity, and mar its usefulness.

 

We think Freemasonry maintained its purity more than twenty‑seven hundred years, and, to us, it seems that the blush of shame should mantle the cheek of that Mason, who can openly declare that a newly invented system of degrees is capable of adding to the beauty, much less to the exemplification, of the true teachings of our venerated Order. It is a lamentable misfortune that innovations were ever attempted, but it is passing strange that those innovations ever found favor with the true Craftsmen.

 

Day by day, we are made to feel the evil consequences of the innovations spoken of. The duties of the Lodge room are too often neglected by those who are led captive by the allurements of high‑soxnding titles, in the so called higher degrees.

 

The manifestations of lukewarmness for the simple but solemn duties of Freemasonry, creates heart‑burnings, jealousies and dissensions, destructive of the best interests of the Craft.

 

If these are evils now perceptible, while yet true Freemasonry is in the ascendant‑‑‑if these are the consequences of the first hundred years of these higher degrees, who will predict the end? We will add a sketch of the early history of the Encampments in the United States,‑‑and close this Iiranch of our history.

 

The first Encampments of Knights Templar, established in this country, were located at New York City and Stillwater, in the State of New York, but we have not been able to learn either the date of their establishment, or by what authority they were planted. We know, however, that they were in existence prior to 1797, for in May, of that year, an Encampment was established in Philadelphia, and the records of that, shows the previous existence of the two former Encampments. It is known that other Encampments were established in this country i1 86

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

by Consistories, and also by the mere authority of a Deputy Inspector General, and, therefore, we conclude that the first Encampments of Knights Templar were planted under the authority of the Ineffable or Scotch Rite.

 

In 1802, a few Knights met in Providence, Rhode Island, and, without any authority whatever, resolved themselves into an Encampment. In 1805, a Convention was held in Providence, composed of Delegates from the Encampments in New York City, Stillwater, and Albany, N. Y.

 

Encampments Nos. 3, 13, and 24, of Maryland, and two Encampments in Massachusetts, one of which, situated in Boston, was an Encampment of the Rose ‑}‑.

 

This Convention resolved itself into a Grand Encampment.

 

In 1812, the above named Grand Encampment resolved itself into a General Grand Encampment, and made its Constitution to correspond ; and, in 1816, it again resolved itself into a General Grand Encampment of the United States of America, and again remodeled its Constitution, and provided for the estab lishment of State Grand Encampments. This is the General Grand Encampment which now meets triennially, at such time and place as is designated by that body and the General Grand Chapter.

 

This National Grand body of Templars disowns and denounces all Encampments which do not hold under her, either directly or through State Grand Encampments.

 

The regulations for the establishment of new Encampments are very similar to those for the government of Chapters. Each State Grand Encampment issues warrants for new Encampments within the State, when petitioned for by eleven Sit Knights. In Territories where there is no Grand Encamp ment, the General Grand body issues warrants; the prie, is ninety dollars for a dispensation, and ten dollars additiotui rò, a warrantor charter.

 

st ha id, an ;e, rk 3, 1uof nd ‑If on en,nd zb ral me nd nd Let its ell ip'5it iP' CHAPTER IT.

 

SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

Fxox a careful examination of the history, legends, and teachings of Freemasonry, the author feels authorized in saying. it is not a cunningly‑devised fable, but a great system of ethics, teaching the doctrine of one living and true God‑the Author and Upholder of all things‑that it was instituted by King Solomon, to whom God gave superior wisdom, and had as its great leading object, not only the perpetuation of the knowledge of God among the Jews; but, by opening its doors to a select few of all nations, thus spread and communicated that knowledge of the great I AM, which bad been lost to the heathen nations ; that it has been faithfully accomplishing its mission, in the subversion of the Heathen Mythology, and slowly, but surely, wending its way through evil, as well as good report, from generation to generation ; and, though there is a period of about seven hundred years, when its history, in common with the history of the world, is but dimly discernible, the traditions and legends of the Order tend most clearly to show that, though we do not now find it clothed in all the lovely simplicity of its primitive purity, it is sufficiently pure to prove its identity and importance. It is believed that we can go nowhere to find the embodiment of its principles and rituals so nearly perfect, as that afforded by the long and careful investigation of the Grand Lodge of England, from 1717 to 1723 ; and, certainly, that it is not safe to rely upon a modern Institution to supply any portion of its body or members, which may have been lost during the middle or dark ages: and, especially, if it shall appear that the latter had its origin with those who used it for political and sectarian ends.

 

If the fact ‑was not notorious, it would seem strange to believe that Freemasons can now be found, who openly proclaim theabsurdity of the traditions and doctrines of Ancient Craft 88

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Masonry, and, at the same time, contend that Masonry, in its pure rituals and teachings, may be found in the so called Scotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted.

 

Seeing that this Modern Society has wormed its way, until, by its fascinations, it has banished from some portions of Continental Europe every Lodge of Ancient Craft Masonry ; and, believing that untiring efforts are being made by many of the leaders of this system, to plant its standard throughout this country, the author believes it to be his duty to give his readers opportunity of judging of its claims to popular favor, by giving its origin, history, and teachings. But, important as the subject is esteemed to be, a condensed sketch is all that can be given here.

 

To guard against evil surmises, the author deems it proper to state that, in 1847, the Rt. Rev. Bro. Walker, then an Episcopal minister at Chicago, and Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Illinois, invited, or called a Convention of Royal Arch Masons, from that and the surrounding States. To this Convention Bro. Walker exhibited his authority, given him by the Grand Council of New York, over which Bro. J. J. J. Gougas presided. The author was invited to deliver a public address to said Convention ; and, during his visit, Bro. Walker, in the presence of the late Bro. Barnes, communicated to him all the degrees of said Scotch Rite.

 

When he received the 33rd, and the charges appertaining, he respectfully, but firmly denounced the whole, as inconsistent with, if not opposed to Freemasonry ; whereupon, Bro. Walker, very properly, withheld from him such documents as, otherwise, he would have been entitled to. And now, he is told by the brother who claims to have:written and delivered said authority, that Bro. Walker transcended his powers.

 

Be this as it may, the recipient feels no sort of concern, as he has never sought or desired intercourse with the Society, but he confesses that, with the imperfect knowledge of the degrees as communicated, he did seek and desire to know more of their history.

 

So far as the teachings of the Scotch Rite are concerned, the author feels that no censure should attach to him, should he hint at them, as derived from the ritual, as said ritual may be seen by any one, in almost SCOTCH BITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

89 any of the cities of the United States.

 

Premising, boa ever, that no startling exposures will be made‑certainly fewer than if he had never taken the degrees, he will at once enter upon the history.

 

In 1740, Chevalier Ramsey, a Scotch nobleman, and a strong adherent of the Stuarts, gave his celebrated lectures in Paris and *Bourdeaux, concerning the origin and objects of Freemasonry. Taking the three degrees, and subdividing them into numerous parts, he concocted degrees for those parts, and made his philosophic lectures explain each, to suit his purposes. He established a Lodge, which he called Harodim, but the French Masons, generally, styled it a Lodge of the Scotchman's Rite Masonry ; and, finally, it assumed the imposing title of Perfect and Sublime Masonry.

 

Bro. Le Blanc De Marconay, then Grand Orator of the Chamber of Deputies in the Grand Orient of France, thus writes, in 1853 " The first Lodge known in France was constituted in 1725, by the Grand Lodge of England, in the York Rite.

 

" Until 1756, the Grand Lodge in France bore the title of English Grand Lodge of France. It was only during this year that it took the name of Kingdom, and, until this time, French Masonry practiced but three degrees, viz., the Symbolic, entitled Apprentice, Companion, and Master.

 

" It was about the year 1758, that the Ineffable degrees were introduced into Masonry‑they were not practiced by the Grand Lodge, but by an authority named the Supreme Council of Emperors of East and West, and had no more than twentyfive degrees, the last degree of which was Prince of the Royal Secret.

 

" It was in the year 1761, that Stephen ‑Morin received, in France, the power to propagate the Ineffable degrees in America. He received only twenty‑five degrees, and, with them, the title of Inspector General, which title was given him, in his patent, not as a degree, but a function, which he was to etercisb in America." Ragon in his Othodoxie Maconnique, says 11 The Council of East and West was formed in Paris, in 90

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

1758.

 

It consisted of twenty‑five degrees, divided into seven classes.

 

" The Council was formed from the ruins of the Chapter of Clermont. formed in 1754, by the Chevalier De Bonnville.

 

" On the 27th of August, 1761, a patent of Deputy Inopector General, was given to Stephen Morin (a Jew), by the Council of Emperors East and West. Stephen Morin's business c<dled him to St. Domingo, where he intended to propagate the Rite of Perfection.

 

The Council of Emperors never imagined, for a moment, that such an audacious juggler as he was, would take possession of the Rite, to make a profit out of it.

 

They never dreamed that he would not only make it an article of traffic, but that he would remodel and modify it at Charleston, South Carolina, and introduce it forty‑three years afterward into Paris, surcharged by eight new degrees, and all attested by the illustrious Frederick the Great, King of Prussia, who was never received in the Ancient and Accepted Rite, and had all the higher degrees in horror‑he opposed them during his whole life.

 

" September 21, 1762.

 

The Council of Emperors of East and West, and the Council of Princes of the Royal Secret, at Bordeaux, drew up the regulations of the Masonry of Harodim, or Masonry of Perfection, in thirty‑five articles.

 

" A new Council was also erected called Knights of the East.

 

" August 17th, 1766.

 

The Grand Lodge of France, in which the Council had its Chamber, and was in union with the same, being dissatisfied with the arbitrary and unmasonic proceedings of Stephen Morin, annulled his patent, recalled his power and placed the W. Bro. Martin in his place.

 

They state that, considering the carelessness and the various alterations introduc^d in the Royal Art by W. Bro. Morin, her late Inspector, the W. Grand Lodge annulled the brief of Inspector, granted to Bro. Morin, and deems proper, for the good of the Royal Art, to cause him to be replaced by W. Bro. Martin," etc.

 

As Bro. Yates and others, who hold in veneration the Grand Council at Charleston, take the ground that Stephen Morin received his patent from a Convention of Sublime Masons, and van of :tor Icil led ,ite for tke ver fir, 3n, Lrd ted Io gad his nd at Im, SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

81 not from the Grand Lodge, and, therefore, the recall of that patent by the Grand Lodge, in 1766, was illegal ; and as the proof is at hand for the final settlement of this question, the following extract is inserted "To the G. 0. T. G. A. 0. T. U. and under the will and pleasure of H. Most S. H. 111. Bro. Louis, of Bourbon, Count of Clermont, Prince of the blood, Grand Master, and Protector of all the Lodges.

 

" At the East of a place well lighted, and where dwell Peace, Silence, Concord, Anno Louis 5761, and according to the Christian Era, August 27, 1761.

 

" Lux ex tenebris veritas, concordia fratrum.

 

" We, the undersigned, Substitutes General of the Art Royal, Grand Wardens and Officers of the Grand and Sovereign Lodge of St. John, established at the Grand East of Paris, and we, Sovereign G. Master of the G. Council of the Lodges of France, under the protection of the Sovereign Grand Lodge, under the sacred and mysterious numbers, do hereby declare, certify, and ordain to all BB. Knights and Princes, spread throughout both hemispheres, that, having assembled by order of the Deputy General, President of the Grand Council, a request, to us communicated. was read at our sitting.

 

"'That our dear Bro. Stephen Morin, Grand Elect Perfect, formerly Sublime Master, Prince Mason, Knight and Sublime of all the Orders of the Masonry of Perfection, member of the Trinity Royal Lodge, etc., being about to leave for America, and wishing to be enabled to work regularly to the advantage and improvement of the Art Royal, in all its perfection, may it please the Sov. G. Council, and the Grand Lodge to grant him letters patent for constitutions. Upon the report which has been made to us, and being acquainted with the eminent qualities of Bro. Stephen Morin, we have, without hesitation, granted this satisfaction for the services which he has always rendered to the Order, and the continuation of which is to us guaranteed by his zeal.

 

'░ Wherefore, and for other good reasons, after approving and ennfirmintr Bro. Morin in his designs, and wishing to give him testimonies of our gratitude, we have unanimously constituted 8$

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

and instituted him, and, by these presentg, do constitute and institute him, and we do give full power and authority to said Bro. Stephen Morin, the signature of whom stands in the margin of the presents, to form and establish a Lodge for the purpose of receiving and multiplying the Royal Order of Freemasons, in all the Perfect and Sublime degrees, to take due care that the general and particular statutes and regulations of the Grand and Sovereign Lodge be kept and observed, and to admit therein none but true and legitimate BB. of Sublime Masonry.

 

" To regulate and govern all the members which may compose his said Lodge, which lie is authorized to establish in the four parts of the world, whither. he may arrive, or where he may dwell, under the title of Lodge of St. John, and by sur name, Perfect Harmony.

 

" Power is, hereby, to him granted, to select such officers as he may think proper, to help him in the government of his Lodge, to whom we command and enjoin to obey and respect him ; we do command and ordain to all Masons of regular Lodges, spread all over the earth, and of whatsoever dignity they might be, we request and enjoin them, in the name of the Royal Order, and in presence of our most Ill. G. Master, to recognize, as we do ourselves hereby recognize, our dear Bro. Stephen Morin as Worshipful Master of the Perfect Harmony Lodge, and we commission him as our Inspector, in every part of the New World, to rectify the observance of our laws in genò eral, etc., and, by these presents, we do institute our dearest Bro. Stephen Morin, our Grand Master Inspector, authorizing him, and giving him full power to ,establish Perfect and Sublime Masonry in every part of the world, etc., etc.

 

"We, therefore, request the brethren, in general, to grant to said Stephen Morin, such aid and assistance as may lie in their power, and we do require him to act in a similar manner toward all the brethren, members of the Lodge, or such as he might have admitted or constituted, or whom lie might hereafter admit and constitute, in the Sublime degrees of Perfection, which we grant him, with full power and authority to make Inslxctors wheresoever the Sublime degree has not been SCOTCH BITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

93 established, as we are well satisfied with his great information and capacity.

 

" In testimony whereof we have delivered him these presents, signed by the Deputy General of the Order, Grand Commander of the White and Black Eagles, Sublime Prince of Royal Secret, and by us, Grand Inspectors, Sublime Officers of the Grand Council and of the Grand Lodge, established in this capital, and we have hereunto affixed the hand seal of our 111. Grand Master H. R. H., and that of our Grand Lodge and Sovereign Grand Council.

 

" At the Grand East of Paris, A.L. 5761, or of the Christian Ira, August 27, 1761.

 

(Signed)

 

CHAILLOU DE JOIVILLE, Deputy Gen. of the Order, etc. PRINCE DE ROHAN, Master o f the Grand Lodge, etc. LACoRNE, Deputy Grand Master, etc. SAVALETTE DE BUC%OLY, Grand Keeper of the Seals, etc. TAUPIN, Prince Mason.

 

BREST DE LA CHAUSVE, Grand Elect Prince Mason.

 

11 By order of the Grand Lodge.

 

(Signed)

 

DAUBERTIN, Grand Elect, etc." If the foregoing document be genuine, and this, it is thought, never has been questioned, the following facts are evolved 1. That in 1761, Louis, of Bourbon, Count of Clermont, Prince of the blood, was Grand Master and Protector of all the Lodges in France, and that Chaillou De Joiville, was his Deputy, and not the Deputy of Frederick the Great.

 

2.. That the body granting powers to Stephen Morin was the Sovereign Grand Lodge, holding in its body the Sovereign Grand Council, and that said act was done by the united and unanimous concurrence of the officers and members then present, of both bodies.

 

3. That Stephen Morin's authority authorized him to constitute a Lodge of Perfection, wherever he might sojourn, and  94 MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

u Bro. Ragon continues required it to take the name of Perfect Harmony, and regard him as its Worshipful Master.

 

4. That the Masters of all regular Lodges, throughout the world, were commanded and enjoined to regard Stephen .florin as Worshipful Master of Perfect Harmony Lodge.

 

5. That, in 1761, a union and fusion had been effected between the Grand Council and Grand Lodge, as the instrument declares the Grand Inspectors to be " officers of the Grand Council, and of the Grand Lodge." 6. That Stephen Morin's authority had the seal of His Royal Highness, Louis, of Bourbon, and not that of Frederick the Great, as head of the Order, nor is any allusion, whatever, made to that Monarch.

 

7. That, whatever may be thought of the union and fusion, above alluded to, Stephen Morin's authority is ordered by the Grand Lodge, and, therefore, it is proper to suppose the Grand Lodge acted with full authority, five years after, when it annulled the patent, and recalled the power granted to him "in 1761." 1",f, "The Council of Emperors of East and *West, strengthen themselves by recruiting men of low station, for whose money they made them Prince Masons. A certain number of Princes of the Royal Secret formed their Supreme Council of Prince Masons, and the dignitaries of this Council took the title of Grand Inspectors General. January 22, of this year, the Council of Emperors East and West, issues a circular, stating that it takes the title of the Sublime Scottish Mother Lodge of the Grand French Globe, Sovereign Grand Lodge of France.

 

"This Council would be a rival to the Grand Lodge of France, and, in consequence, crushed herself‑she fell asleep 1781.

 

Thus goes out the Rite of Harodim.

 

"In 1784, from the broken remains of the Council of Emperors East and West, and the Council of the Knights of the East, there arose, with the assistance of many brethren of the high degrees, and officers of the Grand Lodge of Franca, a Grand Chapter General of France.

 

yard the i as nt nd e e d SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

95 "On the 27th of February, 1786, the Grand Chapter General of France united with the Grand Orient of France by treaty ; by which it will be seen that the Grand Orient has thus gathered in its hands, all the powers of the several authorities, and has thus become the sole possessor, and the immediate successor to the founders of the Rite of Perfection, of the Consistory of Princes of the Royal Secret, and of all the Scottish System, Ancient and Accepted, which was practiced, not only in the Council of the Emperors East and West, but also in the Scotch Consistories of Bourdeaux, known under the title of Sublime Scotch Mother Lodge, and which was conferred on Stephen Morin in 1761, and recalled in 1766.

 

" Stephen Morin, on his arrival in St. Domingo, commenced the propagation of his Masonic work in the Rite of Perfection, consisting of twenty‑five degrees. He also created Inspectors, R hich title did not designate the arbitrary powers and prerogatives that some silly writers have supposed, but merely the power of constituting Lodges.

 

He also, notwithstanding tho annulling of his patent,. and his recall in 1766, went on constituting Chapters and Councils, in different parts of America. Between 1766 and 1782, the Revolution progressed in the Island, and the Rite of Perfection slumbered.

 

But, in 1783, it awakes with thirty‑three degrees, for, in that year, Morin and his coadjutors erect, in the city of Charleston, S. C., a Grand Lodge of Perfection, but the Prince Masons of Charleston, not satisfied with the Rite of Perfection, consisting of twenty‑five degrees, erect eight‑degrees more, making, in all, thirty‑three degrees, and on their own authority, without any Masonic legal right whatever, constitute themselves the Supreme Scotch Council of the French Possessions in America.

 

"In 1797, John Mitchell, Frederick Dalcho, EmanuelDe La Motte, Abraham Alexander, and Isaac Auld, are the five persons who create a Supreme Council of the 33rd degree in Charleston.

 

" fn 1802, the Count De Grasse Tilly received the 33rd degree in Charleston, and returned to France in 1803, and reported himself as the Supreme Chief of the 33rd degree, which, at this time, was not known in France." 1,1 MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Bro. Le Blanc De Marconay says The Ineffable degrees were formerly practiced in France, and continued to be so practiced, viz., from 1761 to 1804. Then Bro. Count De Grasse Tilly, who had taken the 33rd degree in the Grand Council of Charleston, brought them to France as a novelty, or curiosity‑not with the title of Ineffable degrees, as of the Rite of Perfection, under which title they had always hitherto been known, viz., the twenty‑five degrees, but under that of ncotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted.

 

"The administration of the Scottish Rite was adopted in France, by the Grand Orient, only in the year 1810‑11, after the fall of the Empire. Until then, this rite had been under the jurisdiction of a particular administration, not recognized by the Grand Orient, but which administration possessed the right of conferring the same from 1799, by virtue of various treaties, entered into by that body with the Grand Orient." The administration to which Bro. Le Blanc De Marconay alludes is, most likely, a Consistory ; but, if so, his account of the time of its establishment does not agree with that fixed by Bro. Ragon, and, as the latter writes from the records for publication, his account is most probably correct.

 

He says "On the 19th of December, 1804, the Grand Orient declares that, henceforth, it possesses all the rites ; and, on the 22nd of same month, the Supreme Council of the 33rd degree was erected, and provisionally organized at Paris." Thus, it would seem, that Count De Grasse Tilly carried Scotch Rite Masonry into France in 1803, instead of 1799, and that, in 1804, the Grand Council was established. Bro. Ragon further says "Joseph Serneau, a jeweler, initiated by Stephen Morin into the Rite of Perfection, in St. Domingo, and forced to leave on account of the insurrection of the blacks, goes to the city of New York, in 1806, and founds, in 1807, a Supreme Consistory, which is recognized by the Grand Orient of France, in 1812." The history of the above named Grand Consistory is vsriously stated by good men. in the city of New York, swayed, most likely, by their party prejudices. On the ono SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

97 hand, Serneau is represented as a bad man, who, without any authority whatever, established his Consistory, and, by the assistance of a few others, inveigled De Witt Clinton into it. While, on the other hand, it is said that Serneau had precisely the same authority which Morin had, and, certainly, as much: authority as any Inspector General appointed by said Morin ;, that any other view of the subject would only prove that there never was a legal Consistory established in the United States. And, it is further contended, that De Witt Clinton was regularly made the second officer in the Grand Consistory, and soon became the actual Commander; that said Consistory gave the degrees to many eminent men, De Witt Clinton presiding ; that all the degrees were conferred on Lafayette, and, as a mark of distinction, Clinton resigned his office, a..d made him Commander, during his sojourn in the United States; that Clinton resumed the command on the return of Lafayette to France, and continued its Acting Grand Officer until h6t death, in 1828.

 

Bro. Ragon continues "In 1812, some Masons, having received the 33rd degrem in America, and, joined by some other Masons in Paris, erect a, rival Supreme Council in Paris, under the title of Council; )f America, of which the Count De Grasse Tilly was Grand Commander.

 

" On the 5th of August, 1813, De La Motte (a Jew), Treasurer General of the Grand Council of Charleston, founds a Supreme Council in New York City, of which Daniel D. Tompkins is made by him Most Puissant Sovereign Grand Commander; Richard Riker, Samson Simson, J. J. J. Gougas, and M. L. M, Peixotto, members of the same. This Council continued its operations in New York but a short time, and then went to sleep." The reader may remember that, about the time above alluded to, two great rival political parties existed in New York, headed by De Witt Clinton, on the one side, and Daniel D. Tompkins, on the other, and, whether tr‑ie or false, rumor then said that this rival Council was designed to forward the inter,eat of Tompkins, and thus counteract the influence which, the old Grand Council gave to Clinton.

 

14 r.

 

95

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Lc Blanc Dc Ma,rconay says " From 1807 until 1912, there was, in New York, only one Lod`iro (Atilier) of thirty‑two degrees, of which Bro. Serneau was Grand Commander. It was about this time that Bro. Sernea.u founds a Supreme Council of thirty‑three do‑rces, which obtained the acknowledgement of the Grand Orient of France, in 1822." Bro. Ragon says "In blay, 1821, a union and fusion took place between the Supreme Council of France, and the Council of America, in Paris. " In 1828, the regular Supreme Council of New York, of whicli Hon. De Witt Clinton was Grand Commander, went to 'sleep, in common with all the Masonic bodies'in that re‑ion.

 

" In 1832, the Count De St. Laurent comes to New York, and reorganized the Supreme Council of De Witt Clinton, deceased, and Flias Hicks was then Grand Commander. It was duly constituted, and proclaimed by the title of the United Saprente Council 33rd." The Supreme Council of the 33rd degree, Ancient and Accepted Rite, of France, is entirely separate from the Grand 'Orient. It was established, as stated, in, 1811, united to the rival Council of America in 1821, and continues now in existence, in Paris, separate from, but in acknowledgment and cor respondence with the Grand Orient.

 

Thory was its defender, and opposed to the Grand Orient, while Ragon was the de"'fender of the Grand Orient, and opposed to the Grand Council.

 

In the United''States, each of the above bodies have their 'friends, and each have their opposes. The Charleston wing holds the Grand Orient in derision, charges it with assuming control of the Scotch Rite, without authority‑that it is truly ‑',a, Grand Lodge of Modern, or French Rite Masonry, and should ‑confine itself to that Rite.

 

The old Grand Council of New York contends that, by the treaties here referred to, the Grand Orient has 4‑ally obtained control of all the Rites, and, so far as the Scotch Rite is concerned, it is sufficient to say that, even the Grand Council of Fr nee admits her legal right to take charge of said system.

 

SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

Bro. 1,, 131a.nc Dc Marconay says The regular Supreme Council of New York (possessing, in 1807. only thirty‑two degrees), since 1812, omnipotent for the 3rd. passed, in succession of time, from the 111. Bro. De Witt Clinton to 111. Bro. Hicks, and, finally, arrived in the Grand Commandery of Ill. Bro. Henry C. Atwood.

 

'As for the Snpreine Council of Louisiana,. thus it is : It was established by the Supreme Council of New York, in 1813, first as a Grand Consistory of Princes of the Royal Secret. This Consistory was confirmed, in 1833, by the United Supreme Council of the Western Hemisphere (the same Supreme Council that created it), and. in 1835, it took the name and title of Supreme Council of 33rd. and founded a power for Louisiana which was admitted to the correspondence and acknowledgment of the Grand Orient of France, in 1842." About 1851, Bro. John Gedge, Grand Master of Louisiana, who had previously written and published a historical account of the Scotch Rite degrees, denouncing their claims to Masonry in the strongest terms, took charge of a Consistory, under authority from the Grand Council at Charleston, which new. Consistory soon took precedence in public favor, or, more properly, with the American Masons of New Orleans; and, in 1855; the old Grand Council yielded up its right to that jurisdiction.

 

Whatever may have been the motives which induced said surrender, it is certainly too late now to inquire, and any attempt to reestablish it must be regarded as illegal. True, it may be justly said, that the Charleston Council established a Consistory there illegally, because the ground had been, and was occupied, but as one wrong can not justify another, the friends of the old Grand Council can not be justified in an effort to resuscitate the old (which would be impossible), or establish a new one.

 

From all. the facts referred to, and others which may be stated, the following objections may be urged against Scotch Rite Masonry 1. That if the Ancient and Accepted Rite. in its first three degrees, or elsewhere, teaches, essentially, the same truths thut 100

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

are, and ever have been taught by Ancient Craft Masonry, then are they not necessary, nor can there be any legal authority for this new system of administering them.

 

2. If they are essentially different, either in ritual or doo. trine, from Ancient Craft Masonry, then are they falsely called Masonic degrees, and should be denounced by good and true Masons.

 

8. That if the Scotch Rite has taken charge of, and subdivided Masonry into various parts, and instituted a degree for each part, the founder or founders have violated their plighted faith to Ancient Craft Masonry, by a bold attempt to make innovations in the body of Masonry, and that to tolerate, encourage, or practice those degrees, is to sanction those innovations and justify violated vows.

 

4. That the degrees of Perfection were originally political and sectarian.

 

5. That while the Exalted degrees in the Scotch Rite were, originally, and, if properly conferred, are still strictly Christian degrees, and exclude all but Christians, there is proof that they have been, and still are, given to Jews, Infidels, and even revilers of Christ's holy mission.

 

6. That no legal authority can be shown for the introduction of the Rite of Perfection, or Scotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted, into the United States.

 

7. That Frederick the Great never had anything to do with the system of Perfection, or Scotch Rite Masonry.

 

8. If all, or any part of the foregoing charges are true, then should no one who believes in the teachings of Ancient Craft Masonry; no one who can not sanction innovations in the body of Masonry ; no one who believes that Masonry should have nothing to do with politics or religion ; no one who believes that the Grand Lodge system of 1717 should be sustained ; and, certainly, no friend to Christianity, should tolerate, much less encourage, the propagation of said degrees.

 

To the first charge, it is only necessary to say that all Scotch Rite Masons admit, nay, they claim as a reason why Ancient Craft Masons should not object to them, that the three first degrees are essentially the same; and thus are we plainly asked SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

101 to admit that a Society, having the very germ of its origin as late as 1740, or, at farthest, 1650, has the right to administer the first three degrees of Masonry, though no Grand. Lodge authority is sought for to legalize the assumed right. In short. we are asked to admit that it was in the power of Chevalier Ramsey to take charge of Masonry, institute a new formula for it, remodel and change, as he pleased, the ritual, and that now, this new system has not only equal, but paramount claims to be cultivated.

 

What answer should the honest Mason make? Can lie do less than denounce, disown, and repudiate the attempt at innovation ? ‑Suppose our friends, the Odd Fellows, were to adopt the three first degrees of Masonry, as a part and parcel of their system of degrees, and suppose they were to administer them precisely as they are given in our Lodges, could we, dare we recognize them as legal Masonic degrees? But we shall see, before the close of this article, that Scotch Rite Masons do more than ask us to acknowledge and recognize their first three degrees.

 

The second charge conditionally embraces a self‑evident truth, and, therefore, need not be commented upon; and the same may be said of the third charge. In noticing the fourth charge, that the degrees were originally political and sectarian, it will appear necessary, in the absence of positive proof, to present the highest presumptive testimony.

 

It is the opinion of some writers, that the Ineffable degrees were instituted in Scotland, immediately after Cromwell caused Charles I. to be beheaded, and while Charles II. was an exile in France, and that the association had for its leading objects, first, to restore the Royal exile, and second, to bind all Roman Catholics never to change their religion. The Reformation in England, Scotland, and Wales had progessed so rapidly as to alarm the Pope and his adherents, seeing, as they did, that without some well‑planned and combined effort, the supremacy of that Church would be forever lost in the kingdom of Great Britain, if, indeed, the force of example did not spread through out Europe.

 

To meet the emergency, and to arrest the conversions to the Protestant faith, it was deemed proper to form a seeret Society, which, while it gratified the initiates with a    102

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

 great amount of tinsel and show, in a very imposing ceremony, accompanied with high‑sounding titles, and the investment of V.reat powers, especially to the standard‑bearers, also bound the recipients by a solemn oath, never to change heir religion. This Society, it is said, was secretly organized throughout the kingdom. That they adopted Freemasonry as a model, but, instead of the teachings and legends of the third degree, known ‑to every MaEter Mason, they taught that, under the symbol of the Lost Wot d, thhey were to understand the murder of Charles I., which Word could be restored and brought to lialht by the restoration of the son of the murdered King to the throne of England, and the reestablishment of the Roman Catholic religion.

 

Bros. Nichola and Bode felt themselves authorized to 'relieve this was the origin and true version of Freemasonry. Scltroder, also, took this view of the subject, and says that the siguification of the whole ceremony of the third degree goes to show its origin and teaching, as above stated.

 

But we have no reliable testimony, going to show the institution of the Ineffable degrees, until Chevalier Ramsey visited France, about 1740. That the Society, when first, known in France, was a political. As well as Roman Catholic Institution, is, we think, beyond all reasonable doubt ; the ritual of the degrees, even as .they are now used, and especially the old copies, go to establish this fact; .and, certainly, it may, with truth, be said that, previous to the days of Ramsey, no charge of intermeddling in politics or religion had ever been sustained against Ancient Craft Masonry but to show that the. Jesuit Priest, Barruel, was correct in charging that Masons in France had connected themselves with :the Illuminati and Jacobin clubs, and were instrumental in fomenting the Revolution of 17239, the open declaration of Bro. Ladabat, of Louisiana, is given here. In defending the old Grand Council at New Orleans, in 1853, lie says " French Masonry is not nonsense!

 

It works!

 

The world is full of its wonders ; and if the ideas of Liberty and Equality are now in the heart of all Europe, it is French Masonry we must thank for it.

 

.

 

.

 

.

 

.

 

.

 

She (France) waged war with Old aristocracy, priestocracy, and kingoeracy.

 

She stood alone is the midst of the globe, fought against all the nations of   SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

103  world combined against her, and forced into them Freemasonry; that i.,‑, LIBERTY, EQUALITY, and, ultimaIcly, FRATERNITY.

 

The French armies have carried into every land of Europe, the ideas which had been matured by French Afasonry." Here is plainly set forth they ery doctrines, the very teachings of Weishaupt, the founder of the Illuminati. He sets out with tli~ broad basis, that the enlightenment of the people‑thd masses‑will lead to the downfall of all kings, all priests, all religions, and establish upon their ruins, Liberty and Equality: Bro. Ladabat seems resolved not to be misunderstood, as lid proceeds to quote from. Barruel, to prove that this great credit can only be claimed for French Masonry, as Barruel, in hit denunciation of Masonry, exempts English Freemasonry, as hd declared that Masonry, in England, never interfered in politics: Nor is Bro. Ladabat alone in his views of the political charge= ter of Scotch Rite Masonry, though he is, perhaps, more open and manly in his proclamation.

 

Bro. Albert Pike, of Louisiana,;, in an address before his Grand Lodge, in February, 1858, iii speaking of Scotch Rite Masonry, says "It is the preacher of LIBERTY, FRATERNITY, and EQUALITY. 0 And he enters into detail, sh0wing that it advocates and preaches " a decent and well regulated Liberty, a sober Fraternity, and political Equality." Again Bro. Pike says: " Masonry was made to be the ORDER OF THE PEOPLE.

 

1l`t has ever exerted its influence on the side,of civil anti religious liberty ;" and then presents the following extract as the motto of Scotch Rite Masonry " ` Devotion to the interest of the people; detestation ff Tyranny; haired for the rights of Free Tho"ht, Free Speech, and Fred+ Conscience; implacable hostility to Intolerance, Bigotry, drroggnce and Usurpation; respect and regard.for labor, which makes hunidtil nature noble; and scorn and contempt for all monopolies, that minister to insolent and pampered luxury.' " Here we have a published account of the objects and ends or the Scotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted.

 

It was instituted 11br the people, in opposition to tyrants.

 

It is intended to fl‑*e4 15 104

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

the mind of man from religious restraints‑from the dogmas of all religions, and as it was made for the "dear people," "it holds in scorn and contempt all monopolies that minister to intolerant and pampered luxury," that is to say, all royal families tnd liereditory claimants of power; to all priests and ministers, who monopolize the high places, and live in luxury, on the sweat of the poor laborer. Now all this sounds well in the ear of a n American, but this motto is not given as the motto of a politieal club, but is sent forth by a brother Mason, as the true motto of Freemasonry, while the members of the Order have proclaimed, far and near, that it has nothing whatever to do with politics, or religion, that it neither teaches monarchy, anar chy, nor republicanism.

 

It neither teaches the right divine of the Pope, the temperal powers of the Bishop, nor the freedom from all the religious restraints of Priests and Churches. Scotch Rite Masonry, then, was not only political and sectarian, in the beginning, but it is still so, as shown by its ablest advocates.

 

From the best light available, it appears to be probable that Ramsey subdivided the degrees of Masonry, or, rather, added thereon, a set of degrees, which he termed philosophic explanations of true Masonry. That, in addition to these explanatory degrees, lie, in conjunction with the Jesuit Priests of France, concocted one or more strictly Christian degrees, and almost as purely Romish, for the very hangings and imagery representations, from Christ's body to the Cross, portray the forms of worship o6 that Church alone.

 

The Rose Croix, is the great Christian degree of the Scotch Rite, which has been remodeled to furnish the Templar's degree of the United States, but in doing this the original Rose Cross was not given up, but is now practiced by the said Scotch Rite, either in its original purity, or under.various modifications, to suit persons and localities.

 

We do not know how many degrees were invented by Ram. sey. Some writers say he instituted but three, and that they were by him intended, not as innovations upon Masonry, but to ridicule the pomp and show with which he found Masonry incumbered in Paris, and that he succeeded so far beyond of `it in. ies rs, at an tito 0th rm B. f.

 

t I SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

105 his intention, in pleasing the show‑loving French, that they adopted the Scotchmau's Rite Masonry, in lieu of that which they had received from England. Be this as it may, it appear+, that Ramsey's Masonry went to sleep for a time, as, for several years, we hear nothing of it, until it reappears under the guardianship of De Bonnville, who was regarded as Ramsey's successor, and then we find it under the name of the Masonry of Harodim, or Ineffable Masonry, and soon after, the Sublime Masonry of Harodim. and had twenty‑five degrees, the Prince of the Royal Secret being the last. And here it is that we find the Rose Cross, representing the crucifixion, burial, ascension, pas. cover, libations. etc., and all exhibited and explained so pleilosophtcaUy, that they were made acceptable to all, whether Jew, Chris tian, or Infidel.

 

Though this may seem to be a charge difficult to sustain, the facts force the mind to believe its truth. It is true, that these degrees have been so often modified and changed, to suit purposes and localities, that scarcely any one charge will strictly apply to all.

 

In 1823, the Grand Council, over which De Witt Clinton presided. issued a circular, bearing his signature, denouncing the Charleston Council, because they conferred the higher degrees‑the Christian degrees‑upon Israelites, while the Grand Consistory of New Orleans, the creature of the very same Council, held that there was nothing to exclude the Jews from taking them.

 

In this work, there is no intention or desire to recur to the particulars of the party quarrels which have ever marked the footsteps of this new system of secret degrees, called Alasonic, both in France and America; certain it is that, while these quarrels have tended to bring reproach upon Masonry, because of the assumed title, they have, nevertheless, tended to expose and lay bare, not only the teachings, but the very rituals of the Order, copies of which are to be found, not only in the breasts of the good and true, but in black and white, and often differing as widely from each other, as does the ritual of Odd Fellowship from that of Masonry; but it is believed that, in every part of the world, the Scotch Rite retains the leading features of the Rose Croix degree, and, therefore. it is everywhere,appurently, a purely Christian degree, greatly more impressive and theatrical 106

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

than the Templar's degree is, as given in the Eneampruents of this country ; and yet, how abundant the proof, that the bitterest enemies of Christ, and the very blasphemers of His holy name, are deemed fit subjects to take that, and all the other Christian degrees. If we go to France and begin with Voltaire, who, if we may believe the account published by Bro. Mackey, in the first number of his JJIasonic .Miscellany, was received into the degrees with almost shoutings of praise, certainly with speeches in which lie was complimented and thanked, as the great and efficient means of freeing the minds of millions from the thraldocn of superstition. We might pass from Voltaire down to Lafayette, and it would be difficult to find a single prominent Scotch Rite Mason, who was a true believer in any branch of orthodox religion.

 

And how much better is it in the United States?

 

Who are its leaders, and what are their religious sentiments?

 

It is known that many good Christians have taken the degrees in this country, but, generally, they gradually and silently absent themselves from the Lodges and Consistories; but as it would be improper to be personal; other proofs will be referred to.

 

We have seen, in the early part of this work, and alluded to the fact in this article, that Weishaupt was a great fanatic, and claimed to be the founder of a system of infidelity, so wisely arrant,ed, as finally and speedily to banish all religion, save the religion "of Reason, of Liberty, and of Equality." Weishaupt adopted French Masonry as the groundwork of his system, and permitted none but Masons to enter his asylum.

 

It is known that the Charleston Council contends, and has ever done so that Scotch Rite Masonry is indebted to Frederick the Great, of Prussia, for the institution of a part of the degrees, and for, at least, the ratification of the fundamental law for their government.

 

Now, we admit that all this does not amount to proof positive that the Charleston brethren regard the system as teaching anti‑Christian principles, but we leave it to the candid read^r to say, whether such an inference is not legitimate, for we dare not charge that they are ignorant of the fact that Frederick was as much opposed to Christianity as his relig ious teacher, Voltaire himself.

 

No one, who has read the various SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

107 biographies of that Monarch, can believe that lie would have lent his name or aid for the propagation of any system or theory, having even the appearance of Christianity.

 

It is known that Stephen Morin, who brought the Rite of Perfection (including the Rose Cross) to this country, Ryas a Jew, and, therefore, an enemy to Christianity. It is known that nearly all the Deputy Inspectors General, appointed by him, were Jews ; and the same may be said of the acting Deputies, for fifty years after.

 

We proceed to give the names of as many of the early Inspectors as we can call to mind, viz., De La Motte, Abraham Alexander, M. M. Hayes, Isaae Do Costa, Col. John Mitchell, and Frederick Dalcho, were severally appointed for South Carolina. henry Frankin, for Jamaica; Solomon Bush, for Penntiylvania ; Barend M. Spitzer, for Georgia; A. Forst, for Virginia.

 

Of the foregoing, we think Bros. Mitchell and Dalcho, alone, were not Jews.

 

In speaking of Do Grasse Tilly, Bro. Radon says "According to the Count's own showing, Morin conferred the degree on Frankin (a Jew), Frankin rave it to Moses flays (a Jew), Hays gave it to Berend D1. Spitzer (a Jew). These had a reunion in Philadelpliia, in 1781, and gave it to Moses Collen (a Jew), Cohen gave it to Isaac Lalang (a Jew), and Lalang conferred it upon Count Dc Grasse Tilly." Cohen also gave the degree (or, more properly, the appointment of Deputy Inspector) to Abraham Jacobs (a Jew), who, in 1802, initiated eight brethren in Savannah, Georgia. and opened a Sublime Lodge. From 1802 to 1810, Jacobs movements are not known to us, but about the period last named, we hear of him in the city of New York, and, certainly, not under the most favorable circumstances. Whatever may bethought of the legality of the old Consistory of New York, it will hardly be denied that it was occupying the ground, and doing work, and yet Jacobs conferred the whole of the degrees, or as many as lie himself possessed, upon nineteen brethren in New York, in violation of the known laws of the Cousistory. We are told that Jacobs excused himself by taking his novitiates to Trenton‑sixty, miles away from the Consistorv‑‑ò before he could conscientiously complete the degrees.

 

But, after li 108

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

all, we do not know that Jacobs (a poor man, who must needs live by his wits, for he would not go. to hard labor) is much more censurable than was the old Grand Council of New York, in planting a subordinate in Charleston, knowing the ground to be occupied, or than the Grand Council of Charleston, in planting a subordinate in New Orleans, under similar circumstances.

 

In 1802, the Grand Lodge of South Carolina evinced some dissatisfaction, if not distrust, at the establishment of a new system, called Masonic, in that jurisdiction ; whereupon the Grand Council appointed a Committee, consisting of Frederick Dalcho, Isaac Auld, and F. De La Motte, who, on the 4th of December, of that year, issued a circular, historical and explanatory of said new degrees. In this document are to be found many curious things, among which are tire following " It is well known to the Blue Master, that King Solomon and his royal visitor were in possession of the real and pristine word, but of which lie must remain in ignorance, unless initiated into the Sublime degrees. The authenticity of this word, as known to us, and for which our much respected Master died; is proven to the most skeptic mind. from the sacred pages of holy writ, and the Jewish history, from the earliest time.

 

Dr. Priest ley, in his letters to the Jews, has the following remarkable pas sage, when speaking of the miracles of Christ: `and it Iraq been said by your writers, that he performed his miracles by means of some Ineffable name of God, which he stole out of the Temple!"' We learn, from the foregoing, 1. That King Solomon, and Hiram, King of Tyre, were in possession of the pristine word, of which the Master Mason of Ancient Craft Masonry must remain in ignorance, unless lie consent to be initiated into this new system of Masonry, by whose founders the great and hidden mysteries of Masonry have been brought to light. The honest truth is not admitted, that this new system subdivides the degrees of Masonry, and abstracts from tire Master's degree that full and complete explanation of the pristine word, and all the legends of Masonry which were given to the Master Mason, until after this trew t needs s much f New no. tile harlessimilar d some a new ou tho ~derick 4th of !xplan. found lomon ristine nitiatlrd, as ied, is holy 'riest e pas t l: as es by f the re in n of s lie by )nry ;ted, and e xn ry lew SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT ANI1 ACCEPTED.

 

109 system, or so much of it as relates to the Royal Arch, was introduced into England by the coined influence of Ramsey and Dermott.

 

2. We learn that if the extract from Dr. Priestley means anything, it is used here to leave the impression on the mind that the charge made by the Jews against Christ was true ; that He did perform His miracles by means of this pristine word, the Ineffa611e name, which He stole from the Temple. And this is the true Masonic Institution, teaching Ancient Craft Masonry in the first sixteen degrees, and Christianity in the remainder 1 It is true, that what is infidelity with one, may be esteemed good religion with another, as the one or the other may be influenced by a self‑erected standard of truth.

 

If the Holy Bible is true only in part, then is it not infidelity, in part, to deny its truth, and the Charleston Committee may not be charged with favoring infidelity.

 

But if, as we suppose, the Bible is true, as a whole, and in all its parts, it sounds like blasphemy, to us, to indorse the truth of the charge made by Dr. Priestley.

 

If Christ was an imposter, it may not be wrong to charge Him with theft and a juggling use of the stolen word, but if he was the Son of God‑God‑man‑what must be thought of the manner in which the Committee use the words of Dr. Priestley ? Again, the Committee says : "Another very important discovery was made in the year 5553, of a record in Syrian characters, relative to the most remote antiquity, and from which it would appear, that the world is many thousand years older than given by Mosaic accounts‑an opinion entertained by many of the learned." From the above extract, we are left to suppose the Committee attached to this wonderful discovery, the existence of satisfactory testimony that the Bible is not true, at least, so far as Moses is to be esteemed an author. We know that some learned men do believe that the world is older than the Bible represents it to be, but we have yet to learn that this theory is in accordance with the Bible.

 

From published documents and the rituals, we know that Scotch Rite Masons represent the Rose Cross degree and that lieu

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

of Kadosh, as teaching Christianity.

 

In the former, the crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and passover, are represented ; and, yet, we find among the recipients, Jews, Moliammedans, and 1 ufidels, of all grades ; and this is made to appear consistent, by having the degree philosophically explained, and the philosophy of French T‑lasoury is very flexible and expansive. For example, if it fits the taste, or, so called religion, of the initiate, all the representations of Christ and His institutions are philusophicady explained to mean any and everything, but the divine mission, divine mediation, divine death, divine ascension, and His divine laws, are explained to mean only that Christ was a good man, and offered good temporal laws, philo sophically considered, for the government of mankind.

 

While, with the Voltaire branch of this system, it is more openly taught that these representations of Christ and His sufferings, are made to show the fallacy of the doctrines of Christianity. Then, again, there are those who profess to be Christians, and practice piety, who take a medium course. Within the last forty‑eight hours, one of the most distinguished Scotch Rite Masons in the United States, in conversing upon this subject, exclaimed, " What, pray, has the divinity of Christ to do with Christianity."

 

Such as lie would doubtless hold that Christ was a creature of God, a man, mortal as are all men, commissioned by God to do and perform certain temporal things; vii., to prea%h the Gospel, establish Churches, and give laws for their temporal government.

 

Thus it will be seen that these Exalted and Sublime Christian degrees are made palatable to all.

 

In one of the Lodges, perhaps the 28th degree, " Old Adam presides as Chief Commander," and the Lodge is made up of beings, called "Perfect Angels," but so philosophical are these degrees, that it would be esteemed an evidence of downright ignorance to hint at the seeming impiety of such a representation as this.

 

The Rose ‑}‑, under various rite‑about eighty in nunibereven been tacked on to Ancient of Knight Templar, and though it is not here recognized, or names, is practiced in every known to the world. It has Craft 3fasonry, under the title recited ; Lans, conthe ive. the ons but Tnliat iloile, ily ty. nd St to th st s e 0 SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT ARID ACCEPTED.

 

ill claimed to be a part or parcel of Masonry, it assumes that aspect before the world, because none are admitted to the Orders of Knighthood but Freemasons. As practiced in the United States, the Rose Croix, or Templar's degree, is only given to those who believe in the divinity, vicarious death, ascension, and mediation of Christ, but the Rose Croix, or Templar's degree, in the Scotch Rite, is given. as is seen, to the professors of any religion, or of no religion, and certainly to Lnti‑Clii‑istians.

 

The author hopes not to be misunderstood.

 

lie does not Dpposc this new system of Masonry, so called, because it does .wt teach Christianity; on the contrary lie has ever contended that Masonry has nothing directly to do with Christianity, or any other sectarian religion‑that the only religion it has, is the belief in one God‑‑Jehovah.

 

But he holds that it would be quite as foreign to Masonry to teach anti‑Christianity, as to become a Christian sect ; and lie sincerely believes, that while in the Rose +, and Knight of Kadosli, the image worship of our Saviour is taught, Jews and Infidels are permitted to enter, and trample under foot the doctrines Ile carne to promulgate. This blow hot and blow cold Christian Masonry is either too grossly blasphemous, or too philsophically refined, to amalgamate or hold fraternal ties with Ancient Craft Masonry.

 

And can these objections to the higher degrees of the Scotch Rite be considered out of place, when it is remembered that they claim to have "the original right," not only to administer the three degrees in Masonry, but to govern and control all Masonry. It is true that the Grand Council at Charleston said, in 1802 "The Sublime Grand Lodge, sometimes called the Ineffable Lodge; or the Lodge of Perfection, extends, from the 4th to the 14th degree inclusive, which last is the degree of Perfection.

 

The Sublime Masons never initiate any into the Blue degrees, without a legal warrant obtained for that purpose from, a Symbolic Grand Lodge." Was this true when it was spoken ? if so, wonderful strides after power have since been taken ; for, throughout Continental Europe, indeed, everywhere that Scotch Masons have obtained the ascendency, they have not applied to a Symbolic Grand t12

 

MODERN FREEMASONR .

 

Lodge, but their Consistorics‑about which Symbolic Masons know nothing‑have issued authority, established Lodges, and worked the degrees in the Scotch Rite. This has been done in New Orleans; and, so far as their system may be right and proper, they acted correctly, and more manfully than the other wing, who, for popularity, abstain from taking charge of Symbolic Masonry, so far as the three degrees, but, at the same time, openly declare their "original right" to do so.

 

The Charleston Council, having obtained a foothold, and becoming more bold, or more grasping, than she was in 1802, declares end proclaims, in 1845, that " In deference to the Constitutions of the York Rite, practiced in this country, it waives its rights and privileges, so far as they relate to the first three degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry, which, long before the establishment of any Supreme Council in this hemisphere, were under the control of Symbolic Grand Lodges." The Northern Grand Council, under J. J. J. Gougas, reiterated this proclamation. Now this waiving of power over Ancient Craft Masonry, or, rather, that part of their Craft Masonry which they call the first three degrees, stands in a tljreatening attitude, warning us that they have the original right to confer all the degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry‑that they have only waived that right‑aye, and they will continue to waive it, provided we will harken to their advice and dictation.

 

These conditions were very plainly set forth in a printed communication, sent to the Grand Lode of Louisiana, by the Consistory at New Orleans, in February, 1858. What then is the condition of Ancient Craft Masons, made in what we esteem true Masonic Lodges, legally constituted by warrants from Grand Lodges? If we ask whence their authority for taking charge of Freemasonry, under new rituals, new degrees, new doctrines‑no, not new doctrines, but antiquated doctrines, remodeled for modern uses 1 we shall be answered variously, according as the local body has obtained its authority.

 

In France, we shall be told the original power was derived from Chevalier Ramsey, modified and improved by De Bonnville, the Chapter of Clermont, and, finally, the finishing touch is dur to DUB Lad in Lad her rmme .'he ing res ticas ry, icil .Ld erLnry ng Per Iv it, ed ie is In In ~g %V y. n n e 0 SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT ANI) ACCEPTED.

 

113 Std:hen Morin. Ask in Scotland, where it is claimed the., degrees were practiced long before the days of Ramsey, and the Grand Lodge tells us that this now system was never heard of there, until a communication was read from an AmericAu Council, to which she replied in substance‑"depart front: us, we never knew you, we do not wish to know you." Ask;, one arm of the American Society, and they will give much the,. same history that is afforded in France, and refer us to the Grand Orient for further light.

 

Ask the other arm, and they, will, tell you that the Grand Orient is not good authority for‑, facts; and reason very clumsily to sustain false positions‑that, the degrees originated in Scotland, at some remote period, noQ now to be ascertained‑that Ramsey carried them from Scotland:' to France‑that afterward, Frederick the Great, added to andperfected them, and condescended to make laws for then: government.

 

Ask in Prussia, and we are told that Frederick the Greet, was never more than a Master Mason, and that, the degrees of Perfection, or Scotch Rite, never was, and is not now known there. And yet, by this mammoth innovator, we are told weò Must enter, with them, into a concordat of mutual agreement, and, mutual defense, and, in default of such concession, it is. plainly intimated that they will no longer feel under obligar tions to waive their right to control the first three degrees;;; and, the logical deduction is, that if we will, not, throw open, the door of the Masonic Sanctum Sanctorum, we shall be regarded as interlopers, money‑changers, and desecrators of the sacred Temple, and, as such, though we be found kneeling at the alters of our fathers, we shall be ejected, to make place for, those who have the original right to occupy it.

 

In vindication of the sixth charge, viz., that no legal authority. can be found for the introduction of the Scotch, or Rite of Perfection, into the United States, we have only to recapitulato., some facts already stated, viz., that all the Councils and Consistorles, now in existence, or which once existed, have, and do trace their authority to Stephen Morin, and as no Council or, Consistory is claimed to have been established before 1783, iit; Wows that none existed here until. mure than twenty years,, a 114

 

)(ODERN FREEMASONRY, after Morin's power and authority ceased to exist.

 

His patent was issued in 1761, and annulled in 1766.

 

Bro. Giles F. Yates tells us that a Sublime Lodge of Perfection was " established in Albany, in 1767," by Henry A. Frankin, one of the Deputies of Stephen Morin, and if Frankin received his authority from Morin, before the recall of his patent, it would seem that this Lodge, and this alone, was legally planted.

 

But, after all, it is of but little consequence whether any, or all the Councils, Consistories, or Lodges were regularly established, because, whether legal or illegal in their origin, all irregularities have been healed by one of the two great fountain‑heads of France. Every Council or Consistory ever planted in this country (if it lived long enough to open up a correspondence), has been ratified and acknowledged, either by the Grand Council or Grand Orient of France, and as they themselves recognize each other as legal Masonic bodies, we must acknowledge that. Scotch Rite Masonry, in the United States, is as legally practiced as it is in France.

 

The seventh charge, that Frederick the Great never had any thing whatever to do with this system of Perfection, or Scotch Rite Masonry, may, it is thought, be readily sustained. Tne author thinks he has read every respectable biography of Frederick the Great, written or translated, in the English Ian guage, and, without the fear of successful contradiction, he asserts, that nowhere is his name mentioned in connection with any other than the three degrees given in a Symbolic Lodge. And is it at all probable that his connexion with these degrees ryas as important and public as is stated, and that the fact escaped the notice of all his biographers, especially as we know that some of them were minute in their details? They all tell us of his Initiation, Passing, and Raising in a Symbolic Lodge, and some of them very plainly intimate his want of admiration for Freemasonry.

 

Lord Dover kept and published an account of almost everything Frederick did or said, from his rising in the morning to his retirement at night, and yet, not a word of his connection with this Rite.

 

It has been so long and so often stated, in this country, that Frederick the Great was the Sovereign Grand Inspector General of both hemispheres Gt e d a n s s SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

115 and the author of the Secret Constitutions, etc., etc., that, for aught we know, it may be thought rash in us to deny their truth ; but all we ask, is an opportunity to present a moiety of the testimony that might be brought forward, and we think it will be seen that, while it must be admitted that Frederick the Great had quite as many sins of his own to answer for as the heart of his bitterest enemy could desire, it will yet be made appear that he did not lend his name to make innovations in the body of Masonry. The time selected for him to mature the system is singularly unfortunate, as a moment's reflection will satisfy every historian, that at no period of his wars was he so incessantly occupied with his armies, as in 1762'ò and Dr. Dalcho tells us that " the higher Councils and Chapters could not be opened without his presence, or that of his substitute, whom he must appoint." Stephen Morin claimed that his authority to confer the higher degrees emanated from Frederick, and the following extract will show (if true) that this Monarch wore his Masonic honoys a long time, and still they escaped the notice of every historian of his day. The Charleston Grand Council says "On the 1st of May, 1786, the Grand Constitution of the 33rd degree, called the Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, was finally ratified by His Majesty the King of Prussia, who, as Grand Commander of the Order of the Prince of the Royal Secret, possessed Sovereign Masonic power over all the Craft. In the new Constitution, this high power was conferred on a Supreme Council of nine brethren in each nation, who possess all the Masonic prerogatives, in their own districts, that His Majesty individually possessed, and are Sovereigns in .Masonry." By what authority the foregoing statements were made, does not appear, but it is most likely that they were the invented tale of Morin ; certain it is, that not a line or sentence of it is sustained by any historical record. Bro. Albert Pike, who is an open and devoted friend, and holds allegiance to the Charleston Council, said, in his address to the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, in February, 1858, that he did not believe Frederick the Great had 11G

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

anything to do with those degrees; but we offer testimony from the fountain‑head in Prussia, as conclusive upon this su'l,tecL The following is the original translation of the.,document., hi 6t10 Oerman language, deposited in the Grand_ East, of France, :.

 

" To Bro. Le Blanc De Marconay, Esq., of New York MOST LEARNED BROTHER:‑We thank you very much for your obliging letter of May 25th, and for the information ii, contains about, the situation of the Art Royal. in America.

 

You wish to receive from us 1. A notice concerning the establishment, the progress, and. the actual situation of Masonry in our East.

 

" 2. The. Tableaux which were printed by the

 

supreme authorities, and particularly the,Lodges thereto belonging.

 

3. A copy of the publications which took place.

 

`░ In order to comply with your wishes, it would be necessary far you to cover the expenses by a credit, as they are far above our means.

 

But to satisfy you as much as it is in our power, without, exceeding the limits of a letter, and, as a token of our gratitude toward you for the interesting information you have com municated to us, we will only say, that our National Grand Lodge has been founded under the auspices of Frederick the Great, first :'Mason and Grand Master of his Empire, on the 13th of September, 1740. She has now ninety‑nine daughter Lodges, and is composed of the representatives of said Lodges but she is not in the dependency of any other foreign Lodge, and exists only under the protection of our august King, who: confides entirely in her as authorized Mason, first, free, legislative, and administrative. `She is the center of all her daughters, who are devoted to her.' " Concerning the opinions prevailing among you, we inform you that Frederick the Great is partly the author of the system, adopted by our Lodge, but that he never interfered with her affairs, or prescribed any laws to the Masons over whom lie: extended his protection throughout his estates.

 

The Grand Lodge, as far. as she is concerned, confines. leer jurisdiction to the Blue degrees of St. John.

 

A special.

 

SCOTCH RTTE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

Committee, composed of members elected by the brethren. and "called Supreme Interior East, directs the works of the highor degrees, which do not exceed seven.

 

_ " The Scotch Lodge of this Interior East, presided by a 'superior Scotch Master Mason, spreads over all the Scotch Lodges, united with the Lodges of St. John, and forms 'a total kith them all.

 

,"We recognize, as a superior authority, the old Scotch Directory, which is formed by elections in the Grand Lodge. " Such is the state of things. and all that is rumored gmoug you about the prescriptions and ordinances of Frederick the Great, had of a superior Senate, stands on no ground whatever: "Independent of this Grand Lodge, we have, in Berlin, two'bther Grand Easts; equally recognized, and provided with royal privileges, as well as this one, to wit: The National Grand Lodge of Germany, the Grand Royal York Lodge of Friendship.

 

Each one has a certain number of der~endip$ Lodges, and it is a national law that none can exist, in this kingdom, unless it be the dependent of, or united with, these three Lodges.

 

" We recognize these two Lodges as true and regular Masonic Lodges, and we live with them in perfect harmony, notwithstanding the difference of usages and forms existing between us.

 

" We hope that these informations will suffice, and we are ready to continue, with pleasure, our correspondence, and tp enter into more strict intercourse with the Grand Lodges of your country. We can even send you full powers and authority, if our letter be insufficient, and we expect your further advice.

 

`' We salute you with esteem and fraternal love, by‑three times three.

 

"Berlin, August 17, 1833.

 

" The old Scotch Directory of the National Grand Lodge b the three Globes.

 

(Signed)

 

" POSELGER, National G. Master. `' KOLGE, Sen. Warden.

 

" MAZTORFF. " DALLEMANN. " DIEDERICHS. BERTINARD." * See Appendix, page vu.

 

,118

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

The Grand Lodge, Royal York, of Friendship, follows no other system but that of Festler, which has but nine degrees ; and the National Grand Lodge of Germany is governed by the system of Zinnendorf, which has but seven degrees. We see, then, that the three Grand Lodges of the kingdom, working in different Rites, have not, collectively, as many degrees as the Rite of Perfection originally had ; and it is known that many of their degrees are the same, differing only in ritual.

 

How idle, then, to attribute to Frederick the Great the authenticity of any portion of the Scotch Rite degrees, or of instituting laws for their government.

 

Both Ragon and Marconay deny the existence of any Secret Constitutions, and as the Grand Councils in this country hail from France, it would seem that Bro. Marconay is right in paying . " If the Scotch Rite must be known, interpreted, vindicated. and observed, it must be through and by the Grand East of ,France, which is the oldest, authority‑the stock and tradition of said, Rite." Bro. Pike, in his address before the Grand Lodge of Louis iana, in February, 1858, claims that Scotch Rite Masonry originated in Charleston, and claims that the Charleston Couii 'cil is, of'right, the governing power.

 

He takes the ground that the addition of eight degrees to the Rite of Perfection changed that Rite, and justified the assumption of a new name‑that this change took place at Charleston, and the name Scotch Rite, ‑Ancient and ./accepted, was added‑that from Charleston the higher degrees, the eight additional ones, and the new name of the new Rite, was sent to France, and hence the Charleston Council is the mother of the Rite.

 

And, certainly, so far as the addition or cumulation of the eight degrees are concerned, Bro. Pike's statements are confirmed by the French writers, but the difficulty in sustaining the claim set up in behalf of the rights of the Charleston Council, are, 1. That the Council itself did not claim to have added the degrees, or to constitute a new rite, on the contrary, they, de novo, set up the claim that the additional degrees and laws for their SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

110 ‑ government, came to them from Frederick the Great ; and this doctrine has been manfully maintained by that Council, from its origin to the present day.

 

And, 2. If the Sublime Masons of Charleston originated the Scotch Rite, in 1801, that Rite could not have a code of laws, made specially for its government, before the rite was known, viz., in 1801 ; and yet, not only the Charleston Council, but Bro. Pike himself, contends that the Constitution claimed to ha‑Te been ratified by Frederick, in 1786, is, and ever has been, the paramount law'of the Scotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted. It must be apparent, then, that the claim to the institution of the Rite, in Charleston, is not sustained, as it would be incon, sistent to suppose that Frederick the Great ratified a code oú laws for the government of a Society, fifteen years before than Society was instituted.

 

.

 

Having now introduced as much testimony as seems to bd necessary to elucidate our subject, it may be proper to say a few words as to the credibility of the witnesses. And first of Bro. Ragon, whose book, Orthodox .Masonry, has been long before the world, and, so far as we know, has been held in high estimation, as a truthful, though partisan work. He, as stated, was the prominent defender of the Grand Orient of France, and opposed to the Grand Council.

 

Bro. Thory, on the other hand, was the defender of the Grand Council and opposed to the Grand Orient.

 

The brother who translated the extracts we have used front Ragon, says that the facts and dates are corroborated by Thory, but as we have no translations from the latter, we could noti use him as a witness.

 

` Bro. Le Blanc De Marconay received the Scotch Rite de‑i green, in the old Grand Council of New York, removed to Paris and was received a member, and made Grand Orator of the Chamber of Council and Appeals. The report from which we have extracted, was not at the time adopted by the Grand Orient, nor do we know that it has been since; but it was made in his official capacity, and though it might not be illiber~ al to charge that he would be influenced by a partiality for they 120

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Council in which he had been Exalted. his facts must be credited when, as they are, in conformity to those published by Ra;goo. The author has had no means of stating the number and places of meeting of the Lodges and Consistories, established at various periods by the old Grand Council of New York, or the Grand Council of Charleston, but from a Tableau, printed by the De Witt 'Clinton, or old Grand Council of New York, in 1820, it may be seen, that they had planted a Consistory is New Orleans, La., one in Newport, R. I., one in Philadel hia, Pa., and one in Charleston, S. C. This publication bears, the written signature of De Witt Clinton, as Presid^nt c`_' the Council, and the signatures of the other officers.

 

2nd it is but rair to suppose the Charleston Council had been, and continues to be quite as industrious in planting subord nates. .On the Foe hand, the De Witt Clinton Grand ' Council has ever demounced the Grand C^.:ncil of Charleston and its subordinates, and has been sustained in doing 3o by the Grand Orient of France.

 

On the other hand, the Charleston Grand Council and its subordinates, have evo3r (at !east, since 1813) denounced the De Witt Clinton Council, and with it the Grand Orient of France, and have been aided in doing so by the Grand Council France. This quarrel has become so embittered in the Ulnited States, that now, if one will patiently listen to, and besieve all the statements made, lie would be forced to believe that w honest and honorable man ever occupied any prominent station with either party. Be this quarrel among them. It has already had the effect to lay open to dissection the so called Scotch Rite Masonry, and if the dissection shall ever be made by a skillful operator, the whole system will stand forth a ghastly Skeleton of that political and religious machine, erected by Jesuitical machinations, to batter down the Protestant altars, and erect upon their ruins that mammoth system of image 7ror ship, upheld and sustained by the divine right of Popes, Kii.aa and Priests. This may seem strong language. but is the picture overdrawn? To every Christian, whether Catholic or Protestant, who has sat in a Chapter of Rose ‑}‑, and seen the free worked, an appeal is hereby made.

 

Does not the whole ceremony tend to prove, most conclusively, that it was institutes SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

121 !n the manner, and for the purposes stated in this article? Why are two Crosses, with a Rose, veiled in the Sanctuary, and suddenly exposed to view when the Chapter is opened ?

 

Do they not portray a portion of the Catholic worship ?

 

Why, in }gassing these fi +, are you compelled to bow and make a Romis'i Yign to them? Is it not a part and parcel of the Catholic worship?

 

What means the drawn dagger and the solemn vow `that accompanies it? Are you not thereby pledged to spill your heart's blood in defense of the Catholic religion?‑the Catholic, because it is evident that was the religion which the founders of this degree made all its recipients swear never to vcleunge.

 

What means the Holy Font of the Rose +?

 

Is it 'not a basin of water made holy by the mummery of priestcraft?

 

What means the Passover and Libation, if they are not used as the most solemn manner of renewing your

 

covenant and plighting, soul and body, in defence of the Christian feligion But, after all, the most important and momentous question leas yet to be propounded, and it would be but justice to the cause of truth, were it publicly answered: " What means the ceremony of breaking the bread, and drinking the wine?"

 

Do they not constitute a representation of the Lord's Supper?

 

It will, doubtless, be denied, by some Scotch Rite Masons, that the Sacrament is administered in a Rose ‑{‑ Chapter, because in some localities this portion of the ceremony, as we are informed, has been stricken out or changed, but we are authorized to say, that in the French Rose + Chapters, this ceremony is regarded to be the true ordinance, as efficient and holy as when administered by the Apostles.

 

They hold that all who have taken the Sacrament in a Rose + Chapter are ordained priests, having, thereby, full power to administer it to others‑to anoint with holy unction, bury the dead, and do all other things which are lawful and proper in ordained ministers of the Gospel.

 

The reader has, perhaps, shuddered at the thought, that the foregoing may be true, and that there is a society of men in Christendom, who, under the cloak of teaching morality and virtue, thus trifle with the holy ordinances of God.

 

The author is aware that he runs the risk of raising a strong ff 122

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

and influential opposition, not only to this article, but because of it, to the sale of his work ; but if, in consequence of his plain manner of laying bare the truths, as he understands them‑it the performance of a duty, unpleasant, indeed, but no less a duty, which he owes to his brethren and the community at large, must cause the labor of a long life to be regarded as worse tLan useless, and the fruits of that labor, the favorite work of his life, to fall still‑born, he will not be deterred from his course.

 

It is no answer to the objections urged against Scotch Rite Masonry,.dncient and .dccepted, to be told that this Rose Chapter, and that Rose ‑}‑ Chapter, do not work the degrees according to the ritual here hinted at, because, as before stated, various changes have been made, but it is here asserted that the representations made are, to the full, to be found in the old rituals in this country, and the essential portion of them must be used by all Chapters, who work the degrees, or they, have violated their vows and changed their religion.

 

But the misfortune is, that, for the most part, the degree is not worked, but communicated, and the recipient may not know, or be able to fathom the whole scheme.

 

And now, brethren of the old and true school Masonry, are you prepared to amalgamate, or enter into compacts with this Society, who claim to have the Ancient and Accepted Masonry, and who profess to hold in their body the Sovereigns of all Masonry? We have seen the heart‑burnings, discord, and confusion introduced into the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, by the union and fusion of Scotch Rite, and Ancient Craft Masonry, in 1833.

 

We have seen that, wherever, on the Continent of Evirope, the Scotch Rite has been introduced, every effort has been made, and generally, with success, to root out and superceed the Masonry of our fathers. Must this revolutionary system continue?

 

Can Freemasons, good and true, admit that ;t is in the power of men to make innovations in the body of Masonry ?

 

Can intelligent and consistent Freemasons admit, that it is lawful and proper to practice Freemasonry, by a new and modified system ?

 

If there is a reality in Masonry, there can be but one Masonry, one system, one ritual, one teaching, SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

123 one code of fundamental law; and if that Masonry, that system, that ritual, that doctrine, and that code of laws, which have been transmitted to us through the Grand Lodge of En 0 land, be essentially correct, can we, dare we regard any other as legal and proper ? Can we lose sight of the fact, that if the Scotch Rite teaches Masonry at all. it is an innovation upon the body of Masonry.

 

Through the instrumentality of Chevalier Ramsey, a few Jesuit. Priests, and Lawrence Dermott, we have now tacked on to Masonry a series of degrees, amounting to nine in this country, some of which are purely sectarian, purely Christian, and from which we are compelled t.o exclude the true descendents of the twelve tribes‑the founders of Masonry; and shall we further degrade Freemasonry, by adopting a system of thirty‑three degrees, openly and boldly proclaiming, as they do, that, though of modern origin, they teach true Freemasonry, and have the original right do do so ? What would become of our solemn engagements to permit no innovations? What would become of that system of Grand Lodge government universally adopted since 1711 ?

 

We are all pledged not to recognize, as a brother, any one who has not been made in a legally constituted Lodge ; and, since 1717, Lodges can be made legal only by authority of Grand Lodges. It is true that the Grand Lodge of France accommodates all applicants, whether of the Symbolic, Scotch, or Modern Rite, but if our old and beloved Order has been down‑trodden there, shall we, too, bow the knee, and yield obedience to this unblushing innovator ?

 

Does it justify' us in legalizing these innovations, by being told that this new system prevails extensively throughout Continental Europe, and we have recognized Masons made there?

 

Nay, this oft repeated tale of electioneering for the Scotch Rite, is but a poor apology for the violated faith of those who have solemnly promised never to make or tolerate innovations, and who, having taken the Scotch Rite degrees, must know them to be so.

 

If France has lost the Freemasonry planted there by the Grand Lodge of England, and if South America has never known any other than Stephen Morin's Masonry, does it follow that the Masons of the United States, of Scotland, England, Ireland, Prussia, etc., etc., 124

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

ihali desert t,ieir post, and, in a 'dastardly manner, surrender tie Venerable Temple of Masonry to an Institution, young in ears, but old in schemes for change, and more remarkable for high‑sounding titles than a uniform system of morals Were it practicable to institute a world's Convention, instructed and clothed wish power to bring Masonry back to its primitivi; purity, or if this were not practicable, at least to that simplicity which distinguished it throughout the days of Sir Christopher Wren, and down to that period when Ramsey and Dermott entered the Holy of Holies, and stole away many of its sacred and valued jewels, future ages would applaud and venerate their deeds, for then we should have all of Freemasonry in three degrees, and all the historical and traditionary lore, which, by the American system, is given in nine degrees, would be communicated to the Master Mason. But so long as this desirable end is beyond our reach, it is to be hoped there will remain a chosen few, who will rise proudly above the fascinations of high‑sounding titles, and the allurements of power sup. posed to be vested in Sovereign Grand Inspectors General of Freemasonry, and stand forth resolved to permit no more interferences with the rituals and teachings of our Order.

 

If the American subdivision, requiring nine instead of three degrees, or Dermott's four degrees must continue, let us not tax our descendants with the expense and mystifications of a new and enlarged system, interspersed with Masonry, Egyptian philosophy, Paganism, Christianity, and anti‑Christianity. Nay, rather let us plant our standard on the outer walls of of Ancient Free and Accepted Masonry, the only Freemasonry ever known, and, as its Virgin banner floats in the breeze, let passers‑by behold its motto: "REMOVE NOT THE LANDMARKS SET BY YOUR FATHERS." When about half of the foregoing article on Scotch Rite Masonry had been set up for stereotyping, we remembered and referred to an able and learned lecture upon the legends of the third degree, from the pen of Bro. T. S. Gourdin; of South Carolina, which we published in the Signet, in 1852. As we then stated, Bro. Gourdin is the first writer after whom we have rea 1, whose opinions corroborate our own, in relation to the SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

126; oä~jects and, ends of Freemasonry, and as his article will go fate f4,.elucidate,the subjects connected with the Scotch Rite, :i,ncient i sn Accepted, we take the liberty of giving it in fall, though, . iiii regret we lead not first, asked permission of ifs author, sell; uoy beg, liis acceptance of our reasons, above stated, aa, 4!ir. apology: I THE. HISTORICAL REFERENCE OF THE LEGEND OF THR THIRD DEGREE.

 

BY THEODORE s. WURDL21i, w. Il. of IAndmark Lodge, No. 76. Uiarleston, a. Q " In the wide field of Masonic investigation, there is, perhaps,, Ip subject which leas been the. theme of so much discussion, as. tip true historical reference of the legend of the third degree. And it is almost vain to hope that these differences of opinion gill ever be reconciled. I shall, however, endeavor briefly to, present some of the various views entertained upon this `vexed question.' '` Many brethren in Europe suppose this legend to be as a#ronomical allegory. In their opinion `the Masters degree represents the autumn, this last, season, when the sun ends his,. epurse, and, like the Phoenix, which was the type, dies to be reborn from,his ashes. It represents mature age, the epoch of. life., when man reaps the fruits of his labors and of his studies. Ixs,emblem is, the tracing‑board, on which are delineated the plans‑‑that is to say, the lessons of morality and of exper‑, ience, the duties of the Fellow Crafts and the Apprentices."* "The evil principle, which has been represented in all the. appient fables as a jealous prince, ravisher of the power of his, chief, whom lie pursues unceasingly, and at last kills,.t is here. symlbolized. The twelve persons who play so important a part (French Rite) in this degree, are supposed to refer to the twelve signs of the Zodiac through which the sun travels.

 

The three. inferior signs, the signs of winter: to wit, Libra, Scorpio, and e (burs 1'hilosophique et Interprelatif des Initiations Anciennm el Modernes, par d. IL. Qagon, p. 153.

 

Paris : Berlandier.

 

t lbid, p. I tit.

 

126

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Sagittarius, about the middle of autumn occupy these three points in the heavens, in such a manner that the first is found on the decline, or to the West, the second at its right ascension to the South, and the last begins to appear in the East, which is represented by the East gate, where the sun dies in Sagitiò tarius.

 

It is reborn immediately, or recommences a new year in Capricornus.*

 

`The sun can not depart from our universe, or from the temple of nature.'

 

Observe the course which the sun makes, `whether on the first day of spring, if we suppose this star taking up his abode in the sign of Aries, or on the last day of his triumph at the summer solstice, or, finally, the day before his death, which takes place in Libra, whither he descends to the horizon by the western gate ; if, then, we go back upon the sphere, and examine the position that Aries takes in the East, we see near him the great Orion, his arm raised holding a club in the attitude of striking ; to the North we see Perseus, with a weapon in his hand; and in the attitude of a man ready to inflict a deadly blow.

 

From this moment his inclination toward the southern hemisphere appears so prompt, that it resembles a fall ; behold him then cast into the tomb; will he reappear, will he be restored in accordance soith our prayers?

 

It is this uneasiness which is suppcsed to have overcome the first men, which is represented by the search.`h

 

The catastrophe `viewed in the figurative or allegorical sense, is, like the suffering of Osiris, of Adonis, of Atys, or of Mithras, an act of the imagination of the astronomical priests, whose object was to depict the absence of the sun from the earth, in order to represent, by this circumstance, the triumph of the evil principle, or darkness, over light, or the good principle."

 

If we 1Qok toward the western horizon, when the sun sets in Aries, we will distinguish around this constellation, ` Perseus, Phaeton, and Orion, surrounding in this manner the constellations which adorn the heavens, in this position ;. and, we will remark, to the North, Cepheus, Hercules and Bootes ; and to the East will appear Centaurus, Serpentarius, and Scorpio.'1 "The six days which elapse, are supposed

 

to be `still a Mid, p. 147.

 

t Ibid, p. 163.

 

1 Ibid, p. 163.

 

1 Bid, pp. 163‑64.

 

SCOTCH RITE, 1NCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

12,7 dontinuation of the same clcstial theme ; for these six days are the representation of the six months which the sun passes in the inferior signs, before reappearing in the East, in the sign of dries, or the mediatorial lamb. And the discovery which is made on the seventh day, is a symbol of the resurrection of the sun, which actually takes place in the seventh month after his passage into the inferior signs‑a passage which his disappearance has caused to be considered as his death, or as his descent into hell (loci inferi, lower regions).'* "''The degree of Master,' remarks Bro. Ragon, `retraces to us allegorically the death of the solar god. Whether we only consider this god as the physical sun, dying in winter, to reap pear, and to be resuscitated in spring, at Easter‑that is to say, at his passage into the mediatorial lamb‑and to restore life to nature ; or, as the philosopher, we see only a figurative commemoration, an emblematic painting of Chaos, from the bosom of which issues forth the eternal light; or whether (what amounts to the same thing) the putrefaction expressed by the word

 

, apparent death of the body, but in exhaustiblo source of life, by which the germ in spring receives its development.' " ` When in December the winter sun appears to leave our climate to reign over the southern hemisphere, and seems to us to descend into the tomb, Nature, then, is the widow of her husband‑of him from whom she receives each year her joy and her fecundity. Her children mourn; justly, then, do the Masons, pupils of Nature, who, in the degree of Master, describe this beautiful allegory, call themselves the children of the ò Ibid, p. 158.

 

John Fellowes, A.M., after citing from Dapui's (L'Origine de tons les cultes) an account of one of the Pyramids

 

of Egypt, supposes that the fourteen days alude to the period before the Spring Equinox (the precise period at which the Persians celebrated the revival of Nature), when the sun would cease to cast a shade at midday‑and that it would not again cast it till fourteen days after the Fall Equinox (Bxpasition of the Hy8teries, etc., of the Ancient, FgWians, Pythayoreans, and Druids, p. 297.

 

New York: 1835).

 

And, in another place, he seems to think that the fourteen days refer to the gradual diminution of the Canary light, during the fourteen days that follow the full moon (Ibid, p. 296) The fourteen days comport with the allegory of Osiris and Isis (Ibid, p. 306).

 

12$

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

widow (or of Nature), as upon the reappearance of the goal. they become the children of light.'* "All this is very beautiful l but is it true ?

 

I fear that our brethren of the `Rite Moderne' have strained matters a little, in order to give to this degree an astronomical signification. But of this hereafter.

 

"Bro. George Oliver, D.D., one of the greatest Masonie writers,of the present age, on the other hand, rejecta entirely the astronomical signification of the Master's degree.t

 

Put he is also opposed to a literal interpretation of its legend $

 

`The historical foundation of the legend of Speculative Mae‑)nry,' lie observes, 1 ` I am persuaded had a spiritual reference to something of a higher and more supernal character‑sometHng coui.ected with our best and most valuable interests, both in time and eternity‑even to the unhappy fall of our first parent:, to which the penalty of death was attached, which all mankind, unite in deploring.

 

. . .

 

It referred also to their restcration, to life and holiness, by the promise of a Mediator, and a resur rection from the dead.

 

Thus, then, it appears that the h‑storlcal reference of the legend of Speculative Masonry, in all ages of the world, was to our DEATH IN ADAM, and LIFE IN CHRIST. What then, was the origin of our tradition? Or, in other words, to what particular incidents did the legend of initiation refer aefore the flood ? I conceive it to have been the offering and assassination of Abel, by his brother Cain, the escape of the murderer, the discovery of the body by his disconsolate parents, and its subsequent interment, under a certain belief of its final, resurrection from the dead, and of the detection of Cain by. Almighty vengeance.'  This interpretation, though ingenious, is purely speculative. It is impossible for us to say to what historical event the origi.. nal legend of our Order referred ; but we think that w e may sgfely assert that the present legend does not refer to the death, of Abel.

 

ò Ibid., p. 164.

 

t .The I?istoricd Landmarks, etc., I. p. 181, Note 86, by. Richard Spencer. Ion : 1845.

 

t Ibid. pp. 154 aad 170.

 

1 Ibid, pp. 170‑72‑73.

 

SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

129 "Our learned brother then adds:*

 

` This incident, I conceive, was the archetype of the legend of Osiris and Typhon, in the Spurious Freemasonry, as well as any traditionary relations of a s'milar character among ourselves.

 

In each case, we find an assassination, a loss, a discovery of the body, and a rising to a more decent interment, as in the original legend of Abel.

 

And it is a curious coincidence, that tire Messiah, of whom Abel was a legitimate type, in like manner, suffered a violent and unmerit=ed death‑was concealed for three days within the bowels of the earth‑raised Himself triumphantly from the tomb of transgression‑and triumphantly ascended to take possession of His seat in heaven, while His betrayer inflicted summary punish, ment on himself by becoming his own executioner.

 

Ile hanged himself in Aceldama, and, falling headlong, lie burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out ; and there he lay, a spectacle to all mankind.' "`I admit,' be continues,t `that this interpretation of a well known legend may appear overstrained, as it is novel ; but, on a reference to the general construction of the Order, it appears to me the most rational metbod of preserving its consistency. The types and allegories of Freemasonry are illustrative of the sacred truths of religion ; but they embrace those points of doctrine only which are common to all mankind, and it is to exemplify these doctrines, and to make them conducive to the practice of morality, that the details of our consecutive degrees have been arranged.

 

"`1. The candidate is taught ]low, under the theocracy of the patriarchal dispensation, the worship of God consisted in a few simple rites of devotion, which were accepted according to the sincerity of the devotee ; and hence religion was merely the practice of morality, based on the love of God, and His promise of reconciliation to His creatures.

 

"`2. The candidate is passed on to a view of the Mosaic disponsation, shadowing forth a Cliurch triumphant, when the fullness of time should come. And when the theocracy ceased, and a regal government began, the candidate was shown (in Hietorieal Landmarks, Vol. L, p. 171

 

t Ibid, p. 177 9 136

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

the details respecting the erection of the Temple), to the l aiddle chamber. There, as a Fellow Craft, lie was entitled to penetrate, but, no farther‑a type of a more glorious revelation pf the divine Shekinah was represented in the two famous pitJjLps, and their spherical crowns, which were placed at the entrance of the porch.

 

" ` 3. He is raised to a higher and more comprehensive vicar of the beauties of the system, by a scenic display of the resur1Rection from the dead ; and is introduced into the Sanctum Ra,nctorum, where lie beholds the ark and propitiatory, over! ehadowed by the true Shekinah, which in a former degree wa;; only indicated by a symbol. This is a type of the Christian dispensation, which was established by that Sublime Being, of vhom the Jewish Shekinah was the glory or radiant appearance ; and, therefore, it was with manifest propriety that the :resurrection was shadowed forth in this substituted degree, Veeause in no preceding religious system was that doctrine fully ;revealed and exemplified.' `Such,' says this distinguished brother,* ` are my opinions of the origin and application of the .legend which forms the mechanism of the third degree of Masonry ; but I am bound, in candor, to add, that there are veasonable objections to the hypothesis.'

 

In this I concur with liim, viz., that there are reasonable objections to his theory con cerning the origin of the legend.

 

Many of these will, doubtless, lndtantly present themselves to the minds of those brethren who have paid the slightest degree of attention to our core monies.

 

I shall, therefore, merely remark, that if the present legend refers to the death of Abel, it has been most strangely perverted; indeed, so much so, that, from it alone, one could never arrive at a knowledge of the fact that there ever lived ~uph a person as Abel ? With the moral interpretation of the third degree, above mentioned, we feel satisfied. But as this is not the subject of our essay, we will not dwell upon it.

 

" Our late talented brother, William Hutchinson, whose leg ters, originally composed for the use of the Barnard Caetle òHistorloal Landmarks. Vol. 1., p 181.

 

Note 36.

 

SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

131 ‑Wge, of Concord. over which he presided for several oucceeive years, were first published in the year 1775, under the .unction of the Grand Lodge of England, also believes that $be three degrees refer to the three dispensations, viz., the Patriarchal, the Mosaic, and the Christian.* He, however, supposes the third degree was instituted since the death of Christ. Confidently does he assert that ` the ceremonies now *pown to Masons prove that the testimonials and insignia of .ihe Master's order, in the present state of Masonry, were devis#4 within the ages of Christianity ; and we are confident that there are not any records in being, in any nation, or in any ;lapguage, which can show them to be pertinent to any other ;pystem, or give them greater antiquity.'t

 

And, in endeavoring to account for the origin of Freemasonry in England,‑he speaks ,of 'the propagators of the Christian doctrine, who brought with them the principles of the Master's Order, and taunht the converted those sacred mysteries which are typical of the Christian faith, and professional of the hope of the resurection ,of the body, and the life of regeneration.'$

 

And again, he says:

 

` The members of our Society at this day, in the third ‑ptage of Masonry, acknowledge themselves to be Christians'' the vail of the temple is rent‑the builder is smitten‑and we are raised from the tomb of transgression.' II

 

And, in another place: `Thus the Master Mason represents a man under the ,Christian doctrine, saved from the grave of iniquity, and raised to the faith of salvation.' 1 "The late Rev. Bro. Frederick Dalcho, M.D., who was for many years the Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of this Mate, seems in some measure to have adopted the opinion of the learned author last cited ; but he differs from him in this while Bro. Hutchinson supposes that the third degree alone was instituted within the ages of Christianity,l( Bro. Dalcho oelieves that the three degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry were unknown before the the time of Christ.

 

' I have long been of The Spirid N. MCraonry, by Wm. Hutchinson. New Edition

 

London: Id43 p. 155.

 

f Ibid, p. 164

 

t Ibid, p. 203.

 

O Ibid, p. 57

 

1 Ibid, p. 159:

 

11hid, p. 16$‑64 1,32

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

opinion,' says he, * `Tlsstt Freemasonry was unknown until after the Christian era. There are evidently so many allusions in Masonry to the Trinity, and otlici‑ doctrines of the Cliristiai+ revelation, that it requires but little reflection to discover the allegory.'

 

After admitting that ' the origin of the Society, however, as an institution distinct from other associations, is involiedin impenetrable obscurity; and, notwithstanding the learning and zeal of many industrious Masons, it will, I fear. forever remain unknown ;' 'h he declares that `neither Adam, nor Noah, nor Nimrod, nor Moses, nor Joshua, nor David, nor Solomon; nor Hiram, nor St. John the Baptist, nor St. John the Evangelist, belonged to the Masonic Order, however congenial their principles may have been.

 

It is unwise to assert more than we can prove, and to argue against probability.

 

Hypoth esis in history is absurd.

 

There is no record, sacred or profane, to induce us to believe that these holy and distinguished men were Freemasons, and over traditions do not go back to their days. To assert they were Freemasons, may " snake the vulgar stare,' but will rather excite the contempt, tlsan the admiration oú the wise.

 

"And, in support of his position, lie advances the following extraordinary argument : 'If St. John was a Freemason. then it is impossible that Solomon should have been one, because his Lodges could not have been dedicated to St. John, who was not born until a thousand years sifter the first Temple was built, therefore, there would have been in St. John's day what there was not in Solomon's, which would be contrary to our known principles. And besides, if both these personages were Freemasons, then we have the evidence that Solomon was the greater Mason of the two, and our Lodges should be dedicated to him instead of St. John.

 

But if Solomon "was a Freemason, then there could not have been a Freemason in the world, from the day of the creation down to the building of the Temple, as must be evident to every Master Mason.'$ " Now, I would ask, if this weak attempt at argument would ò An Akin= Itaon, etc. Charleston, S. C.: 1822, p.10.

 

Note.

 

+ Ibid, p.5.

 

Note.

 

I =bid, p. 5.

 

Note.

 

SCOTCH KITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

133 become the youngest member of our Order?

 

After admitting that lie is ignorant of the origin of our Society, lie asserts that our traditions do not, as they pretend, go back to the time of Solomon. As regards the dedication of our Lodges, no one would have ever dreamed of the objectio>l, that they could not have been dedicated to St. John before his birth‑that,is to say, to St. John in. fWuro.

 

The learned Doctor appears to have been ignorant of the fact, that Jewish Masons still continue to dtflicate their Lodges to Solomon, as .formerly ; while Christian Masons dedicate them to the two St. Jollus‑for reasons known to every Entered Apprentice. I wish some equally skillful brother would demonstrate, to our satisfaction, the truth of that part of Dr. Dalcho's proposition, which he pronounces to 'be evident to every Master 11ason.' We should feel, under great and lasting obligations to him for enabling us to see tire light. And these are specimens of `the scientific and explanatory notes,' which, in the opinion {unanimously expressed) of the 3(. W. G. Lodge of Ancient Froemasons of South Carolina, ` will be found highly interesting and instructive to the Fraternity, and calculated to promote tire respectability of the Order among those who are ignorant of its principles.' "I will add one more instance of the numerous mistakes which our late worthy brother committed is discussing the scientiio beauties of Freemasonry. In that most remarkable Masonic production which it has ever befallen us to read (his Oration delivered on the 21st March, 1803), he declares that our legend is `founded on tile grossest errors of accumulated ages,' t and complains that a word is demanded which the neophyte has never received.

 

I deem it a sufficient answer to to this, and all similar statements contained in that address, to remark, that our Rev. l3rother seems entirely to have lost sight of the dramatic character of the degree.

 

But Bro. Dalcho professed to be, a learned man, and a very bright Mason.

 

Indeed, it was at one time the fashion of tire brethren in this State, to regard the author of the 'scientific' notes to the Ahiman Rexon, as the 11dd. Sanction. Jnne 28th. 5825 (1821). t Dalchds Orations, p. 43.

 

134

 

MODERN FREEbfASONR7f.

 

fourth great light of the Order.

 

Is it then at all Furprising that our sublime mysteries should, in the hands of such an expositor, have sunk, not only in the eyes of the profane, but also in the estimation of the bretliren?

 

And this is the ittevitalk result oú placing men in situations which they are incompetent to fill. ' "But to return to the subject of our essay.

 

Aeeotding to the Rite of Misraim, Jubal, Tubal Cain, and other distinguished Masons of that day, determined to construct a sacred place: 'The tradition oú the Order,' says Bro. Mare Bedarrido, 'gives the details of this Holy sanctuary, and of the events which occurred during the lengthy period of its ebnstrtictif (Seven. y ears), as well as of the mournful lass, and of the immortal memory of the celebrated Hario‑Jubal‑Abi, occasioned by the perfidy,of the, infamous Hagana, Iiakina, and Haremda.

 

After this sad and unhappy

 

event, the worthy patriarch, Tubal Cain (seventh mortal descendant of Adam in the direct line), was charged with the general diredtidn of the works of the secret place, which was finished with pomp and mao,nificence, to be the depository of the documents containing tire secrets of nature, the dogmas, and the scientific part of dvr sublime Institution.' 'I'Others,' says Robert Ragon,t' explain the degree of Mw ter by circumstances relative to the tragic end of Charlog L, forgetting that these symbols of death were, by all antiquity, received in Chaldea, in Syria, in Persia ; thett they hart e moral signification which we explain, and a physical gignificatittn interpreted by the phenomena of Nature. Tertullidn speaks of them, on the subject of Eleusis, and the sixth book of 1Eneifl describes them with tke accuracy of a ritual.' "` As for those who ascribe this degree:' ebntirios the same learned author,' to the tragic end of the Order of the Temple, they are ignorant of the historical documents which mention the Masons before, during, and after the Order of the Templb.

 

ò De L'Odre Mag. de Mismim Benard et comp.

 

Paris: 1845.p.24.

 

t Quma da Initidim. etc.. p.141.

 

Note 1.

 

t For a very inter òatlng account of this , Innovation, see S'aal"tii and {{'warn iltbmnie MeacdRrny, Charleston, S. C.: 1850. p. 5.

 

SCOTCH RITE: ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

1Sl1 We possess Masonic degrees practiced by the Templar1 three hundred years before their tragic end.' Time will not permit me to notice all the different intcrpretatibna given‑by friends and by foes‑to this truly subliW agree.

 

But 1 can not think of laying aside the pen, irithont mentioning the theory of Barruel (one of the most virulWA enemies to our Order), who deduces our origin from the itnpoeò tar Manes, the founder of the Basilidean sect of Christian&: `In the degree of Master,' lie says, `everything dohotes mourn0 and sorrow.

 

The Lodge is hung in black, iii the middle ii sarcophagus resting on five steps, covered with A phll. Around it the Adepts, in profound silence, inonrin the death of a man whose ashes are supposed to lie in this tomb. This mkit ig at first said to be Adoniram, then Do Molay, whose death is to be Avenged by that of all tyrants.

 

The allegory is rathor inauspicious to kings; but it is of too old it date not to hd anterior to the Grand Master of the Temple.

 

The whole dt. this Ceremonial is to be found in the aihcient ihysWries of the disciples of Manes.

 

This eras the ceremony Which tliCy calldd Bema.

 

They also assembled round a sarcophagus, "resting dtt five steps, decorated in like manner, and rendered great liondra ib him whose ashes it was supposed to contafti.

 

$ut they Overt, all addressed to Manes.

 

It was his death that thdy celebrated , and they kept this feast precisely at the period *lieu the Chr'r* tistis celebrated the death and resurrectlof of Christ.' *

 

F All history asserts that Manes was adopted by the vtidOW to whdid Budda, Scythian's disciple, fled for refuge ; aid that the here siarch inherited all the riches he left her.'t

 

This interpret&ti6n is sufficiently ridiculoius to suit the purposes df its author. It id a gufcient answer to the misreproseiitatioiis of the learAi . bbe; td state that he says that lie was initiated iv thbut an ff: B.

 

This assertion at once stamps him an impostor.

 

"The general belief of Masons, At tho present day is, that ''offer the union of Speculative and Operative Uas6iiffy, and when the Temple of Solomon was completed, a legend of sublime and symbolical meaning was introduced into the 2 Sat. Jae., p. 401

 

f I6 id, p. 408.

 

n.

 

136

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

system, which is still retained, and consequently known to all Master Masons.' " The principal objection to this opinion, so prevalent among the brethren, or, in other words, to a literal interpretation of our legend may, we think, be reduced to the following six ,.grounds " 1. That tile presumption is, that the Chief Architect was 1 present at tile dedication of the Temple. t " 2. And that lie afterwards returned to Tyre, and was the jLdviser and principal confident of Hiram, its King; and is said to have made the famous circumnavigation of Afnica, which is mentioned by Herodotus, and other authors, as a most wonderful undertakin(r. $ "3. That it would scarcely have been adopted by Solomon to consecrate the memory of his humble associate, however, his .virtues and services might merit the continued respect of the brethren of all ages and times, because the naked fact, even if ‑it were true, would have afforded a very poor apology for the basis of an Institution which was destined to extend to every nation of the earth, and to endure.forever. It would have been surpassed in ingenuity of invention, as it was in splendor of 3isplay, and the imposing effects of its machinery, by the legend :)f the Spurious Freemasonry, relative to the death and resurrection of Osiris or Bachus. I '~ 4. That our tradition is corroborated by neither sacred nor profane history.1 "5. The repeated, allusions to Christianity embodied in the third degree. (a) " 6. The similarity between our legend and that of the ancient heathen mysteries, proves that they must have had a common origin. The latter being solar allegories, the former must be a solar allegory also.1 " The first,olilection is predicated upon the following texts of scripture: 1 Kings vii. 40, 51 ; 2 Chronicles iv. 11, v. 1. The 2 Oliver's Elise. Landmarks. p. 169.

 

t Ibid, p. 154.

 

f lbid, p. 154.

 

‑

 

(1 Ibid, p. 170.

 

1 Dalcho's Oradoas. (a) On this ground Bro. Hutchinson has based his arguments.‑Spires,/ Nowry.

 

1f Ragon, Court dear Anilialioru; p. 158.

 

SCOTCH HITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

137 prgument is most clearly stated by the Rev. Dr. Oliver * in the following words "' I am decidedly of opinion that our tradition is merely wllegorical, for there can be no doubt but the Chief Architect was present at the dedication of the Temple. Thus we frA that "Hiram made an end of doing all the work that lie had made Kin‑ Solomon for tile house of the Lord."

 

(1 Kiugs vii. 40.) Lest this plain intimation should be perverted, the above chapter enumerates all tile wonderful works of Hiram, wad, in tile last verse, which is in the same connection with his luakiur an end of all of his work, it is said, "so was ended all the work that King Solomon made for the house of the Lord."

 

Then. according to the sacred writer, the very next thing was the dedication of the Temple.

 

To place the fact of IIiram's being alive at the finishing of the Temple beyond all doubt, it is said (2 Citron. iv. n)," And Hiram finished the work that he was to make for King Solomon for the house of God."

 

And again in the first I verse of the next chapter, " thus all the work that Solomon made for the house of the Lord was finished."' "I admit that the Chief Architect lived to complete the Temple. The passages of Scripture above cited fully prove it. Indeed, the old traditions of Masonry expressly declare this to be tile fact. They say "' The Temple of Jehovah being finished, under the auspices of the wise and glorious King of Israel, Solomon, the Prince of Architecture, and the Grand Master Mason of his day, the Fraternity celebrated the cape‑stone with great joy ; but their joy was soon interrupted by the sudden death of their dear and worthy Master, Hiram Abiff; nor less was the concern of King Solomon, who, after some time allowed to the Craft to vent then sorrow, ordered his obsequies to be performed with great 'solemnity and decency; and buried him in the Lodge, near the Temple, according to the ancient usages among Masons, and long mourned for his loss.

 

"'After Hiram Abiff was mourned for, the Tabernacle of Moses and its holy relics being lodged in tile Temple, Solomon, 2Ilia. landmarks, p. 166.

 

Note 2.

 

1138

 

MODERN PgEkKASON$I'.

 

in a ,oncral assembly, dedicated or consecrated it by solemn prayer and costly sacrifices past number, with the finest music, vocal and instrumental, praising Jehovah, upon fixing the Holy Ark in its proper place, between the Cherubim ; when Jehovah filled his own Temple with a cloud of glory.'* "` We have an old tradition,' says the Rev. Dr. Oliver, t 'delivered dawn orally, that it was the duty of II A. B. to superintend the workmen ; and that the reports of his officers were always examined with the most scrupulous exactuos3. At the opening of the day, when the sun was rising in the East, it was his constant custom, before the commencement of labor, to go into the Temple and offer up his prayers to Jehovah for a ltlessing on the work. And, in like manner, when the sun was setting in the Vilest, and after the labors of the day were closed, and the workmen had left the Temple, lie returned his thanks to the Great Architect of the Universe for the harmonious proted tion of the day.

 

Not content with this devout expression of his feelings, he always went into the Temple at the hour of high twelve, when the men were called off from labor to refreshment, to inspect the work, to draw fresh designs upon the tracingb6 ard, if such were necessary, and to perform other scientific . lots‑never forgetting to consecrate his duties by solelnfn prayer. These religious customs were faithfully performed for the first six years in the secret recesses of his Lodge, and for the last year in the precincts of the most holy place. At length, on the very day appointed for celebrating the cape‑stone of the building, he retired, as usual, at the meridian hour, and did not return alive.' " $ut, because lie was prosont at the completion of the Temple, it by no means follows as a necessary consequence that he wa1 ptòesent at the dedication of it. Oti this point, the Scripturio tire silent, and we are entirely dependent on our traditions‑ The Constitutions of the Ancient and honorable. Frak╗Wy or Free and Am‑#a Masons, containing their History, Charges. Regulations, etc., colliroted and digested by order of the Grand Lodge, from their old records, faithful traditions, &ad Lodge hooks, for the use of the Lodges, by chines Anderson, D. D. A neir edition carefully revised and continued to the present time. pp. 24, 25. London printed for G. Kearsly, Ludgate street, 1769.

 

t 2 Kist Landmarks, p. 151.

 

Note 30.

 

SCOTCH AITE, ANC1I:NT AND ACCEPTED.

 

130 ilehich expressly assert to the contrary.*

 

The Scriptures dS riot mention what space of time elapsed between the completion and the dedication of the Temple.

 

Not are we to suppose that the sacred writers intended to give us an account of the manner In which the Israelites passed every moment, nor even every day of their time.

 

To read history, written after this Fashion, would be a herculean task, which one could never accomplish, though lie were to live to be as old as Methuselah.

 

It is. therefore a fair presumption to suppose that several days, or even weeks, perhaps, necessarily intervened between the completion and the dedication of that superb structure, in order that those to whom the business was intrusted might have sufficient time to make the preparations requisite for the appropriate cclebration of the latter event‑a celebration which certainly was in a style of splendor commensurate with the magnificence.of that edilice, which was to be the peculiar abode of the only true god.

 

And the circumstances mentioned in our tradition might Well have occurred during that interval.

 

W e know not on what ground the presumption is raised, that the Chief Architect, after the dedication of the Temple, returned to Tyre, and was the adviser and principal confidant of Hiram, its King. unless it be the silence oú the sacred historians concerning his fate ; and shall, therefore, postpone the consideration of this question until wo discuss the fourth objection. We are aware, however, that 13r'o. Marc De Bedarride is opposed tb us on this point, for lie says t that `Solomon, fully satisfied with all that Hiram Abilt had prepared for the embellishment df the Temple of God, congratulated him and loaded him with tnvors.

 

Hiram Abi1t returned to the bosom of his family (tA Tyre; we presume), where lie passed, without a cloud, the rest o1 his days in ,opulence.' " 1 laving never enjoyed the exquisite happiness of being ins dated into the sublime mystet‑ies developed in the ninety degrevr of the Rite of Misraim, we know not by what authority this as. wrtiotn is supported.

 

Not does Bro. Bedarride condess,end ò &uthern and We+fete Mamie Muxetlany, 1. p. 285. t Ills L'Ordre Mae. de Misraim. 1. p. 118.

 

140

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

to inform us from what source lie derives this piece of ;‑‑fi.rmation. But we do know that the G. 0. of France (who has always been remarkably liberal in her views) refused, in ISO, to acknowledge this Rite.* We also know that it has been asserted that it was invented and brought to maturity by two Jewish Masons called

 

Bedarride t (but this Brother Mare Bedarride

 

stoutly deuics), $

 

and

 

doubts

 

are

 

entertained whether it be so old as the commencement of the present century: II " It is unnecessary for us to endeavor to refute the last clause of the second ohjoction, inasmuch as our learned brother who proposed it confesses, with 'his usual candor, that lie has no confidence in it. 'This,' says lie,1 `is evidently an anachron ism, for this expedition was performed during the reign of Nechus, King of Egypt, many years afterwards.' " We admit, that after so great a lapse of time, it may at first appear incredible, that Solomon should have endeavored `to consecrate the memory of his liumble associate ;' but we think that, upon mature reflection, this, the third ol>,jection to a literal interpretation of our legend, will also readily disappear. Let us for a moment, in imagination, place ourselves in the situation of Solomon, and see how we should have acted under similar circumstances.

 

 "'The Temple was not only the most magnificent building of the age, but it was the only earthly house of the ever‑living God‑of 'I'. G. A. O. T. U., who vouchsafed, in an especial manner, to dwell therein ; thereby declaring his approbation of that edifice, and of the motives which prompted the erection of it. Surely the architect who planned that elegant structure, and made all the holy vessels for its service‑‑that architect who surpassed all others of his day in knowledge and wisdomthat architect who, even in that barbarous age, equaled (at least) the most skillful of our times, was deserving of all honor and praiso I

 

For to what man, in this the nineteenth centw‑y, ò Ragon, Gbnrs des Gtilialions, p. 344.

 

Note 1.

 

t 2 Oliver 'A //isl. Landmarks. p. 76.

 

t JJe L'Ordre Mae. de Maraim, p. 8.

 

1 Oliver's Rat. Landmarks,‑p. 76.

 

1 Mid, p. 154.

 

Note 38.

 

SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

eim the description in Holy Writ given of Hiram, with anv degree of truth be applied?

 

` A cunning man, endued with understanding, .

 

.

 

.

 

skillful to work in gold and in silver, in brass, in iron, in stone, and in timber, in purple, in blue and .n fine linen, and in crimson ; alsa to grave every manner of graving, and to find out every doN,'ce which may be put to hirn.' " If we believe in the truth of the Old Testament at all, it seems to us that we must believe that, to use the language of the venerable Book of Constitutions,f ` this inspired Master was, 'without question, the most cunning, skillful, and curious workman that ever lived, whose abilities were not confined to building Only, but extended to all kinds of work, whether in linen, tapestry, or embroidery , whether considered as an architect, sculpture, founder, or designer, separately or together, lie equally excelled. From his designs, and under his direction, all the rich and splendid furniture of the Temple, and its several appendages, were begun, carried on, and finished.' "If.. then, this be a faithful description of the intellectual attainments of our ancient Grand Master (and we have no reason to doubt it), is it at all surprising‑nay, is it not highly probable, that Solomon, who, though the wisest of his nation, had found his equal, if not his superior, in the chief architect of the Temple, being reduced to the necessity of changing the original legend of Masonry, should have endeavored, with that generosity which is the peculiar characteristic of noble minds, to immortalize the name of one who had served him so faithfully and so well?

 

Why, this is what all nations have endeavored to do for their benefactors.

 

This is what we still endeavor to do‑not only for the truly great and good, but even for the humblest and least deserving of our relatives, as the tombstones in our churchyards daily testify.

 

The great and the good, in all ages, and among every people, have been glorified, canon~ed, or deified.

 

The only difference is this, that Solomon has. accomplished his object more effectually than some others. Another proof of his wisdom I

 

He has erected to the memory 2 Chrmidea ii. p. 13,14.

 

tBool of Cbnotitutions (Anderson), p. $0.

 

142

 

MODERN FREEN4SONI4Y.

 

of his unfortunate friend an imperishable monument in tht+ hearts of the brethren‑a monument which will outlast all others now on the face of the globe‑‑a monument which can be destroyed only with the whole human race 1 And was it not noble?‑was it not right? " That our legend would have been surpassed in ingenuity of invention, as it was in splendor of display, and the imposing effect of its machinery, by that of the spurious Freemasonry relating to the death of Osiris or Bacchus, is no argument against its truth. The chief difference between the mode in which the false systems of religion and the true one inculcate their doctrines, is this : the former appeal to the senses, while the latter addresses itself to the judgment‑that faculty which places man so far above the brute creation.

 

'1 'he former endeavor to retain their followers. in `captivity by acting upon their imagination and their fears‑‑while the latter, despising the meretricious ornaments of falsehood, seeks to display tile truth in all her naked loveliness.

 

" Even so it leas been with Freemasonry.

 

Tie spurious systems attempted, by the ingenuity of their fables. to mislead the judgment‑by the richness of their decorations, to dazzle the eye‑by the splendor of their ceremonies. to captivate tile fancy‑by the power of their maciduery, to excite terror in tile mind of the votary ; and, finally, to cause the Victim to prostrate himself before the altar of error, instead of before that of truth.

 

"Not so the true system.

 

She lias no pampered priests to support in idleness, no vanity to gratify, no cud to gain, save that of acquiring and preserving a knowledge of tile truth. Slie seeks neither by the splendor of leer decorations to lure tire unsuspecting into leer embrace, nor by false terrors to enslave the weak.

 

No, she addresses herself to us as rational beingsas men whom the omniscient Father of the universe has endowed with reason and powers of reflection.

 

Slie abliors the fetters of XperAition, and points out the way of troth.

 

In letters (it flame she proclaims that truth, whioli is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

 

And this is effected by means of a sublime allegory, founded on fact, and narrated in a plain, but highly impressive manner.

 

To a well‑regulated mind, the remarkable SCOTCH RITE. ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

143 simplicity oú our legend certainly constitutes one of its chief merits.

 

"The fourth ground (by some deemed an insuperable objection) I consider one of the strongest arguments in favor of the truth of our tradition.

 

"The Scriptures do not inform us what became of the Chief Architect of the Temple ; but they relate, in two different places,* the circumstances connected with the death of Adoniram, who was by no means so distinguished a man as H. A. B. Either the writers of the holy books did know what became of H. A. B., after the completion of the Temple, or they did not. If we suppose that they did not know what became of him, their silence is sufficiently accounted for. But this supposition is altogether inconsistent with probability. So great a man as the Chief Architect of the Temple could hardy have left Jerusalem without the people being cognizant ol the fact.

 

Nor could he, after having successfully accomplished so arduous and glorious a task, have lived in obscurity at Jerusalem.

 

" We are, therefore, reduced to the alternative of admitting that the authors of the first book of Rings, and the second book of Chronicles, did know what became of the architect.

 

If he returned to Tyre, why do they not say se ?

 

Did he continue to live in Jerusalem?

 

Then, why are they silent?

 

But, he nei',her returned to Tyre, nor continued to live in Jerusalem. Why, then, do they not tell us what became of him ?

 

Surely, not because he was too insignificant a personage to be again noti:ed by the historian!

 

But rather from conscientious motiveo; or, perhaps, in obedience to the direct command of Solomon, who, intending to make use ol facts which had but recently occurred, as the basis of a new degree, and desirous of perpetuating the i ecollection of the virtues of his friend, determined to intrust their preservation, orally, to a chosen few.

 

Our traditions supply this link in the historical chain. ,kpd, when rightly viewed, there is nothing improbable or unnatural in them.

 

On the contrary, the circumstances are such 0 1 Kings xIi. 18; 2 Chronicles:. 18 144

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

as were very likely to have occurred, when we consider the vast number of workmen assembled at the building of the Temple. and the almost infinite variety‑ of dispositions and tempers with which our three Grand Masters had to contend. `The true stress of tradition lies in an appeal to the common sense of all mankind. It is a reliance upon the testimony of men. considered as men, and not of persons of this or that people or persuasion, actuated by principles implanted in that nature, which the whole species partake of, and not influenced by the power of such as are peculiar to any community or religion.'* " ` On this prihciple,' says the reverend brother whom wo have so often cited,and for whoscopinionwe entertain the highest respect, `have the traditions of Masonry been transferred from father to son, along with the knowledge of God's eternal existence and the immortality of the souUt " ` Ancient traditions,' observes another learned brother,$ `have often afforded occasional assistance to history, by stepping in to supply the want of existing monuments and records ; and, even at this time, in remote countries, where letters are little, if at all known, common tradition hands down past events with an artless sincerity, sometimes wanting where such events are liable to be perverted for indirect purposes. But Masonic tradition stands upon much firmer ground ; the chief bond of connection among Masons, in all agc3, having been FIDELITY.

 

It is well known that, in former times, while learning remained in few hands, the ancients had several institutions for the cultivation of knowledge, concealed under doctrinal and ritual mysteries, that were sacredly withheld from all who were not initiated into a participation of the privileges they led to, that they might not be prostituted to the vulgar.

 

Among these institutions may be ranked that of Masonry ; and its value may be inferred from its surviving those revolutions of government, relitr ion, and manners, that have swallowed tip the rest. And the traditions of so venerable an Institution, claim an attention far superior to the loose oral relations or epic songs of any uncultivated people whatever.' Stanhope's Boyle Led.

 

t Oliver's Andigrsitim of Frctmaaonry p. 1. t North. Gbnd., Part 1. Chap. 1.

 

' SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

145 "The evident allusions to Christianity embodied in the third degree, we respectfully submit, do not prove, as Bros. Hutchin. non and Dalcho suppose, that it was invented within the ages of Christianity. If the Christian religion, as is generally believed by learned divines of the present day, is destined to overshadow the earth, and take the precedence of all other systems of worship, we presume *at it will result from the fact of its being founded in truth.

 

If, then, it be founded in truth, it can not be a new system of religion.

 

But it must be the original ,,system, or rather a development of the original system of religion, established in the beginning by JEHOVAH Himself.

 

There cats not be a system of religion which is true at one period of the world, and false at another.

 

For God, the Author of religion, is unchangeable.

 

He is the same from all eternity.

 

To give laws to‑day, and to repeal them to‑morrow, would be an inconsistency which, though excusable in human legislators, is utterly at variance with the omniscience of Deity.

 

As, therefore, to suppose Him to be inconsistent with Himself, would be an insult to His majesty, so it is equally an insult to suppose that He has ever radically changed the original plan of salvation‑or, in Masonic language, that He has ever altered a landmark thereof.

 

" If, therefore, Masonry really is what she professes to be, the. handmaid of religion,' we must expect to find clear and repeated i allusions to that religion of which she is the humble handmaid, viz., the true religion ;* the religion established in the beginning. And in this we are not disappointed ; for the proofs are evident to every reflecting mind.

 

" It is true that Ancient Craft Masonry requires merely that we should conform to those general principles of natural religion in which all men agree ; and wisely, for her object is to unite the human race in one sacred band of brothers, ` among whom no contention should ever exist, but that noble contention; "If Masonry, or its idolatrous substitute, be considered under the worst and most forbidding forms, it invariably preserved the moral dogmas and institutes of each national religion. It is true that false religion produced false Masonry ; and the latter, faithful to the principles by which it was supported, proceeded na Nrtkt‑r than an idolatrous worship would sanction.'

 

Oliver's Sigm and äprods.

 

Sherwood, Gilbert k Piper.

 

London: 1837.

 

Preface, p. Al.

 

10 246

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

or rather emulation, of who can best work, or best agree."' But having commanded dais, she offers to instruct those who are willing to learn ; and, by a sublime allegory, points out the salvation. And this she does in so clear a manner, that even the dullest among us can not fail to comprehend her intent.

 

" But if the allusions to Christianity be deemed an argument against the antiquity of the Masonic Institution, they must be equally so against the antiquity of the Mosaic dispen. sation ; and, indeed, against the mysteries of all nations ; for. the Mosaic dispensation was merely typical of the Christian, and even in the heathen mysteries, it seems there are to be found allusions to the system of Christianity.t And yet who will lye found mad enough to assert that either the Mosaic system, the Egyptian, Eastern, Persian, Eleusinian, Bacchic, Tyrian, Celtic, British, Gothic, or American mysteries, were invented since the death of Jesus of Nazareth?

 

With what propriety, then, can it be said ` the ceremonies now known to Masons prove that the testimonials and insignia of the Master's order, in the present stage of Masonry, were devised within the ages of Christianity ?' " 6. Others have argued that the similarity between our legend and that of the ancient heathen mysteries, prove that they must have a common origin ; and, hence, that as the latter were solar allegories, the former must be a solar allegory also.$ "While I admit the premises (because it is foreign to my purpose here to discuss the question), I deny the conclusion.

 

" I believe that the original object of Freemasonry, like that of the ancient heathen mysteries, was to preserve a knowledge of the true God, the omnipotent Creator of heaven and earth‑and to inculcate that reverence which is due to His most holy name. In the early ages of the world, the masses, following the evil propensities of their nature, began to worship the M. M. degree.

 

Crone' Chart, p. 36.

 

T On this subject we recommend to the brethren that erudite and highly inrn'nctive work, entitled,The history of Initiation, by Rev. Geo. Oliver, D.D. Riche std $pedeer : London ; and also Warburton's Divine Legation, Book If.

 

4 This appears to be the argument of M. Ragon. burs den Initiations, p. 137.

 

SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

147 shadow instead of the substance‑the creature instead of the Creator. ` Whatever produced a lively impression on the ‑senses ; whatever excited pleasure or pain, astonishment, admiration, or alarm ; whatever banished evil or secured good; the elements, the phenomena of nature, animals, stones, vegetables, mountains, rivers, and forests, became objects of worship. Imagination, acting on the hopes and fears of ignorance, invested brute matter with intelligence and active power; and, as inanimate substances were supposed to contain within themselves certain occult virtues, they formed the divinities of fetishism.'* "Next followed Sabaism,orAstro‑Theology.

 

The sun; moon and stars, which were at first regarded merely as symbols of the Divine power, in course of time themselves became objects of adoration.

 

"And, finally, those men who had in any way distinguished themselves during life‑either by their virtues or their vices‑.when dead, were glorified as heroes, and then worshiped so gods. This is heroism‑the third and last variety of ancient heathenism.

 

"Ignorance, superstition, and crime raged throughout the earth ; and truth fell a victim to their machinations. In this deplorable state of affairs, the enlightened few who still preserved a knowledge of the truth, united together for the ,purpose of mutual improvement and instruction in the sublime doctrines of religion.

 

The multitude, being the children of darkness, could not bear the light.

 

The philosophers‑for so I shall call these religionists‑of the early ages of the world were forced to conceal their doctrines under the vail of alle. gory. Had they made public their views, they would have been denounced as atheists, and have met with persecution even unto death.

 

Hence arose those institutions known among the ancients as the Mysteries.t

 

In these secret assemblies the philosophers instructed those who had proved themselves worthy, by having undergone long and dangerous trials, in a knowledge ;of the true God, and in those principles of religion which had been revealed by Him in the beginning.

 

Religious and Profane Antiquity, by Jonathan Duncan, B.A.

 

Chap I., p. 1.

 

t warburton remarks, that it was an universal opinion that the heathen m y& teries were instituted pure.

 

L48

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

"Among their esoteric doctrines there was one, at least, which is of the utmost importance to man‑the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, and the immortality of the soul. This doctrine, universally taught in the Ancient Mysteries, was alway:! illustrated by a beautiful legend, which was susceptible of two interpretations‑the historical and the moral; or allegorical. The probability is, that as all the various mysteries were derived from a common source, the legend was originally the same in all.

 

But, in the course of time, it varied in different countries. And this diversity in the historical interpretation of the legend was occasioned by many local circumstances, such as the religion, occupations, manners, customs, and habits of each nation ; until, at length, the original legend, became amalgamated with the history of that divinity to whom the mysteries were, at first, only ostensibly dedicated.

 

And as in most countries, the sun, from the infinite blessings which it bestows upon animal and vegetable nature, was, by the people, worshiped as the chief god‑the author and giver of life and light‑so it is not at all surprising that, in those countries, the legend of the mysteries should, in process of time, come to be considered typical of the supposed revolution of that great luminary around the earth.

 

"The moral interpretation of the legend, however, was preserved for a much longer period.

 

But, at length, the mysteries became perverted.

 

Originally the temples of virtue, they became the dens of vice. The moral interpretation of their legend was forgotten ; and the votaries abandoned themselves to every species of vice and crime, alleging, in extenuation of their conduct, the examples set them by their‑gods.

 

The Almighty declared vengeance against their abominations‑and earthly legislators were forced to supress them.

 

Such was the spurious Freemasonry of the ancients.

 

" But let us return to genuine Freemasonry.

 

I shall not here discuss the question whether the present system be, as the Rev Dr. Oliver supposes,* the mother whence the various systems sprung, or, as my esteemed friend, and highly gifted brother ' Metoq of Initiation, p. 13, Note.

 

S~gns aad Symbols, Preface, xiii. Lect. xii~ pp. 224, 235, Sect. l‑3.

 

SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

149 Dr. A G. Mackey, contends,* it is the offspring of a union oetween tt.e 7yrian mysteries and the Jewish religion; but will merely state that, from the construction and design of our Order, it must necessarily, from the period of its first organization, have had~a legend of death and the resurrection.

 

With out such a legend, the Order would not be Masonic.

 

And I conceive that this legend must also necessarily have been embodied in the third degree.

 

Owing to the antiquity of our InE5 and the absence of written records, it is impossible for us to say what was the original legend of Freemasonry, or, in other words, what legend it was the original intention of our three Grand Masters to transmit to their descendants. But, after the completion; and before the dedication of the Temple, certain circumstances occurred which made it necessary that Solomon should create a new degree. In other words, he substituted a new degree for the original one ; and this apparent violation of a Landmark (if our Order can properly be said to have had any Landmarks at so early a period of its history) was fully justified by the peculiar circumstances of the case. Of two evils, he wisely chose the least.

 

Nor is it an objection to this view to say that, according to our own traditions, there were employed at the building of the Temple three thousand three hundred Overseers, or Master Masons ; for these three thousand three hundred Master Masons may not have had authority to do that which, our tradition asserts, was expressly, restricted to the three Grand Masters.

 

"I am aware that some minor objections have been urged against the truth of our legend.

 

These I shall not attempt to discuss.

 

It is proper that we should keep our essay, as well ourselves, within due bounds.

 

But I think, that I have shown, as clearly as the cirumstances of the case will admit " 1. That the presumption is, that the Chief Architect was not present at the dedication of the Temple.

 

"2. That he did not afterward return to Tyre.

 

"8. That it is natural, and highly probable, that Solomon ò Southern and Western Masonic Muedlany, II., p. 105.

 

150

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

should have endeavored to consecrate the memory of his humble associate.

 

" 1. That though our tradition is corroborated by neither sacred nor profane history, it is not `founded on the grossest errors of accumulated ages ;' but that, on the contrary, it is substantially worthy of credence.

 

5. That, the allusions to Christianity, in the third degree, do not militate against its antiquity.

 

"6. That from the similarity between the legends of the heathen mysteries and Freemasonry, admitting the former to' be solar myths, it does not necessarily follow that the latter is a solar myth also.

 

x In conclusion, therefore, I respectfully submit that, substantialdy, the incidents related in the legend of the third degree, are to be understood as historical facts." Sincerely believing, as we do, that the Scotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted, is incapable of exemplifying any principle in Masonry, not as clearly taught by Freemasonry itself ; and that it is, and ever has been a foreign incubus upon our Order, which every true Craftsman should aid in throwing off, it is to be expected we will present the highest order of available testimony, tending to show the correctness of our views ; and to. this end, we know of no witness so likely to be credited as one who deservedly stands at the head of Scotch Rite Masonry, as its most learned and accomplished teacher and expounder. These remarks will explain our motives and serve as an apology‑if apology be needed‑for transferring to our pages the follow ing, which appeared in our journal, in March, 1853.

 

It may be proper to add that we do this the more willingly, because, in our review of the learned author, we give him the benefit of his views, loth for and against Scotch Rite Masonry MACKEY vs. MACKEY.

 

Immediately after returning from the South, our attention was called to a remarkable article in the last September number of the Masonic Miscellany, upon the subject of York and Scotch Rite Masonry, from the pen of the editor.

 

To our surprise SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

151 and_ regret, we find that no notice has been taken of it by, our cotemporaries. While we cheerfully admit, that it is our duty, as a Masonic editor, to expose and denounce error in the theory or practice of Masonry, come from what quarter it may, we can not but think it rather hard that our brethren of the press should seemingly avoid a fair proportion of the responsi oility.

 

It is exceedingly unpleasant to us to find fault with any of the little Spartan band engaged in battling for the cause of Masonry, but it occasionally happens that we are driven to this necessity in the performance of our duty. Sincerely believò ing this to be our unenviable position in relation to the article above referred to, we proceed to insert it entire, and to subjoin such remarks as, in our judgment, are imperiously called for.

 

Bro. Mackey says THE YORK RITE AND THE SOUrCH R"E.

 

" The extension, within the last few years, of the Scotch Rite, and its favorable acceptance by many of the most distinguished members of the Fraternity, are circumstances thathave awakened, in the minds of some over zealous brethren, a fear that it may encroach upon the prosperity of the York Rite, and, perhaps, at length, in places, extirpate it. But all such fears are utterly groundless‑they arise altogether from a misconception of the nature and design of the Scotch Rite, and are to be best combated by a candid explanation of the history and character of that Rite.

 

" It is admitted (at least by all English and American Masons, and, probably, would be by all impartial writers, of every other country), that the York Rite is the most ancient, the, most authentic, and the most simple, as well as consistent, of all the Masonic Rites. But, as it originally existed, it presented to us only the three degrees of what are emphatically called `Ancient Craft Masonry,' namely, the Entered Apprentice, the Fellow Craft, and the Master.

 

The more modern definition is, that these include the Order of the Holy Royal Arch.

 

In all probability, we might almost safely say, that, without doubt, the, Royal Arch, at one time, constituted a part of the Master's degree, and, that, about the middle of the last century. it was, torn from its .appropriate place, as an historical illustration of, 152

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

and emendation to that degree, and made a distinct and separ rate one. Be this as it may, it can not be denied that the Ancient York Rite consisted only of three degrees, with the Royal Arch as in some way supplementary.* The intermediate degrees of Mark, Past, and Most Excellent Master, and the additional ones of Royal and Select Master, and of the Red Cross Knight, and Knight Templar, have nothing whatsoever to do with the York Rite, properly so called.

 

The Mark, Royal, and Select Master were originally honorary degrees of the Scotch Rite, were intrgduced by the possessors of that Rite into this country, and were, until recently (comparatively speaking), under the jurisdiction of that Rite.

 

We have abundantly shown, in some of the earlier numbers of this journal, that what are now called the' Council Degrees,' or those of Royal and Select Master, emanated from the Supreme Councils of the Thirty‑third, and we published, in a very late number, a copy of a warrant of constitution for a Mark Lodge, in the city of Charleston, in 1802, granted by the administrators of the Scotch Rite.

 

It is, probably, to Webb that the York Rite is indebted for the adoption of the Mark degree, as well as that of Most Excellent Master, into a series of degrees.

 

The Past Master's degree, as it is called, is not so much a degree as a ceremony of installation, and constitutes no part of the distinctive Rite.

 

" The Knight of the Red Cross, every Prince of Jerusalem knows, has been borrowed from the Scotch Rite, and the Knight Templar and Knight of Malta are degrees of chivalry, independent of all rites.

 

" We thus, by divesting the York Rite of these meretricious ornaments, with which we think it has not very wisely been laden, reduce it to the three primitive degrees of the Ancient Temple, to which we are permitted to add the illustrative history of the Royal Arch.

 

ò ‑1 The Grand Lodge of Scotland confines what it calls' St. John's Masonry' to these first three degieca, without any reference whatever to the Royal Arch, which is not acknowledged by that body. But it must be evident to the scholar that, unless the Royal Arch be inAcded, the Masonic legendary history to not complete." SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

153 "lt is, then, at this point that the Scotch Rite comes forward, to continue the series of instructions, which every student of Masonry is obliged to listen to, if he desires a thorough knowledge of the science to which he is devoting his investigations. The Scotch Rite, it is true, has also its three primitive degrees; out they are no longer practiced by its possessors. Still, even these degrees are more consonant with the same degrees of the York Rite, than those of any of the other rites.

 

" A York Mason, then, having arrived at the Master's degree, and finding an `hiatus valde deglendus'‑a something missing, and yet greatly to be desired‑a synopsis, rather than a full history of important circumstances, in which he has, by this time, become most interested, seeks further light, by receiving the degrees of the Scotch, or Ancient, and Accepted Rite. He is already a Master Mason, under the York Rite, and he proceeds, by taking the 4th, 5th, 6th, and so. on, to the 14th degree, in the Lodge of Perfection, to obtain an abundant mass of traditionary knowledge, all of which illustrates the unfinished or :mperfect legend which he had already received.

 

He does not, oy this, lose his reverence or respect for the York Rite.

 

On the contrary, by this augmentation of knowledge, he finds his admiration increased.

 

Many things which he had previously looked upon as trifles are now shown to be matters of importance‑many things which were formerly wholly inexplicable, he now fully comprehends‑and many things which once seemed to be discrepancies, militating against each other, and destroying the harmony of the system, are now found to be reconcilable, as consistent parts oú `one stupendous whole.'

 

With the brief expositions of the York Rite, he was as a spectator passing through a gallery of paintings, without a guide.

 

The pictures, emanating from the pencils of the first masters, delight his taste and warm his imagination ; but, ignorant of the subjects thus delineated, his judgment is unsatisfied, and the impressions made upon his heart and mind are transitory.

 

But the Scotch Rite comes to the assistance of the unsatisfied Mason, as a ' catalogue raisonnee' does to the wanderer among the pictures, and, by its copious legends, its more minute traditions, and Its new detail of circumstances, it leads him thoroughly to 154, MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

understand, to appreciate, and, of course, to admire, what had been before incomprehensible, or, at least, unsatisfactory. "Proceeding still farther, the 15th and 16th degrees make' him acquainted with many circumstances of Masonic history which were not preserved in the York Rite, and which are yet of so much importance, as to be essential to a full exposition of Masonic history.

 

" In the 17th and 18th degrees, still more brilliant light darts its rays into his mind, Masonry begins to present him with a holier and purer symbolism, and he returns again to the York. Rite, to wonder that in its simplicity he did not see its admir‑. able adaptation to the solemn explanations of the Rose Croix.

 

" From this degree to the Thirty‑second or Sublime Prince of: the Royal Secret, be finds in the.pbilosophical degrees an abundance of material for wholesome reflection, and many sublime teachings of truth and morality, all founded on the early lessons lie had received, during his initiation into the first principles of Masonry, in the York Rite. The instructions of, these higher degrees are not, it is true, so essential to the ful, understanding of the Masonic system ; but they are sufficiently interesting to claim attention and reward the investigation of the Masonic student.

 

" In all this we see no antagonism to the York Rite‑not even a generous rivalry‑but rather a coincident pursuit of the same great object : the investigation of Masonic truth. The Scotch Rite, as now .practiced, begins from the Master Mason. None but Master Masons of the York Rite can become Scotch Rite Masons, and, therefore, the two Rites mutually aid and illustrate each other.

 

The York Rite furnishes the solid foundation ; the Scotch supplies the beautiful superstructure. Hence, our illustrious brother, Henry Udal, one of the Sovereign Inspectors and Members of the Supreme Council of England, at a meeting of that body, in June last, very truthfully said, that `the system of Sublime and Ineffable Masonry does not encroach upon, or interfere with Craft, or Symbolic Masonry.' " We repeat, that the Scotch Rite is not antagonistic to the York Rite, but is subsidiary to it. And we are not willing to rest the truth or value of this assertion on our own unsupported SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

155 tutbority.

 

Dr. Frederick Dalcho, one of the leading members of the Sec tch Rite in this country, in an address delivered as far back as the year 1803, before the Sublime Grand Lodge of Perfection, at Charleston, thus defined the relations between ,‑he two Rites "'The Sublime Masons* view the Symbolic system with reverence, as forming a test of the character and capacity of the initiated. They are bound, by their laws, to support and cherish the original principles of that Institution ; and they watch, with a jealous eye, all who appear disposed to profane it. It is the door of their sacred Temple, through which all must pass to arrive at perfection. They are equally interested in the splendid establishment of those degrees, and in the union and happiness of their members.' "We have made these remarks, because, as we have already said, we have understood that some well‑meaning, but mistaken brethren have been opposed to the extension of the Scotch or Ancient and Accepted Rite, from the fear that it would interfere with the success of the York Rite. We desire to see these objections removed, because we sincerely believe that it is only by a united study of both Rites, that a Mason can expect to become thoroughly learned in his profession.

 

A true Masonic scholar must listen to the instructions of both ; he must investigate the legends and traditions of both ; and he must collate and compare the history and the philosophy of each with the other.

 

Without diligent union of both Rites in his researches, he must always remain a disciple rather than a master in Israel ‑‑his learning will, after all, be rather foolishness than wisdom, and his draughts at the fountain of Masonry may wet his lips, but will never satiate his thirst. And we all recollect the maxim of Pope, that A little learning is a dangerous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring.' 11 The Mason whose knowledge is confined to the York Rite, will be apt to entertain narrow and insufficient views of the 11 This is a title, technically used to designate those members of the Scotch We who have advanced as far as the 14th degree." 15B

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

sublimity of the Masonic system.

 

Let those views be enlightened and enlarged, by a zealous study of the Scotch Rite, and, in reply to every cavil, let us say: 'In our Masonic studies we belong to the Scotch Rite; in our Masonic allegiance we belong to the York Rite."' In the foregoing, Bro. Mackey sets out by saying that the fears entertained by some over zealous brethren, that Scotch Rite Masonry will encroach upon the prosperity of the York Rite, are to be best combated by a candid explanation of the history and character of that Rite, from which we were led to hope that he was about to give us, what we have never seen, a true history of that so called Masonic Rite; but we regret to say, the author leaves us quite as much in the dark, upon this subject, as we were before.

 

We have elsewhere stated, that there are no Rites in Masonry; that Masonry is a unit; a great system of ethics, complete in itself, and that everything differing from it, or which was originally no part of it, is not Masonry at all, the assumed name to the contrary notwithstanding ; but, for the sake of convenience, we may, on the present occasion, recognize the term Rites, in noticing the position assumed by Bro. Mackey.

 

In the second paragraph, the author asserts, truly, that originally Masonry consisted of only three degrees, including the Holy Royal Arch.

 

Now, this being admitted, and granting, as he does, in another place, that Masonry was instituted by King Solomon, we ask, in all seriousness, whether any system of Rites, subsequently instituted, can be considered part and parcel of the original? But, not feeling it to be our duty to pursue this subject here, we beg to call attention to the singular statement made in the paragraph referred to, that the degrees of Mark, and Royal and Select Master "have nothing whatsoever to do with the York Rite, properly so called." We had supposed, that the degree, now called Mark Master, teaches and inculcates that which was originally taught and inculcated in the Fellow Craft; in short, that it was made up of the better half, torn, imprope░ly, from the Fellow Craft degree, by modern innovvktoT s. who left, in its stead, what is now called the second SCOTCH RIT". ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

157 motion, which did not, originally, and, consequently, does not now, constitute any part of Masonry, properly speaking. But whether our views, in this respect, are true or false, we are certainly not mistaken in saying that Bro. Mackey is the first intelligent Masonic writer, to venture the assertion that the Mark degree has nothing to do with Freemasonry, or, as he says, the York Rite ; and what is even more remarkable, the author does not agree with himself. From an address delivered by Bro. Mackey, on the 27th of December, 1850, and published in the suceeding number of the .Miscellany, we make the following extract "The degree of Mark Master, which is the fourth in the Masonic series, is historically consitl'ered of the utmost importance, since we are informed that, by i* influence, each Operative Mason, at the building of the Temple, was known and distinguished, and the disorder and confusion which might other wise have attended so immense an undertaking, was completely prevented." In the address from which the foregoing is taken, the author emphatically asserts that "the whole system of Freemasonry is divided into seven degrees," and he includes the Mark as one of them: How Bro. Mackey will justify himself in contradicting, in September, 1852, what he asserts as true in December, 1850, we are unable to conjecture.

 

Since the speech above referred to was delivered, the brother has discovered that the Grand Council of the Thirty‑third, at Charleston, did, as early as 1802, issue a charter for a Mark Lodge, and as we know he is engaged in an effort to plant Scotch Rite Masonry in the several States, it may be that his preference for that Rite is leading him to claim for it as much of Ancient Craft Masonry as it can obtain the control of.

 

If the fact that the Grand Council issued a charter for a Mark Lodge, proves that the Mark degree belongs to the Scotch Rite, the fact that the Grand Council, at New Orleans, the Supreme Grand Council of France, and the Grand Orient of France, have issued charters for Lodges of Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason, equally proves that these degrees also belong to the Scotch Rite; and, especially when we remember that the Grand 158

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Councils at New York and Charleston, not long since asserted that they had the original right to control Ancient Craft Masonry, but waived that right in this country, because Symbolic Masonry was under the control of Grand Lodges when the Scotch Rite was introduced here.

 

We are not surprised that the admirers of Scotch Rite Masonry, so called, should seek to get under their control all the degrees of Craft Masonry, for, if we are not misinformed, the Secret Constitutions of that Rite require this at their hands, and we can not conceal the fact, that occurrences have transpired, since December, 1850, which may have had a powerful influence in producing this "presto change" in Bro. Mackey.

 

In the article of September, 1852, Bro. Mackey calls all the degrees now given, as belonging to Ancient Craft Masonry, except the first three, "meretricious ornaments," while, in his address of 1850, he makes the number to consist of seven, and forcibly illustrates the appropriateness and importance of each, in the system of York Rite Masonry.

 

Bro. Mackey alludes to an article published by himself, claiming that the Grand Council of the Thirty‑third, at Charleston, introduced into this country the degrees of Royal and Select Master. If the reader will turn to a report to the Grand Chapter of Vermont. from the pen of Bro. Tucker, in which the author takes up this subject, and, we think, proves that the assumption of the editor of the Miscellany i9 without a shadow of foundation, these degrees having been cultivated in the United States long before the Charleston Council was established.

 

In his speech of 1850, Bro. Mackey admits that " the substance of the degrees is contained in the Royal Arch" Therefore, to ne consistent in his claims, he should come out as have some other Scotch Rite advocates, and claim that the Royal Arch also belongs to the Scotch Rite.

 

But we proceed to notice a still more remarkable theory, attempted to be propagated by Bro. Mackey.

 

In September, 1852, he gravely tells us that the brother who cultivates no more than the degrees of Ancient Craft Masonry, is as a " spectator passing through a gallery of paintings urithout a guide," whereas, if he will, in addition, tako SCOTCH‑ RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

159 the Scotch Rite degrees, all things will be explained.

 

Verily, if this be true, we shall feel prepared to agree with the distinguished brother, in saying, as he does, in his speech of 1850, that " Masonry is a progressive science."

 

Can it be possible that a batch of trumped up degrees, some of them claimed to have been instituted by Frederick the Great, in the last century, some of them by somebody else in the seventeenth century, are capable of explaining any seeming mysteries in the great system of Freemasonry,‑ which, according to Bro. Mackey himself, was instituted more than twenty‑eight hundred years ago ? Should we, for the sake of argument, grant that these Scotch ,Rite degrees are Masonic degrees, we have Bro. Mackey's admission that they are of modern origin, compared with the York Rite.

 

And does he expect his readers to believe that modern Masonry is capable of resurrecting those legends of Ancient Craft Masonry, which may have been buried in the rubbish of the dark ages? Can he believe himself that these lost legends were found by Frederick the Great, or Chevalier Ramsey ?

 

But why should we spend time in racking our brain to find out what Bro. Mackey really believes, when we have it in our power to prove, by Bro. Mackey himself, that he does not believe his own teachings to be true.

 

From the memorable speech of 1850, we make the following extract "Among us, and perhaps three‑fourtbs of the Masonic world, where the right of Ancient York Masonry is practiced, the whole system of Freemasonry is divided into seven degrees, which receive the name of Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, Master Mason, Mark, Past, and Most Excellent Master; and, finally, of ,the Holy Royal Arch.* Within these seven degrees, are included all that is really and essentially necessary to be known of the science, the philosophy, and morality of Masonry.

 

Other degrees, indeed, there are above and beyond these.

 

They are, however, but illustrative and explanatory, and, by Masonic students, may be, and often are, very advantageously cultivated, "' 1 have not here inserted the degrees of Royal and Select Master, because I ba,7e always contended, and, I think, elsewhere proved, that they belong to the Scotoh and not the York Rite. With us, their substance is contained in th4 Royal Arch Degree." 160

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

for the purposes of laudable curiosity and intellectual improvo ment, just as the metaphysician might study the subtile, but now exploded dialectics of Aristotle, or the theologian amuse himself with the visionary disquisitions of Thomas Aquinas.

 

"To these seven ancient and universal degrees of. Masonry which, like the seven prismatic colors of the rainbow, contain, within themselves, the whole substance of light, we shall, on this occasion, confine our investigation." How very full, clear, and explicit is the foregoing.

 

There is no hanging back, no doubt entertained, nor even a difficulty suggested. Will the reader mow turn back and read again what the author says about the importance of the Scotch Rite degrees, in a later paper.

 

There he tells us that the Mason, " without this diligent union oú both Rites in his researches, must always remain a disciple, rather than a master in Israelhis learning will, after all, be rather foolishness than wisdom, and his draughts at the fountain of Masonry may wet his lips, but will never satiate. his thirst ;" and, to enforce this idea, he quotes from Pope, " A little learning is a dangerous thing," etc., and, finally, as a cap‑sheaf, he adds : "The Mason whose knowledge is confined to the York Rite, will be apt to entertain narrow and insufficient views of the sublimity of the Masonic system." And yet, in 1850, he emphatically proclaims that "all the degrees above and beyond Ancient Craft, or York Rite Masonry are to be ` cultivated for purposes of laudable curiosity, as are the exploded dialectics of Aristotle, or as the theolologian would amuse himself with the visionary disquisitions of Thomas Aquinas."'

 

In one article he condemns the student of Masonry to a life of ignorance, unless he acquires a knowledge of the Scotch Rite degrees, while, in the other, he tells him that the " seven degrees of universal Masonry, like the seven prismatic colors of the rainbow, contain, within themselves, the whole substance of light."

 

What, then, are we to infer are the teachings of the editor of the Miscellany ?

 

Why, that the wisdom of the brother who possesses the whole substance of light in Masonry, is mere foolishness, while he who penetrates " above and beyond," obtains a knowledge of the exploded doctrines‑the shadow of Masonry‑‑thereby becomes a 4' Master in Israel." SCOTCH RITE, ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED.

 

161 We feel that further comment from us would be wasting the time of our readers, and shall, therefore, hasten to close.

 

It is known to the readers of our writings that we are among those " well‑meaning brethren," who fear an effort is being made to bring Ancient Craft Masonry under the control of that trumpery yclept Modern Masonry, or Scotch Rite Masonry. We have shown that the Grand Council of, France, and the Grand Orient (Grand Lodge) of France, have succeeded in gaining control over Craft Masonry. We have shown. that the Grand Council of New Orleans, under the sanction of the Grand Orient of France, for many years controlled the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, and openly declared that, by the Secret Constitution of the Order, every Grand Council is recreant to' its solemn obligations, who fails to make an effort to exercise control over all the degrees in Masonry.

 

We have shown that the Grand Councils of New York and Charleston, openly proclaimed the"original right" to control the three first degrees in Masonry, and only waived that right, because they were under the Grand Lodge system when Scotch Rite Masonry was introduced into this country, and, lastly, we think it will now appear that Bro. Mackey, an officer of the Grand Council of the Thirtythird, at Charleston, has put up a finger‑board, so plainly indexed, that even the wayfarer in Masonry cannot be misled thereby.

 

We grant that our "little learning" in Scotch Rite Masonry may be considered a dangerous thing. It might have been better that we had never known anything about the degrees, for we have just learned enough to be able to join in with Brn. Cross, and others. in declaring the whole thing to be a mere imposition, a trumpery of high‑sounding titles, a system of degrees fit only to be cultivated, as Bro. Mackey declares, "as the theologian would amuse himself with the visionary disquisitiona of Thomas Aquinas." Long before Bro. Mackey used the foregoing language, he occupied a prominent position in his Grand Council, and was generally looked upon as its champion ; he can not, therefore, plead ignorance of the teachings of the Scotch Rite.

 

ii CHAPTER V.

 

EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES IIND KE MASONRY.

 

tw the early part of this history, we undertook to show that M: scurry originated at the building of King Solomon's Temple, and we promised, at a proper time, to treat separately of the Egypt:an Mysteries, and give our reasons for supposing they had no connection with, nor any well‑defined likeness to Freemasonry.

 

That we shall be able to give satisfaction to all, we do not indulge the slightest hope. Nor do we expect that we shall be able even to meet the expectations of those who feel inclined to examine the subject for themselves.

 

For, were we ever so well qualified to meet and combat the visionary theories of some modern writers, who would make Masonry the receptacle of a heterogeneous mass of principles, as dissimilar as were the supposed contents of Pandora's box, the space which we have allowed ourself would be too limited for the accomplishment of the end.

 

If, therefore, we shall be able to enlist the attention, and call into action the services of those whose higher qualifieations fit them to mature and finish, what we aim only to set on foot, we shall have accomplished all we hope for: We know we are undertaking a herculean task; for the simple reason that, as far as we are informed, our views of Masonry, though strictly in accordance with its traditions, and similar to those entertained and taught in the Lodge room, by nine‑tenths of the Masons in the United States, and, probably, in England, Scotland, and Ireland, we are not sustained by the conductor of any Masonic journal, or historian. We arrogate to. ourself no higher powers of penetration than are possessed by others, and hence, if our views are found to be more correct than theirs, we can only account. for it by supposing that, to the aeglect of other duties, we have seen proper to dex ote more EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

16.'3 ,,.me to the investigation of this particular subject, than has euited the interest or taste of others.

 

We have been readh% most of our life.

 

For thirty years we have been a student of Masonry, and deeply interested in its history ; and, we can truly say that, whatever our views may be, they are emphatically our own, and we have never paused to inquire whether they were popular or unpopular.

 

We have never admitted that any man was too exalted to be in error, nor have we supposed a man too humble and obscure to do his own thinking, to arrive at the truth.

 

Claiming to occupy a position with the class last referred to, we do dare to attack the opinions of the exalted, when, in our judgment, those opinions tend to do harm, and if this seeming presumption should occasionally excite the ire of a little mind, who, for the lack of ability to make an argument, chooses to blow off his extra steam by means of illnatured epithets, we shall try to pity, rather than censure him.

 

Most historians have set out by declaring Masonry to have originated in the garden of Eden, or with the immediate descendants of Adam. This hypothesis they attempt to establish 'by assuming (falsely, we think,) that Masonry was originally purely Operative, and hence, the first builders of tents or huts are set down as Masons. Now, whether those men were Masons, as the term is usually applied to certain mechanics, we will not be at the trouble to inquire, but that they had formed themselves into a Society, and that the Society of Masons, or Freemasons, we utterly deny.

 

But, having examined this subject, at length, elsewhere, we will not further pursue it here.

 

The class of writers above referred to, fail to find proof that Adam was a Mason, in any sense, while in the Garden of Eden. And, by the way, there is more evidence that Eve was a Mason, for she certainly commenced a very important branch of mechanical labor, and as her material, fig leaves; was not of the test, we have a right to suppose she was a skillful operative. But our learned historians pass over this event, and make a bold dash to show that the Egyptian Mysteries were Masonic Mysteries, that the Egyptian Secret Societies were Masonic Societies, under another name.

 

Though we think there is not a single testimony which tends MODERN'FREEMASONRY.

 

to date Masonry at a period anterior to the Temple, we shall proceed to notice such as have been relied on, and, inasmuch as some of our readers may not be familiar with the history of the Egyptian Mysteries, we shall proceed with some prelimi‑' nary remarks, as introductory to the main question at issue.

 

Until the latter part of the seventeenth century, the fabulous accounts of the heathens, except so far as the divinity of their gods was concerned, were received as so many revelations of truth; but the bold and energetic writers who sprung up about that time, and who so effectually exposed the fallacy of the Heathen Mythology, that, since their time, every branch of history has been somewhat rationally viewed, except that which refers to Masonry, and to the Church of Rome. The members of the Roman Catholic Church, who undertake to write its history, still retain all the mummery of the days of bigotry and superstition.

 

They still tell us the most fabulous and ridiculous stories that were ever penned, and anathematize us if we can not, or do not believe them to be holy truths.

 

We are asked to believe that blood has continued to issue, periodically, for hundreds of years, from certain walls, thereby affording evidence that God's anger is periodically enkindled for crimes there perpetrated, in the days of primitive Christianity.

 

We are asked to believe that a transparent liquid, in a sealed vial, is made to turn to blood, that the world may, thereby, know the true descendants of Peter have power of Jehovah to work miracles.

 

We are asked to believe that relics of our Saviour are still in possession of the Church, and that those who will bond down and worship them, accompanied with certain donations of money, shall receive absolution from their sins.

 

We are asked to believe a thousand tales, no less ridiculous than these, in order to prove that the holy Church of Rome is the only refuge from the vengeance of an offended God.

 

Protestant Masons sneeringly point to these bold and unblushing schemes, intended to impose on the credulity, and alarm the fears of the ignorant and priest‑ridden Roman Catholic people, and yet many of these very Protestants will gulp down even more ridiculous and mischievous stories, told of the history and principles of Masonry.

 

EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES IINLIKE.MABONRY.

 

IfiS The Roman Catholics have no where attempted to vitiate, or set at naught the Word of God, so far as to make religion consist in a knowledge of either of the arts or Sciences; while, by a Protestant divine, we are asked to believe that geometry is Masonry, and that Masonry is the true religion.

 

 Now, men who are paid for writing this worse than nonsense, can be excused only on the ground that money is of more value to them than the simple truth.

 

Is it enough to tell us that the author is an eminent divine ,of England? Is it enough to say he is a man of learning? Why, can not learned men, even beyond the waters, have some weak points? òCan not they write a romance, "founded on facts," and call it history? We are not inclined to quarrel ‑with any one, whose taste runs that way, for worshiping great men, and their errors, so long as he is willing to worship alone; but when he seeks to induce others to bow down to his Moloch, his efforts become of public interest, and must be publicly met, by those whose business it is to guard the public 'against error.

 

It is a singular fact, that the same class of writers who hold that Freemasonry originated from, or originally constituted the Egyptian Mysteries, are loudest in denouncing the bare suggestion that the true religion originally formed part or parcel of the Pagan Theology, and yet, if the likeness of two things is to be taken as evidence of their identity, we think it would not be difficult to show that there is a greater resemblance between the religion of the heathens and that of the. Mosaic Dispensation, than there ever was<between the Egyptian Mysteries and Freemasonry. He, who is at all familiar with ancient history, can not fail to notice a striking likeness in the religious observances of the Hebrews, to those practiced by ' nations given over, by all Christendom, to the grossest idolatry We know that a very convenient method is resorted to, in ‑order to account for the resemblance, by the use of the hack' neyed saying, that the existence of a counterfeit proves the existence of the genuine, and that wherever the likeness spoken of exists, whether in the manner of worshiping their gods, their reliance upon their oracles. and auguries, or any of their 166

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

peculiar rituals, are but counterfeits of the usages and ritual@ of the true religion.

 

Now, while we think that, aside from the foregoing reason, it would not be difficult to show that the idolatry of the heathens, and the religion of the Christian, did not spring from the same great law‑giver, there is much more testimony, going to show the original identity of these two systems of religion, than there is to prove the original identity of Masonry and the Ancient Mysteries.

 

It is contended that the indispensable use made of the Bible by Freemasons, by no means proves that Masonry originated with Moses, or even at a period so late as the days of Solomou, but that it does somekoto show that the Hebrews, who systematized and perfected Freemasonry, had preserved and did imitate the usages of the more ancient nations. The learned antiquarians, for the last hundred and fifty years, have wisely undertaken to penetrate the Egyptian Mysteries, by endeavoring to trace out and interpret the words and symbols used in those days; and though we are constrained to say that many of the definitions given us are far‑fetched and uncertain, yet, granting them all to be correct, we think they wholly fail to prove that Freemasonry was ever part of, or had its origin in the Egyptian Mysteries.

 

It is true, that the heathens did, as now do the savages of the forest, use the pictures of animals, etc., to express their meaning and wishes, but a slight examination will show how little reliance can be placed in our knowledge of their application to specific things.

 

It is known that the descendants of Ham, who were left in Lower Egypt, discovered that the overflowing of the Nile was preceded by an annual wind, blowing from North to South. They further discovered that the overflow was preceded ay the appearance of a brilliant star, showing itself only for a bhort space of time, between the dawn and the rising of the sun. Regarding it, therefore, as a warning messenger, seat specially to bid them prepare to fly to the higblands, they called it Tayant (the dog) ; they also called it Anubis (the barker). And hence, they resorted to the use of a painting, representing EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

lfi'l 1k dog, and this symbol, exposed in public places, under parties ular circumstances, and at particular periods, serve(l to apprise the inhabitants that the Nile Star had made its appearance, and all must remove from the Delta. But, surely, it will not be contended that whenever the symbol of a dog was represented, the same meaning was attached to it. On the contrary, it was sometimes used to denote fidelity, or friendship, or as a warning against danger of any kind. And so, in reference to the symbols used in the Egyptian Mysteries, it will not do, arbitrarily to select the meaning of a symbol; suited to a preconceived opinion or theory, and jump to the conclusion that, because, in some cases, it was designed to signify that particular thing, therefore, it was always so used in the Mysteries.

 

If this method be adopted, very many and contradictory things may be shown, and we think this method has been resorted to, by those who have undertaken to prove that Masonry was identical with, or derived from the Egyptian Mysteries.

 

The representation of the blazing star is used in our teachings of the principles and ends of Freemasonry, and we suppose it is designed simply to commemorate the recollection of the blazing star, which pointed out the birth‑place of our Saviour, and zoe think it has been introduced into our Lodges since the event to which it refers. We know there are men, learned men, who are not satisfied to claim so littlt for that symbol, but who, with marvelous, penetration, have discovered that the, blazing star of our Lodge room is the symbol of the dog‑star oU the Egyptians, and designed to teach us prudence, and to warn us from all evil.

 

Thus it will be perceived, that he who desires to give us a romantic account of Freemasonry, and prove, thereby, that it originated at some point, too remote for the ken of human thought, will find it convenient to study Heathen Mythology, and draw largely from its rich storehouse of unexplained and unintelligible symbols.

 

The overflowing of the Nile, if it did not give birth to, tended, in a powerful degree, to the study of astronomy, for so important was it, that the people should be correctly informed of the signs which indicated the approach and receding of the waters.

 

168

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

that men, the best qualified, were employed, and paid from the .public treasury, to discover and portray those signs ; and hence, the early attention of the Egyptians to the movements of the heavenly bodies. As letters were unknown, symbols were resorted to, to give expression to ideas, but it will be seen that it was utterly impossible to use a distinct symbol to reprevent each idea, as such a language would have proved more aurthensome than that used by the Chinese, inasmuch as the ,Egyptians resorted mainly to the pictures of animals, instead of arbitrary characters, therefore, their symbols were made to represent general ideas, made special by the time of use, or the surrounding circumstances.

 

The monitors of the present day contain the symbol of the Mosaic pavement, to represent human life, checkered with good and evil. Now, the Egyptians, doubtless, had a method of representing , the. same thing, but it would‑ require more than ordinary credulity, to believe that they used the Mosaic pavement at the introduction of the Mysteries, long anterior to the days of Moses. In like manner, though symbols were used by the Egyptians, and are now used by the Masons, it neither proves that the Egyptian Mysteries and Masonry were originally identical, nor that the one is derived from the other. It seems to us somewhat singular, that learned brethren, who trace Masonry back as far as they can find anything to liken even one of its principles or symbols to, lose sight of the fact that, for the last hundred years, men have been successfully introducing additional degrees and additional symbols into Masonry.

 

An eminent divine,* in a late article in the Union, has undertaken to show that the degrees of M. Master, Past Master, atnd, M. E.; Master, were actually instituted and practiced at the building of King Solomon's Temple, as separate and distinct degrees, and for separate and distinct purposes. While we as firmly believe that the Mark Master's degree was originally part and parcel, yea, the better half of the Fellow Craft's degree, and that the second section of the Fellow Craft degree, 0 Rev. Salem Town.

 

EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

169 u now given, is of modern invention, introduced at the time of the subdivision, to fill the vacancy thus created.

 

We believe the Past Master's degree, or, as New York has it, the Installation Ceremony, was introduced by Lawrence Dermott, and without having, then or now, even a well‑defined resemblance to Masonry. And as for the M. E. Master's degree, we can only say that, if the writer above referred to is correct, in supposing it was given at the building of the Temple, we shall be forced to the conclusion, that the shadow existed autscedent to the substance, for the event, which the degree is designed to commemorate, had not then transpired. We think these degrees, above the third, were unknown until after the present system of Grand Lodges was established, and, even at this day, they are not recognized in any country where Ancient Craft Masonry has been preserved in its purity.

 

Neither Eng. land, Ireland, nor Scotland recognizes them as having any legitimate connection with Masonry, and, if given at all, they are given as side degrees. We mean, of course, to except the Mark Master's, or Mark degree., from this category.

 

We introduce the subject here, to show that the ancient degrees have been subdivided, and new degrees added, dignified with the name of Masonry, which do not bear the landmarks of purity ; and to say that, if degrees have been added, it is fair to suppose additional symbols have also been introduced, and meanings attached to them that were unknown to the Ancient Egyptians, and for three thousand years thereafter. Will any one say, that the Ancient Egyptians used two perpendicular parallel lines, to represent St. John the Baptist, and St. John the Evangelist? Could the Egyptians have used symbols to represent the five orders of architecture, before they were invented?

 

Could they have given us the representation of the forty‑seventh problem of Euclid, before it was discovered, and before Euclid, or Pythagoras, lived?

 

It must be borne in mind that most of the symbols to be found in our monitors, distinctly point us to the events which transpired at the build. ing of the Temple, and we must regard it as ridiculous, to sao they are but the symbols of the Egyptian Mysteries.

 

We are referred to the point within a circle, as conclusive 171

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

evidence that Masonry and the Ancient Mysteries were identical, because the ancients used the circle to represent the Divinity; and yet, strange to say, the same writers say nothing about the balance of the same picture, and, especially, the two lines representing Christianity.

 

In the Mark Master's degree our emblems all refer to Solomon's Temple. In the Past Master's degree, we are pleased to say, there is not a single emblem that does not belong to the preceding degrees‑‑the inventor being satisfied to work off his novelties in the way of ceremony alone.

 

Every emblem in the M. E. Master's degree refers to the events which the R. A. degree is intended to commemorate, and the same may be said of the Royal and Select degrees.

 

But who can fail to perceive that, even in the R. A. degree, a symbol has been introduced which has no sort of connection with the events, either upon which the degree was founded or intended to commemorate. What connection has the appearance of the Angel of the Lord to Moses, in a burning bush, with the destruction of Jerusalem and the captivity of the remnant of the Jews?

 

None whatever.

 

We can not find even an apology for this symbol in the place it now occupies, save that it serves to fill up a certain time necessary for half learned officers to prepare for the ceremony which follows in the ritual of the degree, and as far as the use made of the symbol in the lecture, as now given, is concerned, we regard it as very like the second section of the F. C. degree; it serves to divert the mind of the candidate from the true purposes and intent of the degree, until they take the two R. and S. degrees, which have been improperly taken from the R. A., including the true R. A. lecture.

 

That the symbols which have been introduced and added, in modern times, are made to teach useful moral lessons, will not be denied, but we can not, therefore, rely upon them as constituting _ Ancient Landmarks in Masonry.

 

On the contrary, we think if the student of Masonry will ascertain what Ancient Crall Masonry, in its primitive purity, was intended to portray of accomplish, it will not be difficult to define the appropriate symbols.

 

It is no proof that, because a symbol is now found in our Lodges, representing a particular thing, that, therefore, it EGYPTIAN MYST8RIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

11ò1 has always been used for the same purpose.

 

Nearly all the side degrees, of which we have any knowledge, have a tradition attached to them, running back to various periods, as best suited their inventors‑some to the days of Moses, some to Abrat:am, some to Noah, and one or two go into the Garden of Eden. the degrees of Oddfellowship have a tradition quite as ancient as those of Masonry, and will it be said, therefore, that. Odd fellowship is as old as Masonry ? The Egyptians attributed to the moon great power over the 4ements, and, neat to the sun, as being the cau‑e of the overflow of the Nile, and hence they called her Isis, the Queen of Heaven, the excellent one. And, finally, from a habit of attributing divine powers to the sun and moon, they came to look upon them first as man and woman, and then god and goddess.

 

The sun was called Osiris, the conqueror of Typhon, the ruler of the winds; and, anon, he was called Jupiter, Ichor, etc., etc.

 

Isis, in like manner, was called the wife of Osiris, and, anon, she was worshiped as the mother of Jupiter, and, finally, the mother of all the gods.

 

Yea, the contradictions did not stop here, for she was called the sister of Jupiter, and, finally, the daughter of Jupiter.

 

Diana of the Gauls and Romans, the Artemis of the Greeks, was sometimes a terrestrial deity, then the moon, and then the queen of hell. The crescent and the full moon, which she was supposed to wear over her head, caused her to be taken for the moon.

 

And then the time between the last phases and the appearance of the new, was supposed to be occupied in visiting the lower regions, the country of the dead.

 

Now all these errors are owing to the fact that very many attributes and powers were imputed to the moon, and as no symbol could be constructed to represent all of them, the true symbols were metamorphosed to represent either, and, by turns, all the attributes.

 

We see that we cannot identify the use now made of a symbol in our Lodges, with the use made of it by the ancient Egyptians.

 

It is quite evident that the Egyptians, not being able to calculate the movement of the heavenly bodies, entertained fears, at each change, or disappearance of the moon from the earth, that she would not again return, hence, so overjoyed were they on the appearance of the new moon, that after they 172

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

,bad deified Osiris, or the man in the sun, and Isis, tIA6 woman, or queen in the moon, they instituted a festival called the feast of the new moon, and men of known probity were selected to repair to the tops of the mountains to discover the first appearance of the Hecate, and then, with all speed, convey the glad tidings to the people, on the arrival of which, the festivities commenced. The Hebrews, it is known, pursued a similar course. Dr. Adam Clark, in his history of the ancient Israelites, makes the following statement "The moment in which the conjunction between the sun and moon is made, can only be known by astronomical calculations, because she does not then appear ; and as the Hebrews were little skilled in this science, they began their months at the first phasis, or first appearance of the moon, which required no learning to discover. This was an affair in which the great Sanhedrim were concerned, and the different phases were planted upon the hall in which they assembled.

 

It belonged to them to choose men of the strictest probity, whom they sent to the tops of the neighboring mountains, and who no sooner perceived the new moon, than they came, with all speed, even on the Sabbath day itself, to acquaint the Sanhedrim with it.

 

It was the business of that council to ascertain whether the moon had appeared, " and to declare it ; which was done by pronouncing these words ,The feast of the new moon! the feast of the new moon! and all ,the people were informed of it by the sound of the trumpets. To which ceremony David alludes when he says:' Blow up the trumpets in the new moon, in the time appointed on our solemn feast day.

 

We marvel at the credulity and superstition of the Egyptians and Hebrews, and yet are we. at the present day, doing more than looking through a glass darkly? Are we not almost as credulous and as superstitious as the ancients were? How many still believe in the divine power of the moon ?

 

Why, more than half the agriculturists of Europe and America believe that certain vegetables must, in order to a good yield, be put into the earth at the right time of the moon.

 

At least one‑third, including ò Psalms lei. a, a EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

173 a fair proportion of the intelligent people, make prayers and supplications to the new moon‑we mean mentallv, of courseand not a few pour out their supplications in song or verse, for wives, husbands, sweethearts, and friends ; while still another clas3 go so far as to ask the " dear, kind new moon " to send them good crops, riches, and fame. Is it, then, remarkable that men are to be found catching at the most ridiculous theories upon which to build up a temporary notoriety, or by which to `4 put money in their purse."

 

Nor is a love of the marvelous, confined to the skeptic, or the pedantic collegiate, but rather is the hot bed in which it germinates to be found bighly~cultivated in the gardens of ministers of the Gospel, or those educated for the Church ministry.

 

Why, only a few years since. this farò seeing class of men had the sagacity to discover that the then probable downfall of the Ottoman Empire was the fulfilling of the prophecy that the river Euphrates should be dried up. And is it not true that a large proportion of the ministers are among the first to encourage the visonary theories of the day ?

 

Go to your minister, if you want a lecture upon Phrenology, Mesmerism, or Clairvoyance, as newly discovered sciences.

 

Go to your minister, if you wish to hear a song of praise to Number Six, and the miraculous powers of the medicines of steam doctors, or if you wish to hear the mystification of cause and effect, and the delectable theory of the divine power of indivisible particles upon the human system, through the agency of the great science of Homeopathy.

 

And we will not vouch that advocates can not be found, in the same quarter, for spiritual knockings.

 

We know it is generally considered indelicate to speak thus of this class of reverend gentlemen, but we beg to say that they are not over delicate in portraying the faults of lay members, and the sins of outsiders.

 

We admire and venerate the ministry, but we think they figure much more efficiently in the pulpit, than they do in adopting every wind of doctrine in relation to the occult sciences, or in giving encouragement to jugglers and impostors, or, last, though not least, in writing romances, dignified by the name of history. Who but this class of men have thrown Masonry into ridicule, by claiming for it an age coeval with the, world, and the attributes, powers, and excellencies of the true v 174 MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

religion ?

 

We feel that we have a right to say that the opinions of such men, in relation to subjects outside of their callifig, should be adopted with caution, notwithstanding the high sounding title of D.D. may be attached to their names.

 

The ancient Egyptians, during the early part of their feasts, publicly bewailed their losses, and then, in order to show gratitude to the gods, they brought forth symbols representing the divine favors, or gifts they had received ; hence, for an abundant harvest, they loaded a figure with fruits, vegetables, bread, or corn, pitchers of wine, etc., etc.

 

Many of these articles were thrown upon horns with which the figure was furnished.

 

This is, doubtless, the origin of the cornucopia, or horn of plenty, and as the horns represented the wild goat, it is probable this is the origin of the vulgar impression, prevalent, to some extent, at this day, that candidates for initiation into the several secret societies are required to " ride the goat."

 

But, admitting the same symbol is now used to represent plenty, that was so used by the Egyptians, or, what is more correct, the same that was afterward used by the Greeks, viz.,‑‑one horn of the goat in the hand of a human figure‑is it to be inferred from these that Freemasonry was identical with the Ancient Mysteries? It must be borne in mind that the use of this symbol has not been preserved by Masons only, but by nations also.

 

The pitcher of wine was used by the ancients to represent an abundant vintage, but where is the corn and oil ?

 

In the dedicatory ceremonies, Masons use corn, wine, and oil, and, in some cases, in England, salt also, only one oú which articles seems to have been used in the festivals of the Egyptians.

 

But suppose they were all used, it is quite as reasonable to suppose the Masons have borrowed them from the ancients, as that they were Masonic emblems at that day. But we had supposed that the Masons did not even borrow them from the Ancient Mysteries. Sing Solomon sent to Kiug Hiram a present of many measures of corn, wine and oil, etc., in testimony of his gratitude for the important assistance rendered him in building the Temple. This gave birth to that long and uninterrupted friendship which marked the lives of those two great men.

 

We believe these articles were used at ‑the dedication of the Temple to commemorate EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

175 that‑eveut, and Freemasons have ever since taken pride in perpetuating it.

 

The Egyptians carried in their processions a small chest, which at first contained a great variety of symbols, representing abundance. Afterward it seems their mysteries were founded upon the great secrets which were pretended to have been found in that chest. And here again some modern writers have made the wonderful discovery that the representation of the Ark of the Covenant, used by the Freemasons, is nothing more nor less than the mysterious chest of the ancients. Verily, one would be led to suppose that these brethren would attach much higher consequence to the Heathen Mythology than to the Holy Bible; for every Royal Arch Mason knows, and the world has a right to know it (for it is no secret), that the small chest carried in our processions, is a representation of the Ark of the Covenant; and used in our Chapter ceremonies to represent, and perpetuate the memory of an important event which transpired at the building of the first, and also of the second Temple, and there is not the slightest testimony, that the mysterious chest of the Egyptians ever had any connection with any of the Masonic ceremonies.

 

Although we are compelled to be brief in our remarks upon the Ancient Mysteries, we feel it to be our duty to introduce some facts, going to show that no sort of reliance can be placed upon the Heathen Mythology; and, in connection therewith, attempt to show that the symbols of the ancients, whether Egyptian, Phoenician, Grecian, or Roman, were so numerous and so often changed, that they can not be properly classified, or fitly applied to the explanations of our symbols of the present day. We take, for example, the fourth key of ancient symbolical writings, viz., the figure of a man with a dog's head, sometimes carrying a pole with a serpent wound round it. The representation of this symbol, about the time of the rising of the dog‑star, was to admonish the people to leave the low lands to escape the overflow. To this figure they gave the same name as that before given to the star, viz., the barker, or Anubis.

 

They also called it Tayant, the dog ; and still another name, viz., Serapis, the man‑dog.

 

Here are three meanings for the same symbol, 176

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

and, in this case, as in nearly all others, the T,%ptians soon h. t g3 siglit of the original meaning and design of the symbol, and imagined the name given to each was the name of a deity, and assigned to him a place of power. Serapis, at first, was only the figure or symbol of the dog‑star, or rather, one of the divine attributes of the star ; but, in a little while, they imagined that the serpent twined around his rod, and gave him great and miraeulous powers over diseases, and he was not only supposed to be a real being, but a doctor of medicine, and, finally, a god of medicine. The invention of letters was likewise attributed to him., And here we see that the same figure is made to represent three gods‑Serapis, the man‑dog; Tayant. the dog‑star; and Anubis, the barker; while, originally, it was intended simply to inform the inhabitants that the dog‑star waa about to appear, when the overflow would commence.

 

With the Romans the representations of the figure of Bacchus were, at first, to keep before the people important events ; second, to admonish the people of what was best to be done in future ; then he was the symbol of mourning, or crying to the gods ; then Bacchus was the god having power over wild beasts, etc., etc., and the people prayed to him for protection ; and, again, among many other divine powers, he was the god of wine. Under all the various divine attributes of Bacchus, religious festivals were instituted, resembling, from what we can gather, the Roman Catholic processions of the host, and the general impression seems to be, that this ceremony, like most of the mummeries of the Roman Church, was derived from the heathens ; but that they have been greatly improved upon is very' clear, for there are certainly more pomp and pretended mystery in the ceremonies of that Church, than were attempted by the heathens ; and we may add, that wherever they have the power, a disregard of those ceremonies is much more severely punished, than was ever done by the heathens. What man, in a Catholic country, be he Papist or Protestant, Greek or Mohammedan, dare refuse to kneel while the host is passing on the street ? Hercules, the sun, or a god in the sun. was believed by the ancients to have had a battle with the enemies of Atlas, and, finally, succeeded in relieving him of the heavy burden somehcw EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

177 huproperly placed upon his shoulders, which, originally, only meant that the sun, or god of the sun, had thrown hot rays upon. the tops of the mountains, and melted the snow, so that agriculture could be carried on by the assistance of Atlas, or the principles of the earth. And the symbols of three golden balls, now used by pawnbrokers, are derived from the repratentation of a tree, having golden fruit, which was used by the ancients to represent their succcessful commerce with other nations; but no one, at this day, would be led to believe, on seeing the three golden balls at a pawnbroker's office, that the ~imate was largely engaged in commerce.

 

The Egyptians held the feast of Osiris, or Isis. or Horux, at the beginning of the year, which, as we have stated, was governed by the dog‑star ; but as there were six hours in each year which they failed to provide for, they found that, is four years, the feast would come one day too soon for the rising of the dog‑.star, and as; in this feast, they were desirous to appease and honor all the gods having power over the productions of the soil, etc., they determined to continue their feasts as they began, and once in every fourteen hundred and silty years, they would have held their feast on every day of the year, and all the gods were thus equally honored, and hence it was that, every four years, their symbols of the feast were changed to suet the ,seasons, or the presiding deity of that paa.ticular day. And thus, in process of time, each day was supposed to be the birthday of some one or move of the gods.

 

But the figure of Bacchus was multiplied into various gods besides the three we have named, there was Camillus of the Ileturians, the Mercury of the Phoenicians, the Hermes of the Greeks, and the Jamus of the Satins ; all these were represented at various times, and in the different countries, by different figures. A:uubis was sometimes represented as holding in his hand .u large purse, which gave great joy to the people, as they then felt sure of prosperity, and hence was Anubis called Mercury the cunning detder.

 

On some occasions, Anubis was represented with large hawk's wings, to signify that the Nile would rise .sufficiently high to overflow :and enrich the earth ; and here the name of Anubis was changed to Dvedalu~, and soon D.cedalvs 12 178

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

was known, or believed to be a great architect, the inventor of the square and compasses. So that, for the sake of consistency, we think those modern writers, who trace Masonry back to the Ancient Mysteries, should instruct their readers that the true symbol to represent the origin of Masonry, and the tools of the Craft, is a large pair of hawk's wings.

 

Now, the Cabiri, whom Dr. Oliver represents as having been so celebrated as Masons, are nothing more than the three principal figures of the Egyptian ceremonies. òThey were carried into Phoenicia, and there received the name of Cabiri ; the first was called Axicros, the all‑powerful; the second, Axiokersos, the fecundatm‑; and the third, Axeokersa, the fecundatrix. To the latter figure they also gave the name of Casmilus, or she who beholds deity ; and, we think, other names were given to the other two, and hence, they finally made not only six figures out of the original three, but deified them all ; indeed, historians do not agree as to the number of the Cabiri‑some say there were but three, while others contend, with much plausibility, that there were six, and all from the same parentage.

 

The Nile generally covered Lower Egypt, or the Delta, three months in the year, cutting off all land communication with the neighboring cities, and, occasionally, there was distress in some or them. In order to communicate with each other, they introduced barks, or small sailing vessels, the symbol of which was the flying horse.

 

Finally, three of these figures were used to represent the three months oú alms‑giving, or assistance to the distressed, and were called the Pegasus, and nine other figures were made to represent the nine months of prosperity, when the land was free of water.

 

These were called the muses, or gods of the months or prosperity, who were headed by Apollo, who foretold future events through his inferior gods, each one of `which represented a particular month, and what the earth would bring forth for the people in that month.

 

Now, for aught we know, there may be some new side degrees, or even some among the French degrees, called Masonic, whirl. have emblems resembling those above referred to, but there is no sort of resemblance between those symbol's and any belong tm to Ancient Craft Masorry.

 

EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

179 We have stated, and here repeat, that we can place no sort of reliance upon the records of the ancients, as handed down to us, and we are sorry to say, the aid which we have received from writers who have lived since the middle, or dark ages, is but little more satisfactory. Take, for example, the history of the reign of Semiramis, as detailed in the early part of our history, emanating from the pen of Herodotus, and compare it with Strabo, Diodorus Siculus, and others, who have written since, and it will be found that they make this celebrated Queen live at various periods, from two thousand two hundred, down to seven hundred years'before Christ, thus showing a difference of fifteen hundred years ; and, although each author gives us'a detailed account of the Queen's reign, her character and habits, it is, at least, most probable that no such Queen ever lived at all. We know that it was the custom, in the days of Noses, to call a tribe or family by its original head or founder.

 

Ninevah was called Ninees ;, the people of Judea were called Judah ; it was said that Israel dwelt in tents, etc., etc.

 

Now, we know that the ancient Babylonians assumed the name of Semarien, which, we are told, signified a dove, and W. Powel informs us that the title Semiramis was as often used to mean the same thing.

 

If, then, it be admitted that the ancients, in speaking of the battles and victories of Semiramis, mean to give an account of the achievements of that nation of people, it at once enables us to reconcile the different arid, otherwise, contradictory accounts given by different writers; for the Babylonians occupied a position among nations quite as long a period as that referred ' to, viz., from two thousand two hundred down to seven hundred years before Christ.

 

But, if we admit that such errors, as above referred to, originated in a misconstruction of terms, we are bound to admit that the whole history of the ancients, as handed down to us, is fabulous and unsatisfactory.

 

How, then, shall we arrive at anything like a correct knowledge of the original meaning of the symbols of the ancients ?

 

If we rely upon the poets of Greece and Rome, they differ widely from each other, and throw the whole into impenetrable mystery. We learn that an instrument resembling the letter T was used for measuring the Nile, and, again, we find it in the hands of the 180

 

MODE$x FREEMASONRY.

 

same people, transformed into a cross the,posses"sion of which was supposed to be a sure guaranty against evil. The cross, ''therefore; was worn as a charm around the neck, which supertctition, it is said, descended to the Catholics, and is still held in seat veneration by them, although its reference is now made to the Cross of Christ. They have, however, found a spell more potent than the cross; via., a few verses called the ‑gospel. Home tells us that the Egyptians, of the present day, use as a a‑emedy against a disease, a charm from a priest, trade up of wme passage in the Koran. We ask, now; .if there is, or ‑ever was, anything in Masonry which addresses itself to the super stition of its members ?

 

What Mason, of common sense, could bbelieve that a verse; or quotation from the Bible, coming through the hands of a priest; would work miracles upon the body or oul of any man ?

 

And yet, this is quite as reasonable as to òbelieve that the Ancient Mysteries and Masonry were identical, and, especially, if we rely upon the statement of Herodotus, that the Ancient Mysteries constituted a secret theology, which never could be known to any but the initiated.

 

And, indeed; there are many reasons going to show that the original Egyptian Uysteries have never been handed down to as, or, if they have, 'they have been so adulterated and mixed up with the thousand . changes and additions which were perpetually going on, that ‑'it is now impossible to designate the original.

 

We are led to believe, from a careful examination of several of the most prominent writers, that, at an early period, ‑after ,the original signs and symbols had been misconstrued and misapplied, and false theories and histories were introduced, that the wisest and 2best ‑men instituted a secret Society, for the ,praiseworthy purpose of bringing back the people 'from their ,idolatry. We think it will not be difficult to show that this could only be done secretly, and, finder the most solemn vows ,to withhold the facts from the world. We know the belief that the names of the original figures and emblems were the names of distinguished and powerful individuals, and celestial gods became so universally popular, that no man would have been emitted, publicly, to teach the fallacy of that doctrine, nor was it safe to do 'so, even through a secret society, until the EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

MI mind of the candidate was fully prepared for the change, by a long probation, trial, and preparation. That the initiated wage entrusted with but little at a time, and that this was necessary, under the circumstances, we have good reason to believe; but that all who gave satisfactory evidence that they could be trusted and would prove faithful, were fully instructed that the gods they worshiped were but imaginary beings, originating ii. the names of mere symbols, introduced and originally used to signify the heavenly bodies, which were supposed to exercise an influence upon the earth, the water, the air, and the productinns of the earth, we have good reason to believe ; and, hence, the opinion became prevalent, first with the initiated, and the4k with the people generally, that the true religion was only to be mown through the medium of initiation into the Mysteries: The Egyptians were prone to run to extremes, and those who were made wise by the priests, by an introduction into the secret Society, very soon arrived at the conclusion that, not only was a knowledge of the true religion taught in the Mysteries, but that God required every one to be initiated, an4 that those who entered would be blessed, both temporally and spiritually, and that all who failed to withstand the probation, or who were deemed unfit for initiation, were under the curse of God, and should be despised by all men.

 

From this extravagance it was but a step, and a very popular one, too, to intros troduce, even into the Mysteries, a plurality of gods, and attach to each the powers of omnipotence, in a limited sphere.

 

Man has, in all ages, been prone to fall in love with mysteries, and magnify their importance.

 

The more mysterious and difficult to be understood the religion taught, the more followers it will have, with the ignorant and uneducated.

 

Our superstition is much more easily excited into action than our reasoning facul ties, and, hence, it is more easy to believe what we can not understand, than to arrive at the truth, by simple testimony, within the reach of all.

 

The priests first taught, it is believed, many of the primitive truths, but soon after permitted the introduction of other things, which comported with the superstitions and passions of the people, and, hence, the origin of the greater and lesser Mysteries of which we read.

 

Tle greater 182

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

and lesser religions of the Eleusinians were nothing more than the degrees of knowledge, acquired by initiation and progress in the secret Society. As soon as the popular corruptions were introduced, the same care in selecting subjects was no longer necessary ; for all could enter, and have their passions indulged with the worship of as many gods as they chose, while, to a select few, was reserved the right of advancement to the greater Mysteries, and, hence, was it supposed, finally, that the priests alone were entitled to know the greater Mysteries, or religious truths. And thus, is it thought, originated the superstitious and ridiculous idea, that Roman Catholic priests were alone qualified to expound the Scriptures, and comprehend the will of God.

 

We may be asked, if wise and good men instituted the Egyptian Mysteries for the purpose of disabusing the minds of the people, and calling them back to the worship of the true God, what motive could have induced their successors to suffer popular errors to enter, when it was completely within their power to prevent it Y To this we answer, that these very Mysteries were soon made a source of revenue to the priesthood, and, finally, on many occasions, to the government; and To be able to draw largely from the pockets of the people, the Mysteries had to become popular, and it could not be so to the great mass, except by pandering to their passions, and feeding their credulity.

 

Having said thus much, with a view that our readers who Dave not given their attention to Heathen Mythology, may have some idea of the origin of the Ancient Mysteries, we can only express our regret that we could not, consistently, say more, as a bare outline or sketch seldom gives satisfaction to the inquir. ing mind. But, as it can not be expected that we would enter largely upon the history of the ancients, in a history devoted to the Masonic Society, we indulge the hope that all who desire pore light upon this subject, will adopt a course of reading to that end.

 

We shall now attempt to show, as far as we can, in what the ancient Egyptian. Mysteries were made to consist, after they were corrupted, and proceed to trace their introduction into EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

183 other countries, and the alterations made in each.

 

And, as our opinions, in many respects, differ from all others who have written upon the subject, and as our object is, that the Fraternity shall no longer adopt the wild and visionary theories of any man, however high his standing, we indulge the hope that a spirit of inquiry will be aroused, and that before our brethren undertake to endorse errors which must bring our Institution into ridicule, they will read, and think, and reason for them selves.

 

That our views will be pronounced incorrect, in many particulars, we do not at all question.

 

But, if the simple and unadorned truth shall be the result of the exposure of our errors, we shall rejoice that we have written to so good a purpose.

 

The great abundance of the harvest in Egypt, and, especially, in the Delta, very naturally led to a direct intercourse with the surrounding nations. It seldom happened that either the Arabians, Syrians, Greeks, or Canaanites, were not compelled to draw their supply, or make up a deficit in their crops, by, drawing on Lower Egypt.

 

The traffic in corn, therefore, became a regular business, especially with the Phoenician mderchants, who occupied the coast, near Libanus, and who were a much more commercial people than the Egyptians. In their intercourse, it is but reasonable to suppose, they examined into the Egyptian polity, and learned the powerful influence which the Mysteries everywhere exercised over the temper and morals of the people, a knowledge of which was thus carried into their own country, and, ere long, the Mysteries were there introduced.

 

The abundance of the crops was very properly attributed to the overflow of the Nile, and as it never rained in Phoenicia, they naturally fell into the views of the Egyptians, that the overflow was sent directly by God, as a peculiar gift to the inhabitants.

 

In token of their gratitude for this D:vine interposition in their favor, the Egyptians represented it in all their public festivals, by the figure of their god, that is, tree sun, or Osiris, with a river pouring out of his mouth.

 

The Phoenicians traveled all over the then known world, and it is most probable that the Mysteries were by them introduced into other nations, where they were readily receives and MODFRN FREEMASONRY.

 

encouraged ; first, because the public ceremonies were fascinating and imposing in their nature ; and, secondly, because of the known prosperity of the Egyptians, who attributed that prosperity to their religious observances of the Mysteries.

 

Some writer has very appropriately remarked that Egypt was the cup containing the original poison of idolatry, and the the Phoenicians are the people who, by traveling all over the world, have presented this fatal cup to the greater part of the western nations.

 

It is, we believe, generally admitted, that although the Mys. teries of the different countries assumed different names, as best suited the condition or tastes of the people, Ceres, of Sicily and Eleusis, is the same as the Egyptian Isis, and yet the same public ceremonies were not observed. In Egypt, the Mother of Harvests bewailed her husband, while, in the other case, she lamented her daughter; and so it will be seen that the Athenian, and all other Mysteries, differed outwardly from the Egyptian; and, it is equally fair to suppose, quite as many differences existed in the secret ceremonies.

 

Historians tell its that in the mysteries of Ceres, at Eleusis. the ceremony of initiation commenced with a most horrid darkness, lightning,,and imitation of thunder‑claps, and other frightful representations ; after which, quiet was restored, and four persons magnificently and mysteriously dressed, were to be seen. The most brilliant of the four was dressed so as to represent the Ruler of the Universe, and was called the Hierophant, the expounder of holy things. ‑rhe second was the f ambeau bearer, and somehow referred to the sun. The third, the adorer, represented the moon ; and the fourth, messenger of the gods, or Mercury.

 

Both Plato and Cicero preface their laws by calling on all men to exercise an unwavering belief in the gods, and their power over man.

 

" Let those," says Cicero, " who approach the gods be pure and undefiled ; let their offerings be seasoned with piety, and all ostentation of pomp omitted; the god himself will be his own avenger on transgressors. Let the gods, and those who were ever reckoned in the number of the celestials, be worshiped and those, likewise, whom their merits have raised to heaven, EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

1S$ web as Hercules, Bacchus, 1Psculapius, Castor, Pollux, and Romulus. And let chapels be erected in honor to those qualities, by whose aid mortals arrive thither, such as reason, virtue, piety, and good faith." It should be borne in mind, that, in the Pagan worship, each god was entitled to both public and secret honors‑the latter were performed only in the Mysteries, and to which honor but fear were admitted, compared with the multitude who were merely initiated_ Warburton tells us, that " the first and original Mysteries, of which we have any sure account, were those of Isis and Osiris, oÇ Egypt; from thence they were derived by the Greeks, under the presidency of various gods, as the instructor thought most for his purpose ; Zoroaster brought them into Persia; Cadmus and InachuB into Greece, at large ; Orpheus into Thrace ; Melampus into Argos ; Trophonius into Bceotia ; Minos into Crete; Cyneas into Cyprus; and Erechtheus into Athens. And as, in Egypt, they were to Isis and Osiris, so, in Asia, they were to Mithras ;

 

in Samothrace to the mother of the gods; in Bmtia to Bachus ; in Cyprus to Venus; in Crete to Jupiter, in Athens to Ceres and Proserpine ; in Amphisa to Castor an l Pollux ; in Lemnos to Vulcan ; and so to others in other places, the number of which was incredible." As introductory to these Mysteries, we find the origin of the Roman Catholic confessional; every applicant was required to confess, to the Hieropliant, every wicked act that he had committed during his whole life.

 

Hence, as we are told, the consciousness of his parricide deterred Nero, who murdered his mother, from attending the celebration of the Eleusinian Mysteries, while in Greece.

 

All applicants were taught that initiation into the Mvsteries drew the soul from earth, and earthly things, and united it t<r the gods. The initiated took a solemn oath to commence and lead a life of strict piety, and they entered upon the discharge of this duty, by a course of the severest penance, very similar to that practiced, at the present day, by the Roman Catholic Church.

 

This, the ancients thought, would purge the mina AÇ ò Sea Warburton's Divine Lgaatdm V Now.

 

186 MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

its natural defilements ; and the doctrine was openly proclaimed, that none entered the Mysteries who were not thereby placed under the immediate protection and blessings of the gods, while all who failed, or omitted to enter, were, and ever would remain, under the curse of the gods. This differs from the Roman Church, only so far as that the latter brings heretics under the curse of but one God. It is not more wonderful, therefore, that a superstitious and imbecile people should madly rush forward, and seek admission, than that an intelligent and cultivated people, of the present day, should openly proclaim damnation to all who fail to enter the Roman Catholic Church. The Pagans thought initiation quite as necessary as the Christians do baptism, and they initiated women and children as willingly as they did men, and in this they, were consistent, notwithstanding it clearly shows that these religious services bear no relation to Freemasonry.

 

But the Masonic historians have imagined that, inasmuch as the initiates into the Ancient Mysteries were dressed in white garments, they must have been Masons, or Masonry must be derived from them, for our Initiates wear white aprons. The reason here, for the conclusion drawn, is so manifestly inadequate that we do not think it necessary to do more than to notice it.

 

Doubtless, our readers have been expecting us to tell them, not only in what the ceremonies of those great Mysteries consisted, but to explain the doctrine taught in them. This much, we confess, some modern writers have undertaken to do, and we are not inclined to charge them with doing so, without seeming authority, but we wish to say that there is no evidence that the ceremonies or doctrines were ever divulged, only so far as the poets have done by metaphors, inuendoes, and that sort of reference to the secrets, which could be understood only by the initiated, which description of expose is becoming quite too fasb ionable with Masonic writers, at the present day.

 

We are left to, hints, dropped in the various writings of the Greeks and Romans, for an explanation of the internal arrangements of the Mysteries, but there is much testimony going to show that the greater Mysteries exposed and condemned the Pagan EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

18T doctrine, or polity of the plurality of gods, and the worship of (lead men as ascended deities. But what was the peculiar doctrine taught, as being true, in reference to the great first cause, and the final destiny of the souls of men, is not so clearly inferrable, though the weight of testimony goes to prove that one God, supreme and all‑powerful, was the faith taught by those Mysteries ; but, we are not left at liberty to suppose their doctrine stopped here, but that they supposed the Great Ruler employed subordinate deities, in the government of the world. Clemens says : " The doctrines delivered in the greater Mys teries are concerning the Universe.

 

Here all instruction ends. Things are seen as they are ; and nature, and things of nature, are given to be comprehended."

 

And Strabo says: " The secret celebration of the Mysteries preserves the majesty due to the divinity, and, at the same time, initiates its nature, which hides itself from our senses."

 

And, in another place, he clearly makes philosophy to be the object of the Mysteries.

 

An anecdote, generally credited, is handed down to us, which, if true, throws much light upon the object of the Mysteries ; but even this does no more than prove'their opposition to the worship of dead men, and the numerous imaginary gods. The story runs thus: After Alexander of Macedon acquired unlimited away, and his power was everywhere respected or feared, he demanded of one Leo, chief Hierophant of Egypt, the object of the Mysteries, and fear induced the priest to comply with his demand, and‑he stated.that the Mysteries taught that Faunus, and 1Eneas and Romulus, Hercules, ~Esculapius, Castor, Pollux, etc., who were worshiped as gods, were nothing more than mortal men, who had distinguished themselves on earth, but who had lived and died like other men, having no claims to be worshiped as deities.

 

The Mysteries were communicated in groves or caves.

 

The cave is represented as presenting to the candidate a most hideous appearance. A yawning mouth, partially filled with huge stones, and surrounded by a black and gloomy lake. The ground beneath the candidate trembled, or a rumbling noise issued from beneath his feet, the mountain tops began to quake, and dogs were seen to howl through the woods, all which wag is$

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

thought to be produced by the approach of the goddess of divine power, or Eleusis.

 

Procul, 0, procud, este profani‑' Hence, O, hence, ye profane," exclaimed the prophetess, and plunged into the cave. The candidate and his conductor then advanced through thick darkness, in the desolate halls and realms of Pluto. The candidates were in exercise for three or four days, passing from one horrid representation to another; but this was not all, they were thrown into the river Styx, and left to their own efforts to get out, which was a difficult and dangerous task, having to cross a wide extent of water. They were then tortured with the sword and fire. , They were made to pass through flames ; in short, the most inhuman tortures and fatigues were imposed, and in many instances, the candidates sunk in despair under them. It is stated that Pythagoras narrowly escaped with his life, in submitting to the ceremonies.

 

All Masonic writers, who date Masonry back to the Mysteries, contend that the Pythagorean school was a Lodge of Freemasons; and this is necessary to their theory, for, if the Egyptian Mysteries constituted Freemasonry, then was Pytha goras a Mason, for, no one doubts that the Pythagorean Mysteries were the Egyptian Mysteries, altered and added to as suited his purposes.

 

The applicants for the Pythagorean Mysteries were subject, first, to three years abstinence from all food and drink, save what was necessary barely to sustain lifo, and to clothing of the coarsest kind, added to which, were such exercises as were most difficult to perform.

 

Next, he sentenced them to three years' silence, and to teach humility, he subjected them to a course of contradiction, ridicule, and contempt, among the initiated ; to restrain avarice, he required his disciples to submit to voluntary poverty : he deprived them of all control over their own property, by cast ing it all into a common stock, to be distributed to all, according to the judgment of proper officers. During the whole of this probation, his disciples were not permitted to see their great master. but heard his lectures from behind a screen.

 

To the lower grads of his disciples, he explained his doctrines or Fee verg.‑Aa lib. vi., v. 258 et seq.

 

EGYPTIAN JIYSI'ERIE UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

189 philosophy mainly by symbols, but to those who became true or confirmed followers, he fully, explained all the Mysteries. His doctrines, as we have elsewhere stated, consisted of a mixture of 6,11 religions then known.

 

Ile taught that there existed one great God, which is the universal mind, diffused throughout all things, the source of animal life, the cause of all motion, that, in eubstanoe, it was like unto light, incapable of pain, invisible, and to be only known by mind.

 

The air was supposed to be filled with demons‑heroes, who produce ,sickness or health at their pleasure, and who had the power to forewarn man of future events, by visiting his mind, through the medium of dreams.

 

He believed there was one great Soul. controlling :innumerable lesser souls, that these soule passed through all the gradations of animals, from man to the beast, from the beast down to the animals below, and then back again; iz ghott, his was the doctrine of metempsychosis, or transmigration of souls.

 

One of the greatest mysteries of Pythagoras, was the symbol of the letter Y, the use of which, it is said, was never divulged but writers, since his time, have thought he derived the symbol from the Pagan fable of the triple path, or forks of the road to the infernal regions, one leading to the Elysium, and the other, to Tartarus ; and, it will be seen, that the letter fitly makes the representation designed, the one passing up to the left, " the broad way that leads to death," and the other, narrow and straight,; but it does not fully meet the description of the two roads spoken of in the Bible, for neither of them is provided with a straight gate.

 

We have said thus much of the Eleusinian Mysteries, barely for the purpose of giving the reader some general idea of all the Mysteries, as practiced in ancient times ; for, notwithstanding they assumed different names in different countries, and were altered and changed, in order to render them popular, yet it appears the great features of all were the same. Imperfect as is the knowledge of the Ancient Mysteries, as transmitted to us, still i t there enough sczttered through the writings of the Greek and Roman philosoph" aid poets, to render the subject an interesting one.

 

Indeed, the lustnry of the Jews can not be properl,v 190

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

understood without some acquaintance with the Mysteries, for Josephus tells us: " The high and sublime knowledge which the Gentiles, with difficulty, attained, in the rare and tempo.arp celebration of their Mysteries, was habitually taught to the Jews, at all times, so that the body politic seems, as it were, one great assembly, constantly kept together, for the celebration of some sacred Mysteries." Another author says: "The whole Mosaic religion was an initiation into Mysteries, the principal forms and regulations of which were borrowed, by Moses, from the secrets of the old Egyptians." It must be admitted that the doctrines or teachings, as well as the habits of the Essenes and the Druids, were so different from the Elusinian, and other Pagan Mysteries, that in them we find some reason to believe they did not spring from the Egyptian Mysteries, notwithstanding there are some strong points of resemblance.

 

When Julius Caesar invaded England, the Druids were found 'to be a Society of priests. The Britons and the Gauls were a superstitious people, and priests are numerous everywhere, in proportion to the amount of superstition of the people.

 

Strabo tells us that the Britons and Gauls entertained the belief that the more Druids they had on the Island, the more plentiful would be their crops, hence it follows that this Society was generally popular and influential.

 

The Druids of England, the Pamphylia of Egypt, the Liberalia of Rome, the Gymnosophists of India, the Chaldeans of Assyria, the Magi of Persia, the Ceres of Greece, and all others, tauglit two sets of doctrines. The one catered to the tastes and predilections of the people, and imposed but few restraints upon initiates, and, hence, all persons, men, women, and children, could be admitted, but the greater Mysteries were confined mainly to the priests.

 

The secret doctrines of the Druids are not well known, even to this day. Nearly all our information is derived from the Greek and Roman writers, who, it is probable, were not themselves well informed in relation to them. The weight of testimony however, is, that from the Roman invasion, A.D. 55, to EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES IINLTRE MASONRY.

 

191.

 

the arrival of the Saxons, A.D. 449, the Druids taught, in their greater Mysteries, the doctrine of one God, as did the

 

Brah mins of

 

India, and who took a solemn oath to keep this doctrine a profound secret from the world.

 

It is stated that the Druids also taught a knowledge of the creation, and the primitive innocence of man, his fall, etc., and some say they pretended to know the history of the creation, and fall of angels, the universal deluge, and foretold the destruction of the world by fire ; in short, that the doctrines of the Druids were very much the same taught by Moses, in the holy writings.

 

It is quite evident that they taught the immortality of the soul, as this doctrine they were allowed to publish to the world, as a means of stimulating the people to brave deeds, in defence of their rights, and the rights of their nation.

 

But the most learned writers of Greece, as well as Cxsar and Diodorus, assert that the Druids taught the Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls.

 

Other writers say that the ductiine of transmigration of souls was publicly taught by the Druids, in order to suit the popular views of the people, but that, in the greater Mysteries, they taught that the souls of men were placed in a circle‑tlae circle of courses‑that if the possessor prefers good in this world, death will transmit his soul into the circle of felicity ; but, if the man prefers a wicked course in this life, his soul, after death, will be returned to the circle of courses, and take its turn in getting a new habitation.

 

No secret society, of which we have an account, after all, did so much harm by their teachings, as did the Druids, by means of their teaching that ignorance was the mother of devotion. This doctrine tended to minister to the mercenary desires of those priests ; for in proportion to the ignorance of the people, would be the demand for the assistance and guidance of the learned ,and holy priesthood. It is even asserted that such was the secret doctrine of the Mysteries everywhere, but that the Druids were the first to make it public.

 

This is said to bo the reason why so many fabulous tales of terror were invented by the ancients, for if it be admitted that all men were in danger of coming under the curse of the gods, and that the priests had power to intercede and restore them to favor, and procure for 192

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

them temporal and eternal blessings, it will readily be sm that the priests could exact any tax, within the power of the people to pay, for instructions, etc.

 

The doctrines of the Druids were, doubtless, sang by their poets, who were in great favor with the people. These poets had public stands erected, from which they read their effusions, :teaching that the gods enjoined them all to be united in defense of their country, that all who died in battle would be blessed and carried to Elysium by the gods; but that all who pursued the opposite course, should have their souls transmitted to the meanest beasts, there to be punished.

 

The sun was one of the most prominent deities of the Druids. To do honor to this god, they formed a circle of stones on an eminence, and, within this consecrated circle, ‑kept the holy fire. Near to the temple dedicated to the sun, they erected a similar one of smaller dimensions, in honor to the moon, another of their gods. They worshiped a greater number of deities than did any of the ancients; indeed, every river, lake, rivulet. mountain, and valley, had its divinity, or genii.

 

One of the public ceremonies of the ancient Britons, was a source of great ,profit to the priests. They offered sacrif ces of the best animals that were used by them as food, to appease the gods.

 

He who sinned was compelled to make a sacrifice, and this he could not do without purchasing the privilege of the priests. The most perfect animal was slain, one‑third of it consumed on the altar, one‑third was given to him who had :purchased the .privilege, and the other third was reserved ~to the priest.

 

But, ere long, this species of sacrifice did not answer all the craving propensities of the priests, but a doctrine was engrafted into the laws of the Druids, that nothing but the life of ,man could atone for the life of man, and, under this creed, the blood of human beings was freely poured out as offerings to their gods; and when they had no criminals, they did not hesitate to slaughter the innocent, especially upon the approach of war, 'nr at the request of any wealthy individual, backed by a priest. The ancient Britons believed that their laws were the gift of the gods, and as the Druids were the only persons capable of EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

understanding and explaining those laws, all controversies were determined by them ; in short, all power was in their hands, the ruling sovereign being ruler only nominally. A violation of the laws was not an offense against the ruler or the government, but against heaven, or the gods, consequently, the Druids could alone determine the punishment due to crimes. And any against whom the Druids fulminated their anathemas, were deprived of all religious privileges, and held in detestation by the people. Never did the Popes of Rome possess more unlimited sway, in this particular, than the Druids of England.

 

The Druids forbade the dedication of houses as places of worship, and, therefore, held their meetings in groves, planted in the deepest recesses, for that purpose. The oak was venerated by them, and their groves consisted mainly of that tree, and a few others, esteemed for some miraculous powers. The place of meeting was protected by a pile of stones, laid one upon another, or thrown together, leaving but one entrance, which was guarded, to prevent the admission of strangers.

 

The most remarkable of these temples, and most resembling a house, is Stone‑henge, spoken of in the early part of this history, and which is, probably, still standing.

 

The power and influence of the Druids continued unimpaired until the Roman influence grew in strength, when that strength was exerted against them. in every form, until, finally, the Druids were deprived of all offices, and many of them fled to Caledonia and Hibernia, where they sustained themselves for many years.

 

We make the following extracts from the Edinburgh Encydopcedia: "The garments of the Druids were remarkably long, and, when employed in religious ceremonies, they always wore a white surplice.

 

"They generally carried a wand in their hand, and wore a kind of ornament, encased in gold, about their necks, called the Druid's egg. Their necks were likewise decorated with gold chains, and their hands and arms with bracelets they wore their hair very short, and their beards remarkably long.

 

11 The Druids had one Chief, or Arch‑Druid, in every nation, who acted as Higb Priest, or pontlfex maximus.

 

They had absolute authority over the rest, and com manded, decreed, punished, etc., at pleasure.

 

He was elected from among the most eminent Druids, by a plurality of votes.

 

"They worshiped the Supreme Being, under the name of Esus, or Hesus, and We symbol of the oak i and had no other temple than a wood or grove, where sU 1194

 

)LODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

their religious rites were performed. Nor was any person permitted to enter tbA sacred recess, unless he carried with him a chain, in token of his absolute dependence on the deity.

 

1' The consecrated groves, in which they performed their religious rites. were looted round with stones, to prevent any persons entering, except through the passages left open for that purpose, and which were guarded by some inferior Druids. to prevent any stranger from intruding into their mysteries. These groves were of different forms, some quite circular, others oblong, and more or lesstapacious, as the votaries in the districts to which they belonged were mor. or less numerous." 'The Society of Druids, of the present day, decorate their rooms with chairs, tables, pedestals, etc., made of oak, in its rude state, as taken from the forest, and many use festoons of oak leaves upon the walls, and they carry in their processions oak leaves, from which it might be inferred they held to the doctrines of the ancients ; but, we imagine the only veneration now given to the oak, is for the purpose of holding in remembrance the places where the ancient Druids held their meetings. Certainly, it can not be supposed, that there is an organized society in the United States, holding the doctrines of the Pagan Theology. We have good reason for believing that the Society oú Druids, of the present day, make no pretensions to religion whatever, but, like most other secret societies, have their peculiar manner of teaching and enforcing morality, truth, virtue, and benevolence.

 

These remarks are made, not from any knowledge of the internal regulations oú that Society, but from an acquaintance with some of its members, who would not, we are sure, remain connected‑ with them, if the doctrines of the Ancient Druids were taught. Indeed, we doubt whether there are any secret societies in the United States, to which men of contrary politics or religion are admitted, who do not teach, and undertake to practice morality. It is possible for any number of men of precisely the same views in politics, to band themselves together, and, in secret conclave, concoct plans for extending their influence, and increasing their numbers ; and the same may be done by religious sectarians ; but, in either case, their members must be confined to men who are known firmly to entertain the same views, before their application would be considered.

 

But how ridiculous, how idle, yea, how silly, to charge Freemasons, EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE Y ISONRY.

 

195 Oddiellows,,ions of Temperance, Druids, or any other society, known to receive members of all religions, and regardless of their politics, with being combined together for irreligious, immoral purposes, or for the accomplishment of political ends. Every man of common sense should know that such an attempt would speedily lead to the downfall of such society ; for men,, entertaining views radically at variance, would feel it to be their duty to denounce the Institution, as dangerous in its tendency.

 

We are told, by nearly all writers upon Masonry, that the world is being more enlightened, and more enlarged and liberal views are being entertained; that the enemies of Masonry have gone to the tomb of the Capulets ; and so they have, but how long before another swarm of fanatics will rise up, and, with equal boldness, assail an Institution they can not control ? Intolerance is incident to man's nature, and fanaticism is like an epidemic‑periodical.

 

It is true, that the able journals, which have recently made their appearance, are doing wonders in digpelling darkness from the minds of those who are, or have been, ignorant, but honest.

 

But we dare not hope our future is all sunshine; no, we shall have enemies whenever bigotry can use, or abuse our Institution advantageously.

 

We have stated that the original ceremonies, and the secret teachings of the early Egyptian Mysteries, have not been handed down to us, and, though we may rationally infer what were the great objects designed to be accomplished by them, much of the proof depends upon mere conjecture ; and hence, each writer may exercise great latitude in drawing his deductions. It is, however, conceded, on all hands, that the Persian, Grecian, and Roman Mysteries were transplanted from the original, modified or enlarged to suit the peculiar notions and tastes of the people among whom they were introduced.

 

We think we have shown that there is no well‑defined likeness between the early Egyptian Mysteries and those of Freemasonry, as far as a knowledge of the former has come down to us; but, as much more is known of the Persian and Grecian Mysteries than of the original of Egypt, and, as these were in their full tide of prosperity at the very period to which we data 196

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

the origin of Freemasonry, viz., at the building of the Temple of Solomon, it becomes our duty to lay before our readers as many of the leading traits in those Mysteries, as will enable the well‑informed Mason to draw his own deductions. And, we are free to admit, that if it shall be found that the secret Institutions of Zoroaster, Pythagoras, or any others of that period, present a true type of Freemasonry, as taught by our traditions, we shall be compelled to admit that our opinions have been ill founded, and our theory fallacious; it will readily be seen, however, that we can not, in a work like this, enter into an examination of the peculiarities assumed by each nation, in the practice of the Mysteries. That they were all but a continuation of the Polythean doctrines of the ancient Egyptians, is clearly shown by the great number of gods worshiped, and the religions taught, as also in the forms and ceremonies of initia tion.

 

Therefore, for the sake of brevity, we shall select the Persian Mysteries, to exemplify our position, and to expose some of the absurdities of modern teachers in Masonry.

 

We are induced to select the Persian Mysteries, because we think more of their secrets have been exposed and published than of any other.

 

As the Mysteries taught by Zoroaster will constitute thesubject of this sketch, we wish it understood that we allude to the Zoroaster who lived about the time of the destruction of the Temple, without pausing to inquire whether he had a predecessor of the same name, who also gave tone to the Persian religion. Nor shall we stop to answer whether the soul of Zoroaster was eaten by a cow, in a bunch of mistletoe, and passed through her milk to the mother of the great philosopher; suffice it to say, that

 

Zerdusht, as he was called by the Persians, or Zoroaster, as he is called by the Greek writers, did actually live, and that he was the greatest philosopher, as well as the most consummate impostor of his day.

 

Some authors tell us that Zoroaster was a Jew by birth ; that he was thoroughly educated in the Jewish religion ; that he was a student of the Prophet Daniel, and, perceiving the great fame of his master, arising as well from his learning as from the gift of prophecy, Zoroaster left no effort untried to equal EGYPTIAN MTSTERIE8 UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

197 him ; but as he had not the gift of prophecy, lie attempted to rise to distinction by turning his attention to the study of magic, as ta.nght by the Chaldean philosophers. This reckless abandonment of the true faith, for sinister motives, induced Daniel to banish him, and forbid his return to Judea ; and, .hence his flight to Ecbatana. Whether this account of his early life is true or false, is not important to our present purpose, it being sufficiently established that he did, at Ecbatana, set himself up as a great magician, and exhorted the people to abandon some of the peculiarities of the Sabian worship, for the more ancient and sublime Magian religion.

 

Zoroaster had been initiated into the Mysteries of the surrounding nations, and, being deeply learned and well skilled in all the peculiar superstitions and tastes of the Persians, he was eminently fitted to establish a new sect, out of the more fascinating portions of the various forms of worship.

 

Nor was it long until he was surrounded by hundreds, who were ready to become followers, even before knowing his doctrines ; being sufficiently captivated by a representation of something new and mysterious.

 

The Persians, like the Druids, worshiped in the open air, being persuaded that the great and little deities filled all space, and could not be honored by a worship confined within the walls of a building, at least, if the building was covered. The Persians worshiped the sun, or fire, as the supreme being, and hence the sacred fire was kept burning on the tops of high hills. As Zoroaster's new system required secret apartments, in which the ceremony of initiation should be performed, it became necessary to remove this prejudice against covered buildings, and very soon he satisfied all that the sacred fire might be better preserved in round towers, erected for that purpose, having an aperture at the, top for the smoke to escape.

 

The buildings, thus erected, represented the universe, and as fire was kept constantly burning in them, God's residence was supposed to be in them, in an especial manner.

 

Zoroaster, having first prepared the minds of the people, retired to the mountains of Bokhara, where he found a cave, and proceeded to enlarge and ornament it with astronomical devices, and solemnly dedicated it to Mitbras, the third, or mediatorial deity, whom tho 198

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

Persians supposed was an inhabitant of the cave.

 

In the roof, or top of this grotto, Zoroaster represented the sun, by means of the most dazzling brilliants. Around the sun were represented the planets, in burnished gold.

 

Four globes,. composed of gold, brass, silver, and iron, were also represented, together with many of the heavenly bodies; and all richly decked with gold and brillant gems, so that the room, or cave, when lighted, presented a most dazzling and brilliant appearance, and especially to the initiate, for the lamps, we are told, were so constructed as to emit a thousand different shades of color.

 

In the centre of the cave was a large fountain of water, to supply the different chambers, for the purpose of ablution and purification.

 

The sum necessary to fix and ornament this splendid grotto would seem incredible to us of the present‑ day, but it must be remembered that, at the period of which we write, there was immense wealth fn the hands of many Persians; and for no purpose was it so lavishly expended, as for ornamenting and enriching buildings;. and great ostentation and show was nee, essary, in order to the speedy accomplishment of the ends had in view by Zoroaster. But, long before this wonderful grotto was finished, Zoroaster had it reported abroad that he had been received up into the third heaven, and had conversed, face to face, with the supreme being, who revealed to him the true worship, and instructed him to return and teach it to his fellowmen, in order that they might escape the wrath and vengeance of the gods.

 

He stated that the supreme ruler was surrounded by a flame of fire, which, being in accordance with the religion of the Persians, was, readily believed ; and, as soon as he was prepared, candidates were in waiting, ready and willing to consecrate their lives to the study of philosophy, under his guidance and instruction. The Persian philosophy rapidly acquired fame, and all who desired to acquire a knowledge of it, sought initiation at the Mitbaric Cave, or Zoroaster's Grotto. Great numbers came from the most distant countries, and some authors tell us that Pythagoras visited this great philosopher, and was initiated into his Mysteries ; others, again, go so far as to say, that Pythagoras was long a student under Zoroaster, and to him was mainly indebted for the extensive fame whieb EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

I" he afterward acquired.

 

The public lectures of Zoroaster went very popular and numerously attended, and in these was the superior wisdom or craft of the philosopher perecptible ; at least it so appears to sensible men of this day.

 

He so lectured as to show an intimate knowledge of all the religions of the day, and to prove to the minds of his audience that the true worship had been lost, and remained concealed from the knowledge of men, until God revealed it to him; but he only threw out hints, such as were calculated to leave his audience anxioaa to acquire a thorough acquaintance with the true worship,, which could only be obtained by initiation into hits Mysteries, The candidate was prepared for initiation by a gr.,at numW of lustrations with. water, fire, honey, etc.

 

Some writers tell us there were as many as eighty degrees, or parcels of probationary trials, ending with about two months of fasting aid silence, in the gloomy caverns of Mithras.

 

Now, reader, you who are acquainted with the mysteries and ceremonies of Masonry, pause and inquire‑ whether there is aught in all this bearing any well‑marked affinity to Freemasonry. But we have not told the one‑half. The candidate was not only required to fast without a murmur; but he was required to submit to extremes of cold and heat, and have his body lacerated with stripes, and other more refined cr.tel. ties of torture ; and, if we may believe some of the mog learned writers, rendered probable by modern diseoveriee at human bones in these grottos, hundreds who; entered as ew‑didyates for initiation, were unable to withstand the inhuman rrtunes; and were never heard of more; others, who succeedee in, passing through the ordeal, came forth with their intellects e throned.

 

It is not remarkable, therefore, that those who passi A` through courageously, and came forth unscathed, should looked upon as superior beings, and under the direct protection of the gods, and as being entitled to a knowledge of the greater Mysteries.

 

The candidate, having performed his probation, was conducted; to the cavern of initiation. He. was crowned with olive, anoint.' ed with oil, and clothed with enchanted armor. Thus;aceoutir4 he was‑ placed in charge of his guide, who was dressed so as to 200

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

represent a monstrous griffin‑a great bird, whose history, according to the Persian Mythology, resembled that of Phoenix. This monster man‑bird was armed with talismans, that he might successfully make battle with the evil spirits, ever on the road of mortals to a state of perfection and holiness.

 

The candidate was introduced into an inner chamber, and purified by fire and water. He was next conducted to an immense precipice, from which lie was permitted to behold an immense and, apparently, bottomless vault, into which he seemed destined to be thrown, and which he was told was but a faint representation of the infernal regions, through which he was called upon to pass, or, failing in this, must be doomed to the everlasting curse of the gods. In strict silence, his guide now conducts him through the difficult and dangerous windings of the cavern.

 

The gloom, and profound silence which reigned, gave him ample opportunity for meditation, if, indeed, his mind was in a frame for thought.' Anon, he perceives flashes of light, emanating from the holy fire, which served, momentarily, to illumine his pathway, and then leave him in darkness tenfold more dark than before.

 

Sometimes this light would burst upon his head, and dazzle by its brightness ; and now he is terrified by the barking of dogs, the roaring of lions, and the angry yelling of the most ravenous wild beasts.

 

Enveloped in the olaukness of darkness, knowing not what evil should next befall him, unable to see, and incapable of directing his way of escape, he is hurried along in the direction from which the: howling of wolves and the roaring of wild beasts had proceeded and, upon a sudden opening of a door, he finds himself in a den of wild and angry beasts of prey.

 

Here there was light enough to enable him to discover the forms of his antagonists; his snide here. breaks silence to urge him to sum up all his courage, tend boldly defend himself, and now he is fiercely attacked, amidst the most deafening uproar, by lions, tigers, dogs, etc., and it mattered not how much bravery and presence of mind he was able to command, he was not permitted to escape without wounds, both painful and dangerous.

 

Of course, all these wild beasts, as represented, were members of the Society, and so clothed and practiced in their arts, as to counterfeit tht  EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

201  appeal ante and roarings of the different animals.

 

From this apartment, the candidate was dragged into another, where, once more, intense darkness and profound silence reigned. Presently, a distant, rumbling noise is heard, proceeding from the caverns of the grotto ; as he proceeded, the noise became louder and more distinct, until, peal on peal, the thunder‑claps shook the foundation of the cavern, and seemed to threaten the very walls of the mountain. The lightning's vivid glare, in sheets of burning tire, again excited his terror, and enabled him to behold in the distance, groups of avenging genii, threatening to destroy any who might trespass upon their dominions.

 

Thus were these, and similar scenes and dangers, passed through, until the candidate was literally exhausted by fright, wounds, or fatigue, and being no longer capable of encountering toil and danger, he was conducted into another apartment, splendidly illuminated, perfumed, and, like an enchanted grotto, filled with the most bewitching strains of music.

 

At this point, the guide explained the ceremony through which he had passed, and so encouraged him, that he was soon willing to renew his journey. At a signal given by the guide, three priests, or men dressed so as to represent them, made their appearance, and one of them, fixing his long and steady gaze upon the candidate, put a serpent into his bosom, and a private door was thrown open, from which issued lamentations, and howlings of agony and despair. The candidate, upon ‑looking :u, beheld innumerable beings undergoing the torments of the damned in hell.

 

From this spectacle, the candidate was conducted through winding passages, down and up flights of stairs, and, finally, he was admitted into the sacred grotto, or Elysium. This sacred hall was beautifully illuminated, and, on entering, the ear of the candidate was saluted by strains of heavenly music, and his eyes beheld Archimedes, seated on a throne of burnished gold, who, according to Herodotus, was crowned with a diadem, ornamented with mistletoe boughs. Around were seated the dispensers of the Mysteries.

 

Here the candi. date was received with the congratulations of all; obligated to keep secret from the world the ceremonies through wb:eh he had passed, and was presented with a great number of amulets and   201   2112

 

MODERN MERMASONRY.

 

talismans, to guard and protect himself from the assaults of big enemies, and to serve as a shield from danger to his person or property. He was taught that the divine light passed into the initiated, in a peculiar manner, unknown to all others, giving knowledge which could be acquired in no other way.

 

He was taught that the sacred fire was a portion of the divine essence, and should be worshiped accordingly. He was taught that Ormuzd created the world at six different periods.

 

First, the heavens ; second, the waters ; third, the earth ; fourth, vegetables ; fifth, inferior animals ; and sixth, man‑the latter being both man and bull.

 

That man lived in a state of purity for many ages, but was at laat poisoned by Ahriman, who lived in darkness. and was the author of all evil ; that man so multiplied upon the earth, that he eventually rebelled against his Creator. Ormuzd presumed to give him battle, but was eventually overthrown and subjugated. To counteract the evil of man, another pure being was created, and, like the former, was both bull and man; this was Mithras, by whom, with three others, a flood of waters was produced to purify and cleanse the earth.

 

A mighty wind finally stayed and dried up the waters, when an entirely new germ sprang from the earth, which produced the present race of mankind.

 

It further seems that this‑ doctrine did not inculcate the idea that man was cleansed from the original sin by the re‑creation, hut, on the contrary, that Ormuzd created six benevolent gods, and Ahriman the same number of evil spirits, who waged war against each other, and valiantly strove for the mastery of the world. This doctrine is not entirely unlike the religion of the Jews, who believed that God‑ delighted in vengeance, by punishing his enemies, and hence, believing themselves to be under His peculiar protection and favor, they believed they were doing God's service, to pray to Him to send a curse upon their enemies, even to destroy them.

 

But. then, again, the Mysteries of Mithras differed very widely from the religion of the Jews, for, according to the lectures of Zoroaster, the evil spirits finally succeeded in gaining control of one‑half the year, or than contending gods compromised by an equal division of the time of sovereignty, and hence arose the seasons.

 

The benevolent EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE YASONBY.

 

gods took control of spring and summer, or rather, in conw quence of their love for the human race, they produced spring and summer, and sent forth all the blessings consequent upon the heat and moisture thrown by them upon the earth. Man, by their influence, was enabled to cultivate the soil, and lay up a rich harvest, and provide raiment to guard against the venge. ful influence of the evil spirits, who, as soon as their reign commenced, destroyed vegetation, sent evil winds, and endeavored to destroy the whole human race by cold, or, failing in this, to punish them to the full extent of their power.

 

Again, Zoroaster taught that day was sent‑ by the benevolent spirits, and night by the evil spirits.

 

Maurice tells us that one of the emblems held in the highest veneration by the followers of Zoroaster, was a representation of this perpetual warfare between the benevolent and malignant gods.

 

The emblem was two serpents, each striving to get pos session of an egg.

 

Zoroaster taught that the world had been seven times created and destroyed.; that the good spirits would create, and the evil spirits destroy, and that, so violent were their efforts against each other, at times, that their anger shook the whole world, and if the Dives, or evil ones; gained the aseenò dency for a moment, they caused the earth to open and swallow up the human race.

 

We might fill a volume in detailing the thousand wild and incoherent, teachings of this wonderful impostor ; but we think enough has been said to give the reader a very correct idea of the Persian :Mysteries; yea, we think we have said enough about the Heathen Mythology and its teachings, to enable every well‑informed, unprejudiced, and candid reader to answer the question‑Is there any welfdefined testimony going to slow the Mentity of Freemasonry and the. Ancient Mysteries ? We do not think there, is evon such a resemblance between Masonry and the Persian Mysteries, as will justify us in turning back to dissect and draw comparisons. We think they are at direct variance, in every important feature, and believing our readers are quite as capable as we are to perceive this truth, we will not insult their understanding, by asking them to read use less comments.

 

If it be said that Masonry is :_ot now what it 204

 

MODERN FREEMASONRY.

 

once was‑that it has been changed and improved upon since the dark ages, then, we answer, all our traditions are false, and our teachings in the Lodge room a base imposition upon the initiated. We claim, with confident boldness, that the principles of Masonry have never chanced. We hold that all the essential teachings of Freemasonry are the same now as when Masonry was instituted, and such are the avowed opinions of all who undertake to work and lecture in our Lodges, and we must regard it as remarkable that we have one set of opinions growing out of our only reliable history, the traditions of Masonry, and another set of opinions founded upon the romance of those who attempt to place its history end its ends greatly beyond and outside of our traditions.

 

There is not a page, nay, there is not a line upon record, either in the sacred or profane writings, going to show either the antiquity, or the principles upon which our Institution was founded.

 

Our tra ditions tell a " round, unvarnished tale of truth."

 

There is nothing in them that is marvelous or difficult of belief.

 

They are simple, plain, and easily understood.

 

There is no appearance of resemblance to the Heathen Mythology to be found. Freemasonry is, and ever has been totally unlike any one of the secret societies of the ancients.

 

We are reminded that it may be said we have, in this conneotion, omitted to review the claims set up in behalf of the Essenes, as being originally the Masonic Society, by another name, but those who have been readers of our history will remember that, in our first pages, we somewhat freely alluded to this subject, and we do not feel called upon to recapitulate what we there said. We willingly repeat what we have admitted more than once, that the Essenes bore a much nearer resemblance to Masonry than either of the ancient societies ; but a further truth should not be lost sight of, viz., that the Essenes were strictly a religious sect.

 

It is true that morality and virtue constituted a part of the teachings of the Essenes ; and it is equally true that morality and virtue are taught . by all the orthodox religions societies of the present day, but the cardinal teaching of all is the true worship of God and redemption from sin.

 

Morality and virtue are taught, as a means of reaching EGYPTIAN MYSTERIES UNLIKE MASONRY.

 

205 a higher and more glorious aim, and, with all the retirement and peculiarities of the Essenes, morality was taught by them as a preparatory step to the true worship, as they understood it. A,nd can it be said that Freemasonry ever was a religious Sotiety ? Do our traditions permit us to believe it ? In Craft Aiasonry there is not a charge or lecture that claims for it moro than a system of ethics.

 

Its cardinal principles are morality and virtue.

 

If the doctrines of the Essenes were no moro than the doctrines of Masonry, then should we deny our traditions and make religion the cardinal principle of the Order.

 

We have wondered and inquired why it is that intelligent men, who having qualified themselves to preside over Lodges, and deliver such instructions as our traditions have handed down to us, and who expect initiates to believe them honest men, can step out of the Lodge room, and claim that Masonry is something entirely different. In the Lodge room they give us a ritual which refers to Solomon's Temple. There, too, the traditions all go back to the Temple only, and yet, out of doors, they will teach that Masonry is as old as the world ; that it is the Heathen Mythology ‑. and then, again, that it is the true reli(rion.

 

Brethren, " let well enough alone."

 

God has appointed a place for the worship of His creatures ; nor has He left it in doubt as to where that place is.

 

He has given a written law, to which we are at liberty to go and learn, not only the place, but the means set apart for the accomplishment of that great end.

 

If He had intended the Lodge should be the ):lace, He would have said so.

 

If the Masonic, or any other society had been appointed by Him for the true worship, He would have declared it in His holy law.

 

It is not enough to tell. us that Solomon only remodeled Masonry, unless it can be shown that Masonry previously existed, and in what it was made to consist. It is but a paltry begging of ancient robes, with which to clothe our Order, to infer the existence of Masonry in ancient times, only because the ancients had secret societies, and professed to teach the _true religion in them; and we have furnished proof that no higher order of evidence can be found.

 

CHAPTER YI.

 

ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

BEFORE the investigation of the subject, directly indicated by the heading, it may be proper to call attention to some facts, only hinted at, heretofore, in speaking of the persecutions of Masonry. There may be some persons, even members of our Order, who know so little of its history, as to believe that, until the days of William Morgan, no attempt was ever made to gull the ignorant, and prejudice the public mind against Masonry, by pretended revelations of its marvellous and uricked mysteries. This supposition is far from being true.

 

We have, attached to the lecture of theFellow Craftdegree, a traditional account of an attempt having been made, in the early part of the tenth century, to bring Masonry into disrepute, by a pretended expose of all the rituals of the two first degrees.

 

If this tradition is to be relied on, pretended Lodges were formed at most of the beer shops and brothels in London, when and where Masons, so called, were made as a matter of amusement, at the trifling cost of a treat for the club.

 

This practice, however, was improved upon by some of the more shrewd keepers of taverns.

 

Some of these dispensed with the farcical portions of the ceremony, made up a solemn ceremony, pretended to be dealing in pure Freemasonry, and charged, for the degrees, a very respectable fee ; and, in some of these pretended Lodges, a few respectable men were received, and were induced to believe they became members of the Fraternity, in due and ancient form.

 

This latter class, on finding themselves deceived and imposed upon, represented the facts to the Grand Master of Masons, who was induced to call a Convention at York, in 926, when and where eiuch notice was taken, and such action had, as served to expose the impostors, and effectually put down all clandestine Lodges, headed by man of any respectability or character for ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

207 honesty. This manuscript revelation was styled Jachin and Boaz, which was occasionally revived, and used for purposes as above mentioned, until the close of the seventeenth century, when we lose sight of it until 1812, when it makes its appearance, as the wonderful discovery of an unknown author, who discovered all the secrets, signs, grips, and words of the two first degrees, by examining the papers of a deceased friend who was a Freemason. To this edition of Jachin and Boaz, was added the tirade of abuse and misrepresentations of the Abb6 Barruel, in relation to Masonry, Illuminism, and other secret clubs, already noticed, at length, in this history.

 

We suppose this book of 1812 (quite a large volume, now in our possession), was published either by Barruel himself, or some other equally unprincipled Jesuit priest, for the same cunning, the same procaution that was displayed by Barruel, is clearly perceptible in this, viz., both admit that Masonry in England was never amenable to the charge of crimes charged against it. elsewhere; that elsewhere it was opposed to a monarchy, and, therefore, dangerous to the divine right of kings, while, in England, it was under the patronage of the crown, and nearly all the nobility. But this publication, like the papers of Barruel, which the reader must remember, were written in England, while he was a refugee from justice in France, appealed to the religious fanaticism and mushroom patriotism of the royalists of England, to assist in crushing an Institution which everywhere, but in England, was opposed to a monarchy, and which, even in England, received members from among the opponents of the holy Church, and, therefore, enemies of the Christian religion ; yea, and more than this, the learned Abbd takes the ground that while, as Englishmen, it is possible for them to believe that the Church of Rome has not the right to proscribe all others, all English Protestants were bound, as friends of the British Government, to denounce the Masons, because they dared to receive those also who were not members of, or friends to the established Church of England.

 

Had the Parliament of England condescended to stoop to the low and contemptible political trickeries resorted to, in many instances, in the United States, it is quite likely that a LOS

 

ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE JNITED STATES.

 

similar excitement would have been produced by the reading of this publication of Barruel. But the Parliament of England sent for no papers or persons. There were many members of tlia: `,jody who were Masons, and while they declared their willingness to vote for a law denouncing Jacobin Clubs, the Illuminati, etc., they willingly and proudly bore testimony to the purity of Masonry, and its exemption from interference with religion or politics.

 

These declarations of honorable men were believed by those who were not Masons, and upon whose statements the Society of Masons was exempted from the operation of the prohibitory la‑v, and thus was a quietus stamped upon the writings of Barruel and Robinson ; and the same influences were afterward brought to bear upon the Jachin and Boaz, of 1812.

 

W e do not say but that the book was sold, anal yielded a fortune to its unprincipled maker.

 

" Some books are lies f'rae end to end." And still meet with more ready sale than those that chronicle the truth ; but we do undertake to say that this book influenced the opinions of none in England whose opinions the Masonic Society cared for ; and we further say that, after its publication, Masonry flourished more in that quarter, than eyeä before.

 

But the immediate cause of all opposition to Masonry is traceable, originally, to the Catholic Church. It is a fact, never until recently denied, and susceptible of the clearest proof, that Masonry was ever under the patronage of the Church ; that Bishops and Priests were at its head ; that Popes were lavish of their favors in its behalf, so long as architecture was exclusively in the keeping of the Society of Masons ; but when their trade as builders passed into other hands, the wonderful discovery was made that Masonry was opposed to Christianity, because it admitted members who were not Romanists ; because it did not teach the divine right of the Pope; and because it tolerated its members in withholding its secrets from the secret confessional ; and last, though not least, this secret conclave cc ndemned it because it was a secret Society.

 

It is a fact that the Church of Rome never treated an enemy with mercy or forbearance, and once enlisted in hostile array against our ANTI‑SABORRY IN THR ITNIM 6TATAS.

 

204 tmtitution, it soon sent forth its ansethemas, and, down to tha pt *nt day, no opportunity has been neglected to bring it into disrepute, or, where the power existed, to crush it to the earthä Atrd how is it at the present time ? Do we find, at this enlightened day, wisdom, and piety, and honesty enough in the Church to sbstain from all interference with an Institution which they either kn6,#v nothing about, or, knowing; its principles, basely misrep rrsft them ?

 

No, their opposition is not abated ; their hatred of a Soeiety which they can not suborn, and whose membero # ey can not bend to their own will, its net quenched ; they tike openly where they dare, and everywhere it the loweal h reling encouraged, by the hearts of the Church, in tire eiraul* Con of the lowest and most scurrilous abase.

 

Anti‑Masonry, therefore, will continue to exist; and we wood* not at this, for, doubtless, the members of that Church are to hmiest in their opinions as are the members of other Churehes, and as Masonry never will, never can be brought under subjeo. tion to that, or any other Church; and as its toleration of freedom of thought is directly at war with the teachings of that Church, it is utterly impossible that a reconciliation can take. Place.

 

We have said that the Jachix

 

Rots, of 1813, exercised m influence against Masonry, that its' tnetabers cared for ; buts fanny of our readers will be eurprised to learn that the woAdor‑ Al revelations of William Morgan, in 1826, which so horrifidd! s large moiety of the American eiitisme, was nothing more norless than a reprint of JaUn and Boas, of 181‑2. Of thk; however, we shall say more anon. We have not yet spoken d' the ttib*st rational, or, apparently, reasonable objections to Froo ry; and, that it may be clearly understood, we must turn and examine its origin ; and especially is it our duty o 4o this, because the influences refistred to very naturally arrayed tuany very respectable men against M excellent Institution.

 

About the middle of the seVeniemtth century, a Sooietfw. myling itself " The Rodierueitus," & Brothers of the H ffrota, was instituted in Germmy, miade up of visionary chm. Ms, *ho soon became very 'riume

 

, and were quite as.

 

'eurst~agant ilk their oltiima to e k

 

aledge 6f miracles, as. s& 14 210

 

ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

the "Liveforevers" of the nineteenth century.

 

We hope we shall not trample the toes of any brother, in writing truthfully about the Rosicrucians ; for, admitting the Rose Cross degree of the so called Modern Masonry to have originated as above, five suppose it has been modified somewhat, to suit the times.

 

We know not whether, in the great batch of degrees given to us, we received the Rose Cross, but, certain it is, we know something of its teachings, and we claim the right to give to our readers the authenticated facts touching the history of the Rosicrucians. The members of this Society claimed to'be ;earned philosophers, in search of the alchemy oú life, and the ‑"Philosopher's Stone." These enthusiasts, or impostors, pretended to be in possession of many great and valuable secrets, by the use of which they could transmute certain base metals into pure gold ; prolong life through an infinitude of years; make the old grow younger, until, in the bloom of youth, they were prepared for eternal life, and perfect felicity on earth.

 

The Rosicrucians were strictly a secret Society ; they lived so completely in retirement, that they acquired the name of The Invisible Brothers.

 

Some are of opinion that Illum,inism origin ated with the Rosicrucians.

 

Of the Illuminati we have already spoken at length, in noticing the writings of Barruel and Robinson, but we may add here, that if we follow them from their ‑first appearance in Spain, in 1575, to their introduction into France, in 1634, to their revival in Germany by Weishaupt, in 1774, and, finally, to their exposure, growing out of a quarrel . among themselves, in 1787, and their supposed connection with the Jacobin Clubs, in the early part of the French Revolution; and along with this train of observation, if we inquire after the enemies of Masonry, we shall find them employed in pointing out the anti‑religious views of Illuminism, and attributing these infidel principles to the Masonic Society. It was openly avowed by Dr. Weishaupt, that Illuminism was opposed to civil governments, contending that an enlightenment, by educaò tion, of the masses; would do. away with the necessity of pens, laws, and make reason the God to be worshiped; and, as the Illuminati were understood to be a secret Society, it was not ,.very unnatural for very many weak‑minded or mischief‑making ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

211 persons to identify Masonry with Illuminism ‑, and thus it was that, by many, they were esteemed as being one and the same thing; although it was then, as now, susceptible of proof, that, while Illuminism made war upon the Bible, Masons worshiped only through its inspired pages; that, while Illuminism desigped the pulling down all civil governments, Masonry taught and required its members to live peaceable citizens, obedient to the government under which they lived, eschewing religion and politics as subjects for discussion in their Lodges. But, after all, with shamefacedness, we are called upon to admit, that there is some respectable testimony going to show that, during the French Revolution of 1798, the Illuminati, and Jacobin Clubs, each exercised a pernicious influence over some of the Masonic Lodges of Paris. Indeed, it seems probable that these political and anti‑religious Societies, not only sent their mewoers into the Society of Freemasons, but, in a few instances, they obtained control of the Lodges, and thus arose the seemingly well founded charge, that Masonry and Illuminism walked 1land in hand, not only in overthrowing the government, but to the end that anarchy and misrule should crown their efforts. As heretofore stated, true Freemasonry never; was connected with Illuminism ; but that system called Scotch Rite, or Ineffable Masonry, was.

 

Barruel, who had been shorn of his ecclesiastical powers, And driven from France, seized upon these truths for his starting point, and unblushingly added thereto such false charges as served his purpose, all tending to show that the Masons acted in concert with the political clubs. To his work followed a pamphlet, by Robinson, who held office, and was willing, if 1}m could, to move heaven and earth, in order to curry favor with the royalist party, by whose smiles he received his bread. Both Barruel and Robinson were men ot learning and talents, and, consequently, well calculated to wield an influence in society, ; while Prichard, who wrote about the same time, attracted but little attention, although he did not propagate one falsehood ‑for every ten of the other two above named.

 

We do not think, it necessary to name some twenty publications, which appeared at different periods, claiming to expose the secrets of Freemasonry.

 

iA

 

114 'fH9 nAirgb &Aflk.

 

^&‑ .. ‑_'‑ii‑_..,‑_~ W116 6d, __. _the _d.n *ddr 6,i6 A portion of flib citiibiis of this fre6 dfid Tidppy Mild.

 

W~ visions of the other, will continue to brood over tba hind, itfifti t AN‑Tj‑*AfkO‑XRY IN TPF VNITPP STATES.

 

318 01 tlie fiendish bittqrnw with which it was conceived, We !!*vp the w, qrld to , judge from the present condition of 4q, _pry Ibropgbout the lp.Lnq. And 4s we would not p~up ~ 4 pjngfo I#yrpl from the brow of the great American fanatic, iye p

 

‑ ,fully give to his memory t4e benefit of lids ponpluqing Tp .

 

lie says : ~'FQr rqy feeble contributions tq effect this haply matipp, your approving voice is *. R.

 

~recipus record." We .shall now proceed to give g liist,Fy o

 

of the AnieFic*o qu.4dp against Vf c were 4 N4sqxi long before the l4ppg#p Witeipep oft 1 we endeavored to learn the kcY7 PpL this w bible.

 

What there were men, then living, qpabke Q pj?F ‑V lel tj4p mystery in ;which the whole affair so" bpeg" jpy,91yR qq got ba doubted, but such was Vie excited qj

 

p, efyerW ,ate of the public mind, that no man dared m

 

11 p t limed truth,

 

Wedistiqcdy remember, that sp profitable ,did its k,zcqmp p be suspected of having been pqwFned in t4e 041he,Oqu of Morgan, provided they would abjure gAsqury., that ppi dame Armlyd and cqpfcsse4 their ptqtiqjpatiom in t14‑ 4iabg4e9q, who failed tq‑ be 4elieved, from the simple fact fat p4r y *qrq known to ~ at another point when the a4due‑f,w p tioq~ place, 4rk4 did not .even hear of it for several days afar. Tlioep were days when villainy was popular, and when villa* were jargely rewar4eq, provided, only, tha; t4q could ,8at4f.90rily prove that they were, or hadbeen, in* tand intr ut4, Ag"fivillains.

 

And this state of things in New York, and f4 ,

 

. p W. 7 p9pnding country, .deterred all who were qpaliAe4, frpp, giviT% tp,the public q, true version of the 490r, and, indee v‑9 49u4 ybeth,e;r very many of the best qxpp did not bmo4 sq 4ewijOgreq by 0 .e thpusano contradictory statements, 04t they! *ibed opinions much rpr from ~b

 

those 9 trgtb,

 

. than did h Thq lived . remote from the scene, and free . &qW the ;effects .of t4p excitement.

 

NVithin the last twenty years, we have, pr~fbably, conversed with fifty New York mesops,Wb professing t9 know all about ~hp 4qrgap affair, ;Lnd we solemnly

 

that #,9 two of tbem agreed q to the fActg,

 

F!‑om all which, V# qqAplude that the opinion of each had been firmed frop tho different and ,contradictory ,tumors of t4 day. Within the 4,0 V4

 

ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

seven years, we met a brother of apparently good standing as a Mason, and every way a gentleman, who assured us, that he met and conversed with Morgan, in some town in Asia. Within' the last five years, we have been in correspondence with quite a number of intelligent men in the North, with a view to elicit all the information possible, preparatory to this history,. and now, that we have received assistance from various quarters, Ve‑ are, perhaps, as well prepared as we ever shall be, to offer our readers that which we regard as the most reliable, though' wee much regret not having a promised sketch from the able pe`n of Bro. King, of the Masonic Union. We think the follow= iris, furnished us by Bro. L. V. Bierce, of Akron, Ohio, is as correct a history of anti‑Masonry in the United States, as any that will ever appear; indeed, with our knowledge of the facts elicited; and the stories told at the time, we are free to say, we think it may be safely relied upon as authentic, so far as it goes.

 

It is proper to say, that this sketch was forwarded for the purpose of furnishing us the groundwork only for this branch of our history, but it is no affectation to say, that we find the article from Bro. Bierce as perfect, if not more so, in every particular, than we could make it, and, therefore, with a tender of our hearty thanks for his contribution, we give it without alteration " The origin of this mighty affair is clearly ascribable to a certain Col. Miller, an editor of a paper, possessed of respectable talents, a great deal of cunning, familiar with all the artP of designing men, free from all religious scruples, and, of course, ready to hoist sail to a breeze from any point of the compass. Embalrassed in his circumstances, inattentive to business, intemperate in his habits, he saw, by intuition, the use that might be made of Morgan, and an anti‑Masonic excitement. Like many other ambitious demagogues, of waning popularity, who have since joined in the excitement, he had everything to hope, and nothing to fear from an excited state of the public mind.

 

' ~░ The proposition, was made to Morgan, to write a book on Freemasonry, which Miller, for want of other employment for his press, was to publish. Both of them being as destitute of cash as of moral principles, could not raise the funds necessary ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.'

 

215 fur the publication of the work, and were obliged to take others into the copartnership. These others were John Davids and Russel Dyer.

 

"That the public might not know the objects, or credit to' which the intended work was entitled, on the 13th of March, 1826, they subscribed and swore to the following affidavit 'We, and each of us, do hereby most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, upon the Holy Evangelists of Almighty God, that we will never divulge, during our natural lives, communicate, or make known, to any person or persons, in the, known world, our knowledge, or any part thereof, respecting, William Morgan's intentions (communicated to us) to publish ‑ a book on the subject of Freemasonry, neither by writing,' marking, insinuations, nor any way devisable by man. Sworn and subscribed this 13th day of March, 1826.' "This secret oath was the germ, the root out of which grew the party to `put down secret combinations, and prohibit unlaw ful oaths.' " On the 5th day of August following, Miller, Davids, and' Dyer, executed to Morgan a bond for five hundred thousand dollars, conditioned for the payment of one‑fourth part of the' sum, which should be received on the sale of said book. On, the 7th day of August, two days after the said bond was executed, and the contract completed, Morgan, from the conduct of his partners, became dissatisfied, and suspicious of their designs, and addressed them the following note " AUGUST 7,1526.

 

11GEN,Tr.EMFN:‑My note of this morning has not been answered‑further evasion or equivocation I will not submit to‑acknowledge you are not gentlemen, or I will crpose you in twelve hours, unless you do as you agreed to do.

 

I am not a child‑if you suppose I am, you are mistaken.

 

I am a man, and will not suffer myself to be imposed upon‑you have not acted as gentlemen‑ I am Sorry to. be be compelled to say it‑every part of your conduct has been mysterious, and why so Y

 

My first impressions were, you are not honest men‑therefore, I wish to settle, and have no more to do with you.

 

If either of you feel hurt, call on me, as gentlemen, and I will give you any satisfaction you wish.

 

 " WILLIADI MORGAN.

 

" On the 14th of August, a copyright was taken out for the purpose of preventing others from publishing the said work; but the publishers were well aware that an excitement, lib

 

ANTI‑MASONRY IN Inr 1INITHD STATES.

 

was necessary to attract public attention to the intended publi cation, or it would fall, still‑born, from the press. Accordingly on the 8th of September, a pretended attempt was made by forty or fifty persons, in disguise, to burn the office of Miller, when the work was in a state of forwardness. What adds to the singularity of this affair, is that Miller, on the day previous to this pretended attempt to burn his office, had collected several b@rrels of water, and placed them, probably by presentiment of tho approaching danger, near the place where the fire was cyommunieated, so that it was extinguisbed without any m4terial damage.

 

About this time, Miller says, a stranger arrived from Canada, whom Miller took into his employ in publishing the hook, and, whom he soon after discovered to be a Mason iu disguise, whose object it was to parloin the work.

 

" These stories were sent ahroaB, garnished with the appearante of truth, and effected the object for which they were intended‑,‑that of prodwing an exeitelnent.

 

"But we would ask any candid person, if they can believe t4 Jiaaons would have gone, is a body of forty or fifty, to burn, or pull down a building, in a tl ly settled village? If they can believe that Miller would have teak" an entare stranger into company, in publishing a book that required the secrecy of oath? Those, who believe it snaat possess a gullibility th*t would not strain at the narration of Munchause , or choke with the roe's egg of Sinbad the Sailor. It requires a ,etrete4 of credulity beyond the ordinary gift, to believe otherwise t that the whole was a concerted scheme of Miller, Davids, Dyer, 4ud their confederates, to attract public attention to their intended book, or prevent this second edition of Jachin. #nd Reaz from experiencing the fate "t befell the first, which? ,dropped, stillborn, from the press, for want of an excitement to hwing it into laytice. * '',Soou after the pretended attep~pt to pull down and barn Miller's printing office, Morgan was arrested for steaHaag a shirt and cravat, but, as the evidence was that he borrowed *em, and never returned them, ,he .was acquitted.

 

.

 

'be wrier, do~ibt

 

e, g~lgaler 4 ;Priah~rd's pvblioq$ion of Tityhus odd Bgrs, in 1ò12.‑7he AiAor.

 

A:M‑NARfJSRV 1N THE UNITED 8TA'TES.

 

217 Iutmediately after his discharge from this arrest, lie was committed to prison for debt, where he remained till the next day, when the debt was paid by one Lawson, and he was dis eharged.

 

On his discharge, lie was seized, put into a carriage, and carried to Fort Niagara, where he was left in the care of one Giddings, keeper of the Fort, and, notwithstanding the testimony of Giddings‑notwithstanding the various printed and oral declarations, that Morgan has been seen living, and found dead, all authentic grounds, on which to trace his fate farther, entirely fails.

 

"'That there were some Masons, dupes of Miller, Davids, gard Dyer, concerned in this transaction, there is no doubt‑but that any considerable portion of the Masonic body knew of it, approved of it, or sanctioned it, can not be believed by any one who is not a willful bigot to' his own opinions.

 

"As soon as the outrage was known, all the Masons concern' ed in it, who did not renounce, were zx‑pelled. `The Grand Royal Arch Chapter, in which one hundred and ten subordinate Chapters were represented, disclaimed all knowledge, or appro cation of the affair.'

 

De Witt Clinton, then the highest Mason in the Union,* and Governor of New York, offered a reward of two thousand dollars for the apprehension of the perpetrators, and calling on all officers, civil and military, to assist in detect, ing, and bringing them to justice.

 

'`Wliether it was the consurnmttion of a scheme concerted by Morgan, Miller, Giddings and their vonfederates, to cause an excitement, and,Morgan is still living to enjoy his share of ;the profits of the work‑or whether the fears of Morgan, expressed in his letter of August 7, were well founded, and has life fell a, sacrifice to the avarice of his partners, is not, and probably never will be known.

 

The plot was now consummated. Giddings, into whose custody Morgan was traced, immediately renounced Masoary, and expiated the crime of participation in the abduction, by disclosing tt& he knew of the part acted by others, and as much as he pleased of that acted by himself; but has never disclosed ò De Witt Clinton was as high, Init not higher than eeveral others.‑‑T& Authpp 218

 

ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE IINJTED STATES.

 

what was the fate of Morgan, after lie was left in :iis custody in the Fort. He who had never known a conscientious feeling, was all at once, as conscientiously 'desirous to become what, in common parlance, is known by the name of State's evidence,, and to attach to his confederates, whom he and Miller had duped into the transaction, the most atrocious guilt, for an act, in which, by his own confession, lie had the chief share'‑but so notoriously bad was the character of Giddings, that, notwithstanding the excited state of the public mind, the court had firmness enough to reject him as unworthy of credit.

 

His pattieipation in the profits of Morgan's hook, and the flood of Giddings' anti‑Masonic Almanacs, which deluged the country, affording a speculation to the retailers of Giddings' morality, show his occupation since, and afford, at least, a strong presumption of his being concerned, originally, with Miller, Davids, and Dyer, in the speculation.

 

" Meetings were now called, and generally attended, not for political purposes, or to proscribe Masons who were not concerned in the transaction, but to detect the guilty, and bring the perpetrators to punishment. Those concerned were ferreted out, and as they were but actors previous to the grand drama performed by Giddings, they were convicted of a conspiracy only. He, the‑ grand mover, and spring of the whole performance, in consideration of his expiatory renunciation and subsequent labors in the cause of prosecution, was absolved, and stands a monument of atheism, villainy, and political antiMasonry.

 

"By this time, the excitement had arrived at the pitch desired by Miller, Giddings, and their confederates. Their books 'fell like, rain drops' from the press, costing, probably, ten cents, and which the excited public appetite swallowed, to a surfeit, for some time, at the price of one dollar.

 

The Bible, tract, and Webster's Spelling Book, hardly afforded equal occupation for the press.

 

'The most malignant and improbable falsehoods and slanders, which, at any other time, would have returned with vengeance to plague the inventors, in the present state of the public feeling were received with implicit faith.' "' Demagogues, and broken down politicians, now saw the ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

219 affair was ripe for their use, and they, accordingly, took it in keeping.' The whole Masonic Fraternity were denounced as murderers, and traitors to their country ; and every anti‑Mason, from ',Niyron Holle'y down to Thurlow Weed, became regenerated from moral and political transgression, and were stamped ure patriots.

 

"Solomon Southwick, who, in 1822, defrauded the Albany Post Office of $6,000‑who was ever a bankrupt in principle, as well as in property, in 1826, by the pure spirit of anti‑Masonry, was transformed, renewed, and qualified for Governor of New York. Bankrupts in politics became patriots‑atheists became moralists‑anti‑Masons of every school became genuine republicans t "Never was the public frenzy so high, or infatuation so general. All that was necessary to ensure public approbation was to come out, acknowledge a participation in Morgan's abduction, renounce Masonry, and publish some `new light' on a subject which had already been enlightened by the anti‑Ma. sonic worthies, until it was enveloped in total darkness.

 

So prevalent, and so contagious was this confessing mania, and so high the premium offered for false acknowledgments, that 'there were not wanting persons who, carried away by the insanity of the times,' sought a martyr's fame, by confessing' themselves guilty of the murder of Morgan.

 

`A certain R. H. Hill, came forward in the papers, and 1. with a most imposing' Solemnity, confessed himself guilty of having murdered Morgan. The poor man supplicated the mercy of God and man, as one' sure of the gallows.'

 

He attracted notoriety, which like the object of other Morgan confessions, was his wretched motive, and was imprisoned, but could not gain a martyr's fame by being hung.

 

There had been so many true confessions, each contradicting the other, that a jury, on oath, would not believe him.

 

" Bigots in the Church now laid hold of it, to advance their cause, and strengthen their power. Masonic members, who had ever `walked worthy of their high vocation,' were excommunicated, unless they would renounce. Ministers, against whom the breath of slander had never been heard, were dismissed,' 420

 

ANTI‑MAS0;7RY TN THE PN[TEU aT4TF* Churches divided, and the members scattered.

 

All vliq felt JA their duty to `live in peace with all men,' to seek the spiriokgl, welfare of mankind, and not to engage in party 1torfes, w;grp excozgmunicated; and none but those who could roll forth t thunders of anti‑Masonry, and pour oft the vials of wrath Q.a their flocks, were allowed to minister at the Altar of Peace.

 

" Although the pretended attempit to destrow filler's o ice, purloin the unpublished work, and carry off A4organ, had prodqó,ed the effects desired, yet politióians, whose 9hly hope was is that law of Nature, that 'in an excited state of the vygter xlre fifth ,rises,' saw that something was necessary to prevent ilk suWlding. `Warrants were accordingly issped, and tFi rs'. instituted without numbers 1‑and each succeeding day brougl44 to light a new brood of stories of violence, blp9d, ,and murder.' All these, however, had relation to persons who stood unmoyed ~y the storm that raged around them, Whilq Giddings, and X11 who would acknowledge themselves guilty, and join in the persecution of Masons, remained unmolested, and were embraced as worthy members of the anti‑Masonic crusade. While exarninations were going on before a Grand Jury, handbills were pasted on the courthouse door, ,calculated to inflame their minds against the ;accused, and prevent a fair and impar exami4,ation. And,`while a famous trial, at which one hundred witnesses were present, was in progress, a rumor Nvas set n,,#,9.9f that Morg4n'g body land been found, and would be present qLt the trial.' All megns were resorted to, to keep ,up the feveri4 excitement, and prevent a candid and impartial expression of toe public mind.

 

"A. Committee was appointed to examine, and make report of e h patters, relatdng to the affair, ;p they thought proper; laps Whose real object was to prevent a return of. dispassion urination.

 

TAey `hired a vessel,' chartered boats, and c9,nstructed instruments for raking the bed of the Niagara river, and xL part of JAke Ontario, which was efectually done, but nothing was .di~agvered of Morb .u. The eearch w‑ as wh aud,~,‑,~,"~ sut useless, a,Ad the public mind again liegAa? to return to i,tp a quiet, when,,qn Pie 7th of October, a bódy wgs found ,ou toe shores of Lake Ontario, which appeared to have been left A*"‑RA16ITkT 11V fUt DN1ftb ftA3tg.

 

291 tfidre by the eurf.

 

Being highly putrid, it was, art3r the usala itiquft, hdfied.

 

But it afforded too good a 8uhjeet for tie titer feA1ess spirits, that no* had charge oÇ the feitfnwilt, eftdiu lbng undisturbed.

 

"It sotid eptead through the dountry that it ivss 1ldotga*'g C bdy. Some of the master‑spiting; from Batavia and R,dehesitet, s it+aired to the spot; disinterred the body, and Mrs. Mofgan *&1 Wught to identify it with that of her husbaud. Frdtn itA pntridit~, at ttie time, all identity of bblot bf ebunteriaricd *M &ite.

 

In no rdspdet, eitcept ift the night, hair, *ethi and dtM, cold it be identitled with a.rtt other pefsbn. In no ote of theft regpet‑M did it beat the 1e9A fbsfbldht;e to' Mdfgaf. The digs#, by Mrs. Morgan's own coffdssiiti; Wilt (tilt AA 0iA Motgan wore when lie disappeared, the'r`e were Mligioug tfddis ifi the poclkeis; and Morgan was not a pbtson whti carried tradtt Bet a Jury must again be called, to pronottfde, if possible; this eddy Mofgan~s.

 

The flrst witaess galled, swore that Morgan h

 

double teeth all round, and that the1 }red also ; and he also a4bre to tnhny other circumstances of identity between this eddy and Morgah's.

 

Thir"teen other Witnesses sivotd to the kiiffid general bffedt.

 

Mrs. korgau also swore that Mr. Morgaii had double teeth fill round ‑ that titvo of hig teeth vbefe *ahtiltg, and one "split =‑ to which eir6uthstWide the witnesses svaotb this body arisiafied: ‑"The Jury, composed of twenty‑three persons; kbsctibbd tb a verdict that this was Motgaii's body, and that he bathe to 'his death by drowning.

 

`` All doubt was now removed froth the public rhino, and the Multitude flodked to the funefal pfboession. The body this f"dved, with great parade, tb Bathviit, who're a funeral disdbui"se was pronounced, for the seine purpose; lord with mush the 9Wb effect, as that of Mark Aiitdiiy over the body of CWs0. The body Was agent intetred as that of Morgan, and the cry of vengeance a'g'ainst Masons *as nd* oil the breeze; and the glibst of Mofgan yeas said to be Abroad: " Fame, with tier ten thdutahd totrgubs, vvfts now btisy, afd fttry tongue `'vas pttt in rdquisltion, tut, unfortuflately fat this Wftb ivi$hed to creltte ail finnat&R1 egdit#tfiidtit, tlhd iep6t 222

 

ANTIòMASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

the story to the real widow of the drowned man.

 

A Mr. Munroe, of Upper Canada, left his home for Newark, and was drowned in the Niagara.

 

A description of the clothes found on the supposed Morgan, induced Mrs. Munroe to believe it was the body of her drowned husband, and, in company with other relatives, she repaired to Batavia, where this ill‑fated body, which could not rest in the earth, was again disinterred.

 

An~other inquest was called, and the real truth of the case, that this was the identical Timothy Monroe's body, and not Morgan's, was established by that kind of evidence that can not fail to establish undoubting conviction in every rational mind.

 

These inquisitions are astonishing proofs of how much testimony is affected by strong prejudices, public excitement, and popular ieelin, .

 

A great number of particulars, specified on oath by the second Jury, proved to be not as specified by this third examination.

 

Particularly, it was proved that Morgan was wholly bald on the forehead, and never wore whiskers.

 

That Morgan lead double teeth all round‑this body had not.

 

That Morgan had lost two teeth; and a part of a third. only‑this body had lost five.

 

What put the matter out of all question, was, that Mrs. Munroe specified, before seeing them, certain articles of dress, which she had made with her own hands, and which were found to. be as she, described them.

 

All doubt was now dispelled from all minds, except such as were determined not to be convinced.

 

" The excitement caused by this pretended discovery of Morgan was now destroyed, by its being discovered to be founded ‑on a hoax ; or, what was worse, on testimony swayed by preju;,dice, or, warped by interest and popular frenzy. But it had .answered the purposes for which it was intended, that of. inflaming the publio mind at the election of that fall, and the t)ody of Munroe, was sent back to Canada, with the heartless farewell of Thurlow Weed, the Apostle of anti‑Masonry, that ' ae was a good enough .Morgan until after the election.' `‑ The failure of all the projects hitherto devised by the lead. ers of political anti‑Masonry, did not dishearten them‑bank;rupt in principles, and stale in politics, they saw that, without s6a unusual excitement, they could never rise in political power, ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

223 ,and if they failed in producing one, they could sink no lower . in popular esteem.

 

They had, therefore, everything to hope and nothing to fear.

 

Undismayed by defeat, unblushing in exposure of their late projects, untiring in exertions, and unlimited in expedients, nothing was too low for their grasp, or too high for their ambition.

 

Scarcely was one project defeated, before another was in operation, or one false clamor exposed, beforo the public attention was excited by another.

 

" The attempt to pull down Miller's office, had been satisfactorily shown to be the work of Miller and his confederates, to ,raise an excitement‑‑the story about the Canadian Mason, no reasonable person ever believed‑the discovery of Morgan had turned out to be a hoax‑the funeral procession, requiem, and ,interment at Batavia, were known to have been solemnized over Timothy Munroe‑and all the previous projects had now besome stale, and incapable of producing the desired excitement. New expedients were, therefore, resorted to, and new materials furnished, to keep up the fire around this political cauldron. Every Mason of standing, no matter what his cliaracter, must ,have the seal of ignominy put upon him, by being accused of participating in Morgan's abduction, while Giddings and Miller, the real projectors, actors, and finishers of the whole plot, were hugged with a fraternal embrace, by those pretending to be searching for the conspirators. Ordinary prosecutions had, by this time, lost the novelty that at first made them the objects of political excitement, and a stronger potion must, accordingly, be prepared for the public appetite.

 

Col. King, formerly a member of the New York Legislature, a man of unblemished reputation, highly respected where known, resided near LewisJon, at the time of the abduction, but soon after received the appointment of Sutler at Cantonment Towson, situated on the Kiamesia. a high branch of Red river, on the borders of Texas, and removed to that remote station.

 

He was a fine victim for the sacrifice, and the pursuit, capture, and return, through almost all the Western States, with him as a prisoner, would afford employment to some of the worthy leaders of the cru,sade, as well as be calculated to sow the fruitful seed of anti;Masonry in those States, through which they might pass.

 

224

 

ANTI‑MA961VAAY IN f IIJ tiMTki) STAB " Among the rumors; it wad; abcotditigly, reported that he if6 concerned in the abduction, and had fled to this remote egti+& lishment, a fugitive from justice.

 

Those ofcets, appointed by the authorities of New York; t'epaired to that distant stati6fi ih pursuit of the pretended cri)niaal. Public excitement wits again on tiptoe. The rank and respectability of Col. Kifig, the romantic pursuit instituted, and the reported guilt of the accused, served again to enliven the expiring ashes of diseoM, and give political gamesters, who had ventured their all on too hasatd of the excitement, another hope of suedess.

 

" The pursuers arrived at the Cantonment, but the report W arrived before them; and Cal. King, for the defence of his chfilu neter, was on his way to New York. The pursuers, adcordifgly, made their way in the same direction, and the parties aceotisplished this wild goose chase of about four thousand miles, in dearly the same time. It is easy to conjftfi`e the feelings 6f Col. King's slanderers, on finding him, not a prisoner, but standing fearless and erect among them for the purpose of Andicating his Character, and returning the Vengeance, prepaf'd for himself, on the heads of his abcusers,

 

But he did not live to Measure the reward of their guilt upon them.

 

He died 96611 after his return, whether a vidtim of dlseaee, of of anti‑Masodic vengeance, is not, and probably nevet Will be, satisfackify known.

 

`░ Thus ended this situgular part of this singular a$air. Mill: from a poor, degraded, abandoned profligate, by means of tire excitement, had become Clerk of the County Court. Tracy ha+d ;got e seat in the Legislature=Spongier; Special Council‑Tbnflow Weed, a standing witnds9‑and Solomon Southwick, the privilege of running for Glovernor: Northon, another of the leaders, had got a snug goat in Congress, tot; which, to use his oven words, lie ░ owed Hilly Morgan many thanks, as hell would have frozen oter before he would have been elected, if it lfhd hot been for the dkeiteinent.' " Such success did blue‑light fcddrals, acid warn=out pblitWhih have in New York, in riding on the bitaitembiit into offcb, thM . they how began to use it as an article of eitpoft; and it more or less extensively bpread in gevekal of thb Stateb.

 

It AIZTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

226 denounced first the system and then the men, as unfit for others, and unworthy of any countenance.

 

It not only denounced tlu men, but also denounced all that would not denounce them.

 

New York set the example, ~and some disappointed office‑seekers, in Pennsylvania, closely followed.

 

At what was termed a ` State Convention,' at Harrisburg, in an address to the public, they said: ` It will not be sufficient to withhold public. favor from Freema sons alone‑a!l their partisans should receive the same measure o f justice.

 

They have even less claims upon public ,favor than the sworn Fraternity themselves.

 

Timid and time‑serving neutrality is more degrading to its votaries, and more dangerous to the public, than open and magnanimous error !' "'Those who had, heretofore, pretended that it was the Institution of Masonry that they were coudenmninn‑‑and the members of it, to be punished for an outrage, pretended to have been committed by them, having, by their professions, drawn many into the political arona, here come out and avow their plans, and declare themselves a political party, and denounce those who are not Masons, but who will not promote the schemes of this new Jacobin club, with still greater vengeance than they do the Masons. Neutrality is a crime still greater than Masonry, and all who will not support anti‑Masonry, in its aspirings for office, must be disfranchised.

 

The question was no longer `are you a Mason?'‑but, ` will you join the crusade of antiMasonry, and denounce all who will not?'

 

If you will not, you, yourself. must be denounced as having `even less claims upon the public, favor than the sworn Fraternity themselves.' Such was ever real anti‑Masonry which an intelligent community was called on to support‑and such was it avowed to be. Not to put down Masons or Masonry, but to re6roanir.e an old and defeated party under a new name, and again bring into power those men who were consigned to contempt, for their endeavors to distract the republican party, and ruin their country in the second War of Independence." Thus our brother brings the history of anti‑Masonry down to that period when it ceased to be sufficiently attractive to answer the purposes of designing politicians.

 

For. soon after the period to which he last referred, the more sober and thinking is 2░G

 

ANTI‑31ASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

men, even of the party whose interests were now somewhait dependent upon the continuance of the excitement, began to withdraw themselves from an active particiliation in the tirade of abuse and misrepresentation, which had so long been hurled against our Institution, and its unflinching, high‑minded, and honorable members. The anti‑Masonic party suffered signal defeats in various quarters, and, hence, the noisy stump orators who lead suddenly sprung up like so many brainless lnush rooms, received their quietus, and it is said to be susceptible of proof, that a very large proportion of them found the reward of their labors in drunkard's graves. But now that political anti Masonry was dead and buried in its own original corruption, our younger readers will be surprised to learn that anti‑Masonry passed into other hands, to be used for other purposes.

 

We shall briefly speak of its new keepers, and follow it until its shadow can no longer be seen.

 

It is sometimes fearful to contemplate the effect of popular excitement, when whole communities are brought under its sway.

 

Were we permitted to see only the wild an(] visionary fanatic, carried headlong into the whirlpool, we might safely hope, that the sanative influence of the more sober and thinking portion of society, would soon correct the evil ; but. when we are compelled to behold some of our ablest statesmen, and also the most pious Christians, bowing in humble adoration to the soulless and senseless juggernaut, the spectacle becomes heart. sickening to those who can stand aloof, and endeavor to regard man as the "noblest work of God." If the Morgan excitement lead been the first popular frenzy ever known, we might feel inclined to believe that some great and momentous cause was necessary, to produce such :n commotion, but we have seen that the delusions of New England witclicraft, were even more wonderful than those of Morganism ; for, in the former case, the most revolting murders were perpetrated, under the legal cognomen of trial by judge and jury. .‑ And the causes which superinduced all this, were even more destitute of a foundation, in truth, than was American anti‑Alasonry.

 

That Dlorgan was abducted, we think is very certain, but ive are not at all certain that many of those who shouted long and loud for vengeance ANTI‑3IASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

227 upon an innocent and unoffending Society, would not themselves have engaged in the abduction of a certain class of human wings, if, by so doing. they could have made it as profitable as lid Miller and his associates, in the Morgan affair.

 

Soon after the political anti‑Masonic party was defeated, politicians. even of the lowest grade abandoned this hobby, and, by many, it was supposed, that no set of men had any further use for it; but, such was not the fact, for there immediately sprung up a set of traveling mendicants, and ministers of the Gospel, who, jointly and severally, undertook to wield it for the accomplishment of their nefarious ends. We have ever held in great veneration the ministers of the Gospel, whenever and wherever we have found them acting within their legitimate sphere, but, as a class, we are, forced to believe that they are more liable to be swayed to and fro, by every species of quackery, than any other set of intelligent men. We know there was a time, even in this country, when ministers were among the first to pick out and denounce certain members of their own Church, as bona fide witches, and so very blinded were they, by popular opinion and new theories, that they proceeded to testify against them before a court of justice, and then calmly witness their execution, by drownir_g, without the least remorse of conscience, because they honestly believed they were doing God's service. We know it is said that this thing took place in a superstitious age, and we are not inclined to doubt it, but we do doubt whether the present age is not equally so.

 

What but superstition could induce an educated man to believe that the ten thousandth of a thing was more powerful than the thing itself?

 

That while it is admitted that a drop of laudanum, mixed with a tablespoonful of water, administered to an athletic man, would produce no perceptible effect, the same quantity dropped into a hogshead of water, and a tablespoonful of the mixture, given to the same man, would most powerfully operate on the whole system? What but superstition is it, for an educated man to believe that, by some hocus pocus, certain persons have the power to see, with the "mind's eye," through the scull bone, and, in this manner, read newspapers and letters?

 

What but superstition is it, to, 228

 

ANTI‑YASQNRY' IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

believe that one human being can think for, or control tie thoughts of another? In short, what but the merest dream of superstition is it, to believe that the spirit of the dead may be brought to rap on, or under a table, for the amusement qf living beings ?

 

And, if we except the avowed skeptics, we think, in no class of men will there be found so large a number of advoeates for the truth of all these things, as among the teachers of the Gospel.

 

Nor is it less remarkable, that this credulity, or superstition, when it once takes hold of a man's mind, is much more difficult to eradicate, even by the most positive proof of trickery, than it is to fasten upon the mind another and still greater deception. The author learned how to read, as did Miss Lumis, with a pair of kid gloves tied over his eyes, but, because he was not fortunate enough to learn all the other tricks, lie could never shake the faith of any one who believed in clairvoyance.

 

IIe has recently learned flow to make the raps, on or under the table, and can make any spirit called for, say just what lie (the author) pleases, and yet, he has never been able Ao convince any believer in " spirit‑rapping ". that it was all a trick, simply because we could not tell flow certain other things were done.

 

But we have charged that ministers have largely aided in the promulgation of these delusions; and, we may very properly be asked why this is so, as no one will be inclined to attribute improper motives to this estimable class of men.

 

We do not know that we can account for the fact in any other wV, than by supposing that the studies, the thoughts of ministers are generally narrowed down to the subjects directly embraced in their avocation ; and whenever, by any exciting cause, their thoughts are called off, and directed to other subjects, clothed in mystery, they are liable to forget the platform on which they have stood, and fly in search of the merest phantoms of the brain.

 

Certain it is, that this class of men were the cause of disturbing the peace of society to a more alarming extent, in the Morgan affair, than did the political anti‑Masonic party. When Bernard, Stone, and their satellites, took possession of anti‑Masonry as a religious hobby, Churches were made to resemble the Spanish Inquisition !

 

Christians r were denounced, not so much, because they were Masons, but ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

2ft because they would not denounce, abuse, and anathematize all other Masons, who did not renounce Masonry 1 The rreligioup fanatics published books and tracts, denouncing the Society of Masonry, not because it was believed, at the time of said publi. cations, that the Society, or any respectable member of it, was concerned in the abduction of Morgan, but, carried away by popular tumult, these ministers, honestly, perhaps, persuaded .themselves that the developments growing out of the Morgan expose, proved the Institution to l* corrupt and dangerous to the cause of Christianity, and like the Jews, who made unto themselves laws, subversive of the laws of God, forgetting the attribute of mercy, desecrated the pulpit and the altar, by preaching anathemas, and praying for curses upon an Instita‑tion about which they either knew nothing, or knowing, falsely represented.

 

And, as a class, where are the ministers now? Masonry has outlived their opposition, and triumphed over their curses. The Institution is better known, and more highly esteemed than at any former period ; and although there have been no new developments in its favor, and the religious tracts are still in being, the ministry, as a class, have wheeled right about, and very generally sought initiation, and are now loudest in their praise of Freemasonry.

 

It is a law of our nature, that an excess of feeling, whether of joy or grief, can not be long kept up; the mind, like the pendulum, may be made to vibrate from one extreme to the other, but finally, it must find its equilibrium. Even those Churches in the North, the most noisy against Masonry, though supported and sustained by their ministers, were compelled to yield to the public demand for peace and quiet, from the turmoils of the anti‑Masonic tirade. We have still another evidence that the ministers of the Gospel, as a class, are liable to be carried away by popular excitement, It is a fact, susceptible of the clearest proof, that now when Masonry is in the ascendant and universally popular, ministers of the Gospel are writing books to prove that Freemasonry is either the true religion, or so intimately connected with it, that it would seem an effort is made to introduce Masonry as a now creed in Christian faith. When public sentiment would no longer tolerate the Chureb 2110

 

ANTI‑31ASONILY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

tirade against Masonry, there sprung up a set of little, dirty lazy, sap headed, unprincipled, renegade Masons, who, n(A hay. in‑ succeeded in working themselves into public employment, determined to make merchandise of their treachery, and thus put money in their purses. This little band of contemptible parasites, unwittingly did more to put to shame the cause of anti‑Masonry, than any other overt act of individuals. Had these vagabonds understood human nature a little better, and taken time by the fore‑lock, they might, indeed, have made fortunes by conferring degrees, and lecturing on Masonry ; but they did not commence their farcical exhibitions, until the people had become tired of the subject, tired of excitement, and hence, these traveling impostors first excited the ridicule, and nest the contempt and scorn of all decent men.

 

Thus anti‑Masonry died.

 

And now that we can calmly look back upon the past, behold the present, and contemplate the future, we are constrained to acknowledge that " whom God loveth He chasteneth." The number of unprincipled men found to be members of the Fra .

 

ternity during the excitement, proves how far the Lodges ‑ad departed from the well known rules of the Society.

 

Desirious only of numbers, it would seem, Lodges became careless of con sequences, and admitted men whose presence was a disgrace to that, and would have been to any other moral Institution.

 

For this neglect of our sacred duty, our Order has received a chastening,. which caused the good and true to return to their post of duty, and guard well the outer door to the Lodge room. This having been done, it is manifest to all, that never, since the days of Solomon, has Masonry been so prosperous a.4 now.

 

From the foregoing facts, every reader will be able to draw his own deductions as to the guilty party. Every reader, we trust, is desirous of arriving at the truth, and as it is the business of a historian to assist in the accomplishment of this end, it becomes our duty to give to the world the conclusions to which we have arrived, and some of the reasons which have intiuena ed our opinions.

 

In the first place,.we take occasion to say that it is extremely ridiculous to suppose any Freemason, of the least intelligence, ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

231 and the smallest particle of moral honesty, ever did, or ever will, attempt to take the life of a man, because of any attempt he ever‑ did, or ever can make, to divulge the secrets of Masonry. And, most certainly, the republication of the book called Jachin and Boaz, could excite only the laughter or contempt of every' good Mason. We may, and should feel contempt for the man who would thus endeavor to speculate on the credulity of the public, but more than this would be uncalled for, and would not be sanctioned by either the principles or rules of our Order. Let as suppose that the world believes that Jachin and Boaz, as republished by Morgan, and the additions made thereto by Ber= nard, Stone, Allyn, and others, contain a revelation of the secrets of Masonry, what then? They have done but little Tuore than did Prichard, and divers others.

 

Nearly every word that these celebrated American authors published, had been pul}' lished before.

 

And, after all, do they give us a single sentence, line, or word, that tends to show it is a Mason's duty to mur=der a man for revealing the secrets?

 

Certainly not.

 

And tlius far, we admit, they have done the Institution justice, for, we assert, upon the veracity of an author and a man, that there is not a word of the kind, either in the written or oral rituals; from the Entered Apprentice, to the Royal Arch, from the Royal Arch to the Knights Templar, from the Knights Templar to the 33rd degree of Modern Masonry.

 

On the contrary, so far from tolerating murder, or any other crime, the whole teach= ings of‑Masonry denounce everyspecies of vice and immorality: And we speak only the simple truth, in saying that if it could be possible to make the very existence of Masonry depend upon_ the commission of a murder, the Society would be compelled to denounce and expel the brother who perpetrated the deed though it were known the murder saved the Order from ruin.; But that we know the power of public excitement, we should' feel surprised that any sensible man, not a Mason, should ever' have relied upon the professed developments of the renouncing Masons ; because, according to their own showing, they could not, and did not make the expose, without, themselves, committing wilful and base perjury. Who dare believe a man on oath, who violates, voluntarily, an oath, voluntarily made, in order 232

 

ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED RTATES.

 

to give testimony? And how much less credence should attach to their statements, when it is self‑evident that their object was to make money by the perjury ? We need not say that the memory of such men will go down to posterity with the detestation and scorn of all good men.

 

But if it be possible to conceive of a wretch, whose name should be transmitted to future ages as the assassin of the nineteenth century, it is lie who could make such a publication, and, in order to increase its sale and profits, assassinate, in a brutal and unprovoked manner, his accomplice and partner in crime.

 

That we can point to such a monster, we sincerely believe; and though, if living, the mark of Cain may not be upon his head, we think the day is coming, when all will be able to see through his cunningly devised schemes, fix his guilt upon him, and consign his name and memory to the merited scorn of mankind.

 

That William Morga.n was murdered, we sincerely believe, and that one or more Masons were concerned, and participated in the hellish deed, we have no reason to doubt. But for what purpose? Was it to defend, or protect Masonry from the influences of a book, a copy of which could be had for a few pennies, in nearly all the book stores in England and America? No; but for the sole purpose of putting money in their purse t What if rumor did say that Morgan was about to publish an ezpwi of Masonry, we doubt whether any honest Mason was permitted to see the original copy, whether manuscript or the book Jachin and Boaz, and hence the Masons could not know what was about to be published; and surely no sane man would suffer himself to be guilty of murder, upon bare suspicions of treachery.

 

In any view we can take of the subject, we can find no reason to fix the crime of Morgan's murder upon any, except those who were base enough to participate with him in the scheme, and who sought money as tho reward of their villainy 1 We beg our readers to remember the oath entered into by. Morgan and his partners; and then we ask special attention to Morgan's note, in which he accuses them of dastardly conduct, and demands a settlement under the penalty of an exposures What effect this note had upon Miller, Davids, and Dyer, wo< ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UXITED STATES.

 

233 are not, informed ; but, we are bound to believe that they ap. peased Morgan's wrath, and again enlisted his confidence, for a copyright for the book was taken out,,mid the publication went on. But does any one, who was acquainted, with the character of Aliller, suppose that his friendship for Alorgan, or any other man, extended beyond his own interest? . Does any one suppose that 1lliller ever intended to act fairly with Morgan, if it licenme his interest to act otherwise? We believe that the reconciliation was intended by Miller to be temporary. That Miller planned, got up, and directed the feigned attempt to burn his office, but few men doubted, even during the great excitement, and, certainly, none can question now, when they calmly reflect upon the facts.

 

That Alorgan was put in jail, under a false pretence, in order to excite the public mind, and in order to prepare for the final consummation of Miller's diabolical scheme; there is every reason to believe ; and that lie was let out of jail precisely at the time when everything, even to a carriage, was prepared to take him off, no one ever doubted. We must believe that the person who had Morgan arrested for stealing, was persuaded to do so, whether a. party or not, by those who were preparing the great plot.

 

We believe lie was arrested for debt by the same influences, as they could more safely lay their plans while Morgan was in jail ; and we believe that Lawson was induced to pay the debt, and release Morgan, by the same murderous gang!

 

But who were the contrivers and actors?

 

We all know that no honest man was concerned in it.

 

Every Mason knows that Masonry furnished no inducementor excuse for such a plot:

 

Whose interest then was it, that Morgan should be put out of the way? We think the answer is simple and plain. It was to the interest of those, and those only, who were to share in the profits of JVforgan's book!

 

That Miller was the great wireworker we sincerely believe.

 

He was shrewd enough and base enough to lay plans for the perpetration of any deed which might accomplish his ends.

 

And were not Miller, Davids, Dyer, and the other partners interested in Morgan's death ?

 

We say that Morgan's letter proves the three persons named were probably in his power.

 

Morgan's threat and insulting language, taken is connection with the apparent friendship of the parties afterwards, 234

 

ANTI‑AIASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

prove that they had not principle enough to feel an insult, or fiat their avowed friendship was all assumed. It is, :moreover, fair to conclude that they were never entirely sure that Morgan. was villain enouali~for the consummation of their united design, for lie lead denounced them as scoundrels, and threatened pub lic exposure.

 

It is re4sonable to conclude that Miller had the cunning and sagacity to foresee that the abduction of Morgan would benefit himself and his associates.

 

First, by being rid of one who, with all his faults, had some remains of honesty, and, of course, was to be feared.

 

Second, by increasing the excitement, as yet only half begun, and a corresponding increase m the sale of the book.

 

And, lastly, by getting rid of a partner, who was entitled to a large share of the profits.

 

Whether Morgan's death or absence vitiated the bond, we do not know, but from the demand the Morgan book had, we judge the profits were very large ; and we have good reason to believe that Airs. Morgan received but little, if anything from the sale, as we have understood she was destitute when' she joined the Mormons. It was, doubtless, Miller's policy to keep in with Morgan, until he obtained full possession of the entire manuscript, or what is more likely, an English copy of Jachin and Boa.; ; this being accomplislied, Miller had no further use for M organ, living, but we can easily see that his death, palmed on the Masons, would, or could be made to work out Miller from the haunts of a grog‑shop, and place him in an honorable office.

 

Whatever may be the doubts as to the correctness of our conclusions, we think all will agree in this, that Morgan was ab. ducted by those whose interest it was to have him out of the way, and for the life of us we can not suppose any body was so interested, except those concerned in the " book." If, then, we can determine who received the benefits resulting from the sale of Morgan's book, we shall have, we think, no difficulty in fixing the mark of murder on his, or their brows.

 

Rumor says that Miller and Gidings were partners, with how many others we are not definitely informed; and, as Giddings was a Mason, we feel called upon to say (though it makes our cheek burn with shame), that one or more Freemasons were concerned in the abduction, and, most likely, in the murder of Morgan.

 

But ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATES.

 

2355 what if all concerned had been Masons?

 

It would only prove that the Institution iiad been prostituted for their reception. Masonry does not now, and never did seek to bestow its bena fits upon any but those wlio are men of principle, of sterling honor: but we never claimed that none others found admission. Our Institution, like the Cluircli, is occasionally imposed upon, even wlulc we are most watchful.

 

In conclusion, we beg to say that we shall feel sora;v if it sliall be believed that, in the foregoing, we leave "set down auglit in malice ; " and yet, we sliould not be naucla surprised, for we, so loat}w; detest, and abhor the "craven wretch" wlio, knowing what Freemasonry is, could lend himself to its revilcrs, tliat we are not sure our heart is free from malice toward Nina ; but, be this as it may, the facts we liace presented, none the less certainly point to the contemptible source from w1iicli anti‑Masonry sprang, and to the low and groveling spirits that, from time to time, fanned the flame.

 

Since writing the foregoing, we have received a reply from It. W. Bro. pierce, to a letter of inquiry which we addressed to liana a sport time ago. It seems flint, inunediately upon the receipt of our letter asking additional inforanation, pro. Bierco addressed a letter of inquiry, in his official capacity as a Orand Warden of his Grand Lodge, to the very point where information Avas most likely to be found ; but, alas for poor human nature, we are startled at learning Dforgan's ghost is still abroad in the land, and Freemasons, in flint quarter, are absolutely afraid to speak the truth upon this sul)iect ; and, indeed, so frightened do they seem to be at the bare prospect of a historical publication, that their official prayers are interposed for the palsy of our hand, and the hermetical scaling of our lips.

 

Tliat our readers may see of what materials Freemasonry is composed in certain localities, we annex the official letter from the Lodge addressed, suppressing only the name of the Lodge ; and we give, .also, the reply of Il. W. Bro. Pierce, and heartily endorse leis opinions. We be,, to add flint we ]lave not suppressed tile name of tljc Secretary, for so frightened was he when he penned the note, that lie witlilaeld bas name.

 

For 236

 

ANTI‑MASONRY IN THE UNITED STATM9.

 

the honor of Masonry, we hope there is no other similar Lodg% or Secretary, iu the State of New York NEW YORK, Septemb ‑r 9. 1853.

 

Dean SIR '‑.Yours of 6th inst., is received.

 

We are decidedly of opinion that the histrory of "anti‑Masonry." even though written by a Mason, can ut9 kr otherwise than hurtful to the Institution.

 

We had to surrender our charters and stop work entirely. for many years, as account of the anti‑Alasonic excitement.

 

Let the embers of that excitement. for " pods sAy" slumber on.

 

We, at least. shall endeavor to let them remain It peace.

 

We can give you no intelligence about which you inquire.

 

Tours truly,

 

‑‑‑, &^crdary of Afaaonic Lodge,

 

, New I'onk B. G. W. of G. Lodge of Ohio.

 

Aeuox, Ouio, Sept. 12, 1 853.

 

grit :‑Tours is received, and while I acknowledge. to the full extent. your right to give, or withold the information sought, wlhoul a rerwon, yet when you give a reason, I have a right to examine it.

 

You say: " We had to surrender our charters, and stop work entirely. for many years, an account of the anti‑Masonic excitement. Let the etubers of that excitement, the ' pods sake,' slumber on." If this is true, it shows you to be poor, cowardly Masons. deserving to be ran1l. ed with Christians who will renounce their God on account of perweutiou. I regret your reason more than I do your refluml.

 

With respect,

 

L. P. Birnex, C. I Jr. +q/' p. l o~dJe of Ohm $Mmtwy of Masonic Lodge,

 

, Now Tork.

 

C1IAPTLR V11.

 

2111 WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED? la'ttoät the creation of the world down to the present time, we are 1'inrnislicd with unmistakable evidence that the fiat of Omnipotence was pronounced, through the womb of time, against the stability of all liuman institutions. No law in the divine economy is more clearly perceptible, than "lie that iiumbleth himself shall be exalted, and lie that esalteth himself shall be abased." Nation after nation have risen from poor and obscure parentage, and gathered strewrth on the ‑'vay, till, finally, they would strut and lord it over the earth.

 

Kingdom after kingdom leas come up from little colonies. or tribes, and grew apace, until, by the strong arm of power, they have ruled with unlimited sway, and given laws to mankind.

 

But where are they now ''

 

Echo answers. where ?

 

As each, in turn, waxed stronv, and became proud of its power and influence upon the earth, so has each, in turn. been compelled to kiss the dust at the, feet of those once ]told in contempt.

 

That this law of heaven was desi‑ncd to be of universal application to men and things, we can ask no clearer proof than that God suffered His chosen people to fall beneath its iron power, when that people dared for rct their allegiance to Him and His immaculate laws. flan is so constituted, that success, even in his laudable efforts, befrets unholy desires for triumph in other and unholy things. The acquisition of wealth begets a love of power, and Dower is the parent of arrogance and pride. and pride is, most generally, but bigotry concealed and arrogance put on.

 

No nation has, or ever will, become treat in the eyes of mankind, and continue steadily to remember that their areatness is derived from a power Lrreater than they.

 

The heavens declare the ulorr of trod, gnu tno angels adore Him as the Source of all power, and 237 238

 

Y WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED? tile UIvne of pit Good.: but when men and nations become now. erful and great, fey become puffed up with pride and vanity. find, to their own superior wisdom and goodness, do thc,,v, attribute their greatness. And when nations become maddened with self conceit, and ware successful war against otlier uation's of the earth, trampling under 'foot the sacred laws of human liberty and human ri(;lits. then does the Great Jehovah buckle on ills armor, and their strong men are brought low.

 

If we travel back through the unwritten bistory of the dark ages, even there we shall find unmistakable evidences, that nation after nation, kingdom after kingdom, people after people, tribe after tribe, have ruled with iron sway. Civil institutions, supposed to be wise beyond comparison, have sprung up, and dazzled with their splendor for a while, but tlioy have all passed away, and many of them become so far forgotten, that tlic bowels of the earth alone are capable of bearing testimony that they once were.

 

And now, may we not ask, is it not remarkable that the Institution of Masonry has survived the mildew of time? Wily is it that, against all opposition, which bigotry. and superstition, and dark cuuninn could suggest, this Institution alone has proudly triumplied, and still stands a monument of its own glory'?

 

Masonry has never had, or sou(rlit to have the law making power, in any land beneath the sun.

 

Masonry never had, or sought to ]lave ecclesiastical power, to perpetuate its being by religious dogmas.

 

Masonry has never been, nor sought to be set apart by sovereign power, as exempt from any or all the duties and responsibilities of the body politic.

 

Masonry has claimed and received but few favors from kings or rulers. Wliy then, we repeat, is leer glorious star still in tile ascendant? It can not be because the Institution is too insignificant or effeminate to attract attention, for we know she has been hated, persecuted, and hunted down, with a malignity that would do credit to fiends, land with a =l that, n.iglit ]lave honored a better cause.

 

It can not be a cunningly devised fable, emanatin,, from, and perpetuated by, the prince of darkness; for we have admitted into our fold, and declared all our secrets to old end tried soldiers of the Cross, who have received the bounty, WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED?

 

239 and taken a solemn oath to wage war, to the death, aaaimt his satanic maiesty, and all his subjects, both great and small.

 

Tile foregoing thoughts have been suggested, by our having noticed that there is a tendency in the minds of the most intelligent men, not even excepting pious ministers of tlic Gospel, to account for all mysteries in. the divine economy, by reasons tending to show that man is God, and God is man.

 

We Dave asked for a reason why Solomon's Temple was erected, and have been told that " the avowed reason was to furnish a resting place for the Ark of the Covenant, but that the gaudy‑ trappings of the building go to prove that it was the vainglorious work of Israel's proud King." 2'e have asked why the Temple was so constructed as to furnish a place of worship for all nations ; and have received for an answer, " this was the result of the wisdom of Solomon, derived from the superior learning of the Scribes." We have asked why the Temple surpassed all other buildings in beauty of proportions and richness of finish, and have been told that " the Greeks, at that period, were profound gcometricians, and the most expert and scientific architects on earth ; that about fifty years before the death of David, some Greek architects settled in the kingdom of Tyre, and that these superior workmen were sent to Solomon, whicli enabled liim to present a perfect work ; and that the great wealth of King Solomon, enabled him to enrich and adorn the edifice so as to surpass all others." We have asked to be informed in what consisted the wisdom imparted by Solomon to the wise men of all nations, who vi, ited him after the completion of the Temple, and have been toll, with a knowing look, " the science of geometry, and the art of building." Now, while we are constrained to admit that the foregoing answers have been made by men, whose learning and research entitle their opinions to the highest respect and consideration, we are inclined to fear that their great desire to exalt the powers of the human intellect, and make it capable of explaining all things, as resulting from natural causes, has led them into a misconception of the whole subject. It would seem to us prohtò able, in the investigation of cause and effect, not to lose sight 240

 

WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED of the great First Cause, the Fountain of all power, and the Dispenser of all good.

 

If we could see nothing remarkable in the Institution of lylasonry, in its long continuance and wonder‑working iullnence upon the lives of men, we, too, might readily full into the popular notion, that its institution and perpetuation lias been the result of the wisdom and cunning of man. If we could sco nothing remarkable in the time, place, and the manuer of building Solomon's Temple, and if, too, the Bible were silent upon the subject, we might suppose that vanity and pride had been the great movie; cause in the mind of Israel's Kingä in devising the plan. If we could believe that it was necessary, in the divine economy, that the Ark of the Covenant should have a building set apart for its special keeping, we might be inclined to favor the opinion of some highly respectable divines, that Jehovah had put it into the heart of Solomon to erect the house of the Lord, for that purpose alouc ; but there are so many reasons offered to our mind, for supposiu r there Nvas a greater and more important end to be accomplished, through the mercy and providence of God, that we are not content with so limited a view of the subject.

 

We claim that, in and out of the Bible, we lave the clearest evidence that God, in His providence, operates upon the minds of men, not alone by the strong arm of His power, nor yet according to the strict laws of divine justice, but also by means of His own appointment, which may, or may not, be chosen by His creatures, and, therefore, while these hearts nlnst work for the well‑being and happiness of mankind, as u whole, they may not operate for tlje good of all individuals, because the appointed means are not chosen by all.

 

. .

 

The account given us Of our Saviour's mission oncarth, is filled with events designed to impress these truths upon the minds of all.

 

We know Ile possessed the bower to do all things by the fiat of His will, unaided by means, for Ile commanded ?iazarus to come forth ; and yet, IIis ordinary method of demonstrating his power, was by a resort to means, as is shown in restoring sight to the blind, making the deal' to hear, and in healing all manuer of diseases.

 

WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED?

 

241 We claim it to be a fixed fact, that Jehovah ordered the building of the house of the Lord, and that He gave the instrw ment used, wisdom and power gommensurate with the great design. We do not arrive at this conclusion, because the reason of such fact is supposed to be clearly apparent to all, but simply because the Word of God has so declared it.

 

We believe the house of the Lord was erected to accomplish a great end for the good of mankind, not because we are able to perceive that all men have been benefited thereby,. but because the works of God are all great, and the end is ever equal to the means.

 

Having thus briefly. prepared the way, we will proceed to select a few of the most prominent facts, which, in our mind, tend to show what were the objects and ends of the erection of the Temple.

 

We have seen that, down to the reign of David, infidelity, and false worship had spread and communicated from nation to nation, and from people to people, until all had gone astray, Not even that people whom God, by His omnipotent power and goodness, had snatched away from the house of bondage; and who, by goodness., divine presence,. He had cheered on through the wilderness, and gave a triumphant entrance into the land of promise‑we say, not even these, the peculiar, the chosen people, remained true to their first love. It is true; that the Jew retained more of the true worship, and outwardly kept more, of the forms taught them by Moses ; in short, they knew more about the true religion than any other nation of people.

 

But they had sought out many inventions ; they entered up decrees, suggested by their own vanity, and designed to promote their own vain glory, until God and His holy law were set at defiance, when supposed to conflict with, or run counter to their own creed.

 

At the time to which we refer, the true worship . was only here and there to be found, and these were generally overawed by the outcry of popular: will, if not borne down and oppressed by the superstition of tlw age.

 

Every nation had; a religion.

 

All men worshiped superior, or supposed superior: beings, but they were slaves to their carnal passions, or duped: to the cunning and machinations of a designing and corrupt 16 242

 

WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED? priesthood.

 

The Egyptian Mysteries, in some form or other, had covered the face of the inhabited earth, and all men were being led astray by initiation into them.

 

The flesh pots of Egypt were everywhere open and yawning to be filled.

 

Secret societies were everywhere to be found, and all men were seeking to enter them. The curse of the gods was supposed to fall upon all persons who failed or neglected to gain admission. These secret societies were all religious societies, and then, as now, Heathens as well as Christians, believed religion was necessary to the well‑being and happiness of man on earth, and to his felicity after death.

 

The time was at hand, when God, in His infinite wisoom, had determined to send His only begotten Son into the world, to save mankind from the penalty of their crimes. David was upon the throne of Israel, and, we think, God permitted him to indulge in all the abominations of wickedness and sin, that in his final penitence and true worship, the world might be furnished with & prominent example, not only of the power and goodness of God, but to make manifest the means about to be set apart to bring man back to his lost estate‑his affinity to the one only living and true God, and his home in heaven.

 

To this end, we think, the clearest proofs were given, for though King David had imbued his hands in innocent blood, and wrought wickedness under the guise of friendship‑although he had set at defiance all law save that which ministered to his unbridled passions, still did God extend forgiveness to true repentance. Yea, more, the astounding fact is left upon record, that, through repentance, God coiild take to His bosom, him who had been the vilest of the vile, and pronounce him a man after His own heart.

 

When his locks were whitened with age, and his limbs were tottering upon the brink of the grave, David's soul yearned to do some good, and while his grateful aspirations were poured out in songs of inimitable sweetness, he prayingly sought to erect that house which he knew God designed to have built, but. God would not permit him to do so, because he had been a man of war; for, as the Temple was intended to typify the kingdom and reign of our Saviour, a man whose hands were wined with human blood could not participate iD its erection, WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED?

 

243 though, through the mercy and goodness of God, all stains of stn had been blotted out, and his name written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

 

But God promised that the house should be built by his son, whose reign, as we know, was one of uninter. rupted peace. King David was permitted to hoard up the very wealth he had acquired by wicked deeds, that it might be expended on the Temple.

 

When Solomon ascended the throne, he prayed to God for wisdom to govern his people, and not only did God give him greater wisdom than had ever been given to any king, but granted him also great riches, that he might fully accomplish the work set before him.

 

We have heard it said, that the Bible does not declare Solomon the wisest man, but only wiser than any other king ; while we believe the language used was designed to show that he was emphatically the wisest man that had ever lived, for we know that kings were generally supposed wiser than any other men, and hence, is Solomon's wisdom spoken of as being greater than even that of any king.

 

Now, assuming onr position to be correct, viz., that‑ God's works are all for great ends, we conclude that His peculiar and miraculous gift to Solomon was for great and wise purposes, and it does seem to us to be underrating the works of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, and the bestowment of His special blessings, to say that He thus endowed and blessed the King of Israel, for no other purpose than the erection of a fine house, though it be admitted that it was to contain the Ark of the Covenant, and receive the great Shekinah. We hold these things were secondary to the great end in the divine plan, as we shall attempt to show before we conclude; and we ask the reader carefully to observe our ads ance, step by step, and judge the correctness of our views by the facts adduced, and such others as may suggest themselves to all Bible readers.

 

It will be remembered that, at the period about which we write, the kindliest feelings did not exist between the Jews and Tyrians; on the contrary, a deadly hostility was perceptible.

 

'.Choir religion was totally different, their interests were different, and a long continued of tional hatred

 

had beep 244

 

WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTF4D ? indulged in.

 

And yet Solomon called on the King of Tyre to give him aid in the great work which God had set apart for him to accomplish.

 

To us it seems to be a short‑sighted view of the subject, to conclude that the wisest and richest King upon earth, should be driven to the necessity of calling on his people's enemy, and the enemy of Israel's God and His worship, to assist in building a house, simply because his enemy possessed the most convenient means for giving that assistance.

 

Again, it is remarkable that the King of Tyre not only agreed to render the assistance asked, but, in the most fraternal manner, cxpresqed a desire to participate in the work, and offered to do much more than was asked or accepted.

 

Reader, pause and reflect. Why was. it that a worshiper of idols and innumerable heathen gods, was so willing, yea, anxious, to assist. in building and dedicating a house to the one only living and true God ? Again, there was a youth, whose father was a man of Tyre, and whose mother was of the tribe of Naphtali‑we know not that there was another of similar issue, certainly there were but few intermarriages between the citizens of the two kingdoms. This youth early attracted the attention of the father of the King of Tyre, who took charge of and educated him , .and, at the time Solomon was engaged in laying his plans for the Temple, this young man had acquired the fame of being the host cunning and expert workman in the world.

 

We rejoice to know that, while all thinns in connection with the design o the house of the Lord, are not fully explained, we are not left tO conjecture a reason why Hiram Abiff was so accomplished; for, though the reason which actuated God may remain a my~tery, he has told us that, from the councils of heaven, the Widow's Son received wisdom to work all manner of cunning work,, and to solve all difficult questions; but it is not so plainly told us why the King of Tyre,sent him to King Solomon, where his wisdom and skill would be employed in givicig fame to a rival King, and a hated nation of people.

 

Again, the Jews knew they were the peculiar people of God, and had become so puffed up with vanity and pride, that none from the surrounding nations were permitted to approach, much Jew: to worship at. their altars, and a corresponding feelins WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED?

 

245 toward them was entertained by all others ; and yet, without.' opposition, so far as we know, the Temple was so planned, that, from its foundation, it was to be seen that a place was being provided, even in Jerusalem, for the worship of all nations.

 

The Most Holy Place was for those who had been' selected by God to minister in holy things.

 

The inner courts were for the worship of the Jews, God's 'chosen people; and the outer courts, for the worship of the Gentiles‑all nations.

 

Again, the storm was suspended, the tempest was stayed, and' one uninterrupted sunshine was permitted to cheer on the workmen, in their labor of love. Nor is this all; for when the Temple was completed, the wise men of all nations visited Jerusalem to see the Temple, and learn wisdom of Solomon.

 

Can it be that intelligent, thinking men do believe that the' wisdom here spoken of consisted in teaching the art of building ? We can not so believe ; but, in order that our opinions' may be tried by the law and the testimony, we will return to the remarkable events referred to, and briefly review them in detail.

 

Before doing so, however, we owe it to our2.: " to say, that we have no theory in religion or Masonry to establish. We love all true Christians and true Mans, but we are wedded to no creeds in either. We labc,. only to "render unto Cxsar that which is Caesar's;" and while we would not pre=' sume to measure arms with the thousands of learned divines,' who have made the Bible their study, we are forced to take hold of this subject, even at the hazard of exposing our too slight reading of that holy volume, in order to show what, in, our judgment, Masonry was instituted for, and why it is that the storms of persecution ever have, and ever will beat harm= lessly against the sacred walls of its temple; and, if it shall' appear that the honor is due to God, why, then, let all good' Masons give glory, and honor, and praise to God and the Lamb, for ever and ever.

 

We feel fully at liberty to assume it to be a conceded fact, that before the building of Solomon's Temple, the people of all nations had gone astray, so far as to lose sight of the true worship ; that they were seeking admission into secret societies, all which taught false doctrines. ' 'If we are thus far correct, 246

 

WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED? and if we are permitted to claim that, " God has no pleasure in the death of a sinner, but rather that all should turn and live," we are irresistibly led to the conclusion that some great scheme was necessary, to stay the ruin which was pending over mankind ; and we do not hesitate to assert, that no scheme of mere human invention would have been adequate to the end.

 

We assume it to be true, that God does not compel His creatures to worship and adore His mighty name, to live good'men and true, always obedient to His laws of redemption; for this would be to suppose Him capable of giving laws without suitable penalties annexed to their violation; or affixing penalties, when, in truth, His creatures possessed no power to become amenable to them, for, if compelled to be holy and just, they could not violate God's holy law. On the other hand, we feel equally confident that God does not compel, or superinduce His creatures to violate His law, for this would be to suppose Him capable of commanding obedience to a law, the violation of which was consonant with His fixed will. In short, it would make Him not only the A4thor.of sin, but would; prove that sin added to His glory ; that He is a God of vengeance, 'and not of mercy.

 

We believe that, through the mercy of God, means are provided for man's escape from the penalty,of 'transgression, and that He, in His infinite goodness and benevolence, holds out strong inducements to all intelligent creatures to choose the better part.

 

We believe King Solomon received superior wisdom from God, that he might be the means of laying the foundation of man's return to his lost estate. To suppose th░At Solomon received' an out‑pouring of wisdom from the councils of Heaven, for no other purpose than that he might erect a model house, in order that the art of building might be thoroughly understood, is tf suppose that God failed in His design; for no building has been erected that would compare with it, either in justness of pro. portions, or beauty of finish. Yea, more, to suppose God capable of thus acting would be to make Him do great things for little purposes.

 

At the time of which we write, great congequence was attached to fine houses, by king? princes, the WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED ?

 

247 priesthood, and the people, and hence did Jehovah provide the inducement of a fine house, in which to receive proper instruotions.

 

We hold that God gave Solomon superior wisdom, that he might be capable of teaching the principles of the true religion, and thus prepare the minds of the wise men, of all nations, for tke coming of our Saviour; and, we think, the Temple was the place set apart, in. the divine plan, to commence that great work.

 

We are aware that we are treading upon favorite theories, and running the risk of being thought a partisan in religious doctrines. And what if we should? Every Church, professing Christianity, desires to be understood as founding their dootrinps upon the plain Word of God, or upon the spiritual meaning of the Bible, and all contend that their doctrine is. consistent with common sense, and capable of being demonstrat ed, at least by the priesthood.

 

And as we have set ourself up (and what priest ever got up any other way), as a High Priest in ?Masonry, we claim the right to construe the Word of God by the rules of common sense, and draw such deductions as the premises warrant, leaving our readers at liberty to put on the, same robes, in which to judge the fruits of our labor.

 

We do not take by‑paths to find reasons which might satisfy. the skeptic, why King Solomon called on King Hiram to furnish timbers, but we say, what we are justified in believing,, that God put it into the heart of Solomon to call upon His people's enemy, and that God put it into the heart of the King of Tyre to comply with that request. We believe that God raised up, and prepared the Widow's Son for the great work, and that He put it into the heart of King Hiram, to send him to King Solomon.

 

We believe the Temple was so planned and built, that it served to assist in typifying God's plan of sal. vation.

 

We believe that, during the building, and after the completion of the Temple, King Solomon was engaged, under the direction of God, in preparing the minds of the people for the coming of John the Baptist, and the final advent of our Saviour, by teaching the outlines‑the preparatory steps to, and the principles of the true religion.

 

We believe King Solomon succeeded in eradicating the blindness of superstition and falea 248

 

WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED Y loarslilp from the minds of many hundred thousands, including the wise men of all nations, by introducing them into the ~o called recrct Society, now termed Freemasonry. We believe that, but for the teachings of King Solomon, John the Baptist would have been rejected, and his preaching would have received the scoflings and derision of all men.

 

Whether that which we have already said, or may 'add, will clearly show our opinions to be well founded, remains to be seen. Indeed, it would be exceedingly vain in us to suppose we shall succeed in making proselytes to this new view of the subject, but we do hope to elicit a more enlarged and liberal investigation than that which makes God bring down special wisdom from heaven, and bestow it upon one of His creatures, for no highcr and more glorious purpose than the erection of a fine house.

 

We have seen that mankind had gone astray, and fallen from that high station which God permitted and invited all His created intelligent beings to occupy. Man had lost, by his own wickedness and rebellion, even that knowledge of the true worship, which alone could gain him admission into a world of glory.

 

Such being the deplorable condition of the world, It may be clearly seen that nothing short of omnipotent power and infinite wisdom was capable of devising means for man's redemption, and final salvation.

 

If it be admitted that God does not force obedience to His laws‑and man's rebellion proves this‑it then follows that He could adopt no other means to effect the object, than to open up a way by which man could be justified, and yet God remain consistent and unchangeable.

 

The means, of necessity, still left all men at liberty to choose between obedience and eternal blessings, and disobedience and eternal woe. In the plan of the Temple, it may be seen that the world was taught to look upon God in a different light to that in which He had been viewed even by His chosen people. Tile Jews, by their cunningly devised fables, bad learned to look upon Him as a God of vengeance, and not of mercy ; and hence, they prayed for all manner of evils to fall upon their enemies.

 

The fact that God refused to permit King David "to build the house of `the Lord, indicates His intention to represent a reign of peace' and purity.

 

The fact that He put `it into the WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED ?

 

2‑I9 heart of Solomon to call upon the King of Tyre for assistance, clearly showE His intention to manifest Himself to mankind as an impartial and benevolent Being. The fact that He put it into the heart of King Hiram to render the assistance asked for, clearly proves His intention to show to the heathen nations that they, too, were to have an interest in the means about to be em ployed for man's redemption.

 

In short, that He was preparing a way for all mankind.

 

It further shows His design to impress upon the minds of all, that all enmity, and animosity, and bit‑. terness of feeling, should be swallowed up in the great work or repentance.

 

The fact that God gave special wisdom to the Widow's Son, to fit and prepare him for a great work, and then put it into the heart of the King of Tyre to send him where that work could be performed, tends most strikingly to show to the world, that the great duty of men and nations, was, to live and act as brethren, created, and sustained by the same Omnipotent hand.

 

Could more striking proof of the justice and mercy of God have been conceived by infinite wisdom ? The Jews could not fail to see that their vanity and pride had led them to overestimate their claims on Jehovah.

 

The Gentiles were struck dumb with wonder and astonishment, that a Being, whom they derided and rejected, was giving the clearest proofs that He was ready and willing to exercise a parental care over them.

 

They saw one of their greatest kings invited to take part in building the house of the Lord.

 

They saw their most skillful workman chosen to go beyond the confines of his native land, and take a distinguished part in the wonderful work. Both Jew and Gentile were persuaded to believe in the one only living and true God, by the fact that Hiram Abiff was se‑' lected to step between hostile nations, and heal all national' breaches,‑was neither Jew nor Gentile, but both, his father being a man of Tyre, and his mother of the tribe of Naphtali' ‑and, at a little later period, all were enabled to see that he wds fully carrying out the great design of his divine master.

 

They saw him beloved by all, both Jew and Gentile.

 

They saw him uniting the discordant materials, and bringing the Workmen on the Temple to bow to the mild sceptre of Shig Emanuel, now being most strikingly typifycd.

 

250 The surrounding nations‑the world at large, was struck with wonder and admiration, in finding that a means was being Drovided, by which the lion and the lamb could lie down together. All were permitted to know that the Temple was being provided, not alone for the worship of the Jews, the only people then professing to be God's followers, but for all nations. rhey saw that God was true to His promises, in still manifesting His preference for His chosen people ; for, in the house of the Lord, the Most Holy Place was to be set apart for the priesthood, the inner courts for the Jews, and yet, the outer courts were to be free for all nations ; thus showing to mankind, whichersoever dispersed, that He was God over all, and that all were equally provided for, and equally invited to come äto His house, to bow at His altar, and there receive the rich blessings held in reversion for all the faithful. And how were the character and nature of the new dispensation to be made known to those who rejected the Lord our God ?

 

How were those who had been reared and educated to believe all the teachings of the Heathen Mythology, to have those powerful impressions removed, and their error made manifest?

 

God did not force them to become his followers.

 

The strong arm of His power was not directed against their idols, by destroying their graven images.

 

God did not choose to cover the land with a blighting, curse, as in the days of Moses, in order to prove His omnipo. tence ; but, on the other hand, yielded, so to speak, to all the predilections of the people, so far as to afford.them their favorite method of learning wisdom.

 

We have seen that the gods ,f the heathen were to be sought and honored through secret societies ; that wisdom and honor in this world, and never end1ng happiness, was promised to all who passed through the fiery ordeal of those societies, supposed to be the peculiar dwelling place of their gods.

 

We say God indulged their predilections, so far as to offer them inducements to learn true wisdom in their own way; and, hence, He established a secret Society, into which all high‑minded, and honorable men, whether Jew or Gentile, were invited to enter.

 

We suppose the tenets and the peculiar teachings of that Society, were kept a profound secret from the world.

 

We suppose this was absolutely necessary to WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED?

 

251 No success, for so deeply rooted in the minds of the people were the teachings of the Heathen Mythology, that had it been known that the teachings within the vail were opposed to their favorite theory, but few would have volunteered as candidates for its Mysteries.

 

Start not, reader, when we say that the So ciety here referred to was Freemasonry.

 

We say this from a thorough' conviction of its truth ; we say it, believing that its truth can be shown by many, and irresistible proofs; and the admission' of this truth furnishes a solution for many things which can not be understood, or satisfactorily explained in any other way.

 

By this view of the subject, we leave no difficulty in perceiving that God, in His, mercy and dhine goodness, gave Solomon superior wisdom, and induced him to call upon Hiram, King of Tyre, whose participation in the erection of the Temple could not fail to produce a beneficial effect upon the minds of the Gentile world, by causing them to look favorably upon the God of the Jews.

 

By this view, we can see the unspeakable wisdom of God, in preparing the mind oú the Widow's Son, and eausing him to be sent to assist in building the Temple, as the, most eminently qualified person to put down all hostile feelings, and amalgamate the discordant materials, then in active operation against the harmony and peace of nations.

 

Hiram Abiff was both Jew and Gentile; each party claimed equal right to his favors, and each delighted to call upon him to decide all matters of difference.

 

No other man was so universally loved by the Craft. No other man could have preserved universal order, though assisted by the superior wisdom of Solomon.

 

Again, by admitting that God's pity and benevolence towards fallen man, caused the introduction of these means, that all men might be persuaded to turn from their idolatry, and, finally, come back to the worship of the only living God, we can perceive why it was, that in Judea, yea, even in Jerusalem, a Temple for His worship was built, wherein all men were called to participate. By the very plan of the Temple, the proud and stiff‑necked Jews were taught that the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, was equally God over all, and that all created intelligences were invited to come unto Him for redemption from sin, and through His mercy, gain an entrance and 252

 

WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED? eternal rest in that better kingdom.

 

Yea, more, by this construction of God's design in erecting the Temple, we can under. stand why it was that the wise men of all nations visited they Temple, in order to learn wisdom of Solomon.

 

With all our knowledge of the careless manner of conferring degrees iii Masonry, and the imperfect instructions given in the lectures, we still wonder how any Mason, who has been made even part ally to understand the Master's degree, can take any other view of the origin and design of Masonry. Every Mason knows that all our reliable traditions point to the Temple, showing its origin to have been there.

 

Every Mason knows that the most prominent feature in all the teaching of Masonry is the belief in one, the only living and true God ; and can any Mason doubt that this was the case at the building of the Temple?

 

We assert, with bold confidence, that Masonry was instituted by God's appointment, to lead the minds of men to the true worship, by pointing to the true and mighty Jehovah. We do not suppose the Lodge of Masons ever was a place of religious worship. On the contrary, we suppose Masonry never would have accomplished half the good which it has, had it been a religious association ; but then, as now, its door was open' to the honorable man, no matter from what tribe, kindred, or ebuntrv lie hailed.

 

Had it been a religious society, by God's appointment, females would not have been excluded.

 

We suppose the only difference between Masonry, as practiced in the days of Solomon, and at this day, is to be found in the simple fact, that while we now proclaim to the world that no man can gain admission who does not believe in God, no such proclamation was then made, but, on the contrary, no man had the most distant well‑grounded idea oú the wisdom taught by King Solomon to the initiated. This profound secrecy was necessary to the success of the great plan.

 

What worshiper of idols would have applied for admission, had he known what was taught in the Society?

 

We suppose, in this Institution, as in the Egyptian Mysteries, the whole system was explained to no man upon his admission, for in this there was then danger' of doing Inore harm than good.

 

Men's prejudices were to be. removed, their errors of education were gradually to be WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED? eradicated, and then the seeds of true holiness to be planted upon the prepared ground, with suitable instructions to cultivate. with industry and skill, in order to a reward in harvest time.

 

I That initiates at the Temple received instructions in the art. of building, we do not question ; that initiates received forcible, and useful lessons in morals, we believe. And that all "good and true men " were rewarded by being fully instructed in the errors of the Heathen Mythology, and the sublime truth that tLere never was, never can be but one God, one Lord, the Crea tor and Preserver of all things.

 

It is, then, no wonder that the, wise men of all nations were enabled to learn wisdom of Solo‑. mon.

 

We do not, for a moment, doubt that their visit to the Temple, and initiation and instruction by King Solomon, wars a part of the divine plan for the introduction of the new dispensation.

 

We believe that Solomon initiated the wise men of all nations, spoken of in the Bible, and gave them, by means of his superior wisdom, such evidence of the existence and omnipotent power of Jehovah, as carried conviction to their minds ; and hence it was that no man went away, without being filled with such wisdom as he could nowhere else have obtained.

 

And to ;,his divine plan, this preparation of the minds of men, are, we Indebted for the favorable reception which John the Baptist met, with, when he came proclaiming the coming of the Saviour of the. world.

 

Masonry, then, is of divine origin ; instituted,'not to teach religious dogmas, but to prepare the way, and point to'the true. worship. And has it not thus far performed its mission ? Has, it ever done more than teach the preliminary steps to the holy religion ? but has it not always done this much ?

 

Through the. dark ages of bigotry and superstition, its small, but pure. light may be seen, shedding a mild, heaven‑born glory upon man's benighted pathway.

 

While the lamp of religion grew pale and dim, a melancholy gloom also hung over our banners, but still, by the strong arm of Jehovah, Masonry still lived on and continued to be the true depository of the dcctrine of one God. Did infidelity stalk forth, and, Moloch‑like, crush the Church, and banish the true worship, yet everywhere a little private. band of brothers was to be. found who preserved a knowledge 2 64

 

WRY WAS NAPINRY INSTITUTED .' Ood ai.a His immaculate lawo.

 

Did a Roman Pontiff o: a Spanish Inquisition visit with their maledictions, and lead to the stake or the guillotine its fait' ful votaries ; still, in some secret hiding

 

place, where only t e ALL: SEEING EYE could behold their midnight assembly, did they congregate for the purpose of teaching that doctrine of one God, and for the purpose of perpetuating the doctrine through all time.

 

Masonry has thus far done all it was designed to do.

 

It has continued to prepare the minds of men to live together as a band‑ of brothers, looking for superior blessings from Him who brought it into being.

 

God's benevolence to man, caused Him to institute Masonry, and, in humble gratitude to its great founder, Masons ever have, and still continue to teach benevolence to all mankind. God emphatically entrusted Masonry with the keeping of a copy of His holy laws, dnd when every other copy was destroy nd by the ruthless hand of the invader, Masonry, true to its divine appointwent, preserved a copy, where neither Nebuchadnezar nor the mildew of time could sully its pages, and, at God's own appointed time, brought it forth to be read to the people, as evidence against themselves, and as proof of the power and goodness of God. Masonry has ever taught Morality and. Virtue, Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth.

 

In short, it hae inculcated upon the minds of its votaries, all the preliminary qualifications essential to a proper appreciation of the lave o; God, and His holy laws. Masonry, being instituted fbr uIe good of all, could not teach creeds ; it has, and ever had, one faith and one docrine‑love to God and man.

 

While it teaches no sectarian theory, it significantly points to the worship of that holy King, whose fiat spoke worlds into being, and whose infinite goodness pleads with fallen man.

 

Masonry teaches no ephem eral worship, it wants no gewgaws to fascinate the, vain nretender, but, with plastic power, it lays hold of the thinking faculties, and mildly, but irresistibly leads its votaries to scan the far‑off heavens, and bow the knee in humble adoration to Him who sits enthroned higher than the heavens, and more glorious than the congregated glory of worlds. Masonry teaches that its members shall believe in one supreme, WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED?

 

255 ImmAculatc God, and requiring this, it, of necessity, encourages all to seek an intimate acquaintance with, and obedience to His laws; and, hence, the Holy Bible, by Masons believed to contain those laws, is always lying open in the Lodge room. No Entered Apprentice can be made without it; no Fellow Craft can he made without it; no Master Mason can be made without it. In short, no degree in Masonry can be conferred without it. and no degree can be legally conferred, unless the candidate be, in a peculiar manner, persuaded to take that holy volume as the rule and guide to his faith. Masonry affectionately entreats all its followers to study the law of God, and to do His will.

 

Masonry requires its votaries to practice Morality and Brotherly Love ; it teaches Benevolence and Charity , it requires Temperance, Fortitude, Prudence, and Justice; $t teaches Mercy, Forbearance, and Kindness.

 

In short, it teaches all the virtues inculcated by the Holy $ible, and yet it does not require that a man shall profess any of the creeds called religion.

 

Masonry confirms the believer, persuades and endeavors to convince the wavering, and attacks the stronghold of the Infidel, and constrains him to bow his knee and supplicate for mercy at the altar of Jehovah. Masonry deals with the worldly‑minded, who might not otherwise read the Bible, or attend divine worship.

 

Thousands there are, who have been led to knock at the door of the Lodge, prompted mainly by curiosity, or by an expectation that amusement was to be found there, but whose minds became solemnly impressed with the holy truths inculcated by Masonry, and have gone away, resolved to be better men.

 

The chisel of truth has engraven upon their hearts those solemn truths contained in the Bible, but which they had never before learned, or learned to be disregarded.

 

Masonry persuades all men to be good and true, and to obey the moral law; and who will deny that he who so lives, has made one step towards obedience to that higher and holier teaching. to be found in the book of life.

 

If, then, Masonry was instituted by divine appointment, and continues to meet the ends of its mission; if, as we believe, Jehovah has preserved it as in the hollow of His hand, " to bring the blind by a way they know 256

 

WHY WAS MASONRY INSTITUTED? ,not; to lead them in paths they have not known; to make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight ; these things to do unto them, and not forsake them;" will the time ever come when MASONRY SHALL CEASE TO BE 2 We answer, unhesitatingly, that, as sure as the Bible is the Word of God, the day must, and will come, when Masonry shall no longer exist upon earth. Masonry will continue, as a means of God's appointment, to win the minds of men from the error of their ways, until, in conjunction with all the other appointed means, the great end is accomplished, when " every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ."

 

Then, and not till then, shall efforts for the spread of the Word of God be no more needed. Then, and not till then, will all benevolent associations cease to do good.

 

Then, and not till then, will God sever the Masonic tie, and unite its members in bonds of holy love, in. " that Temple‑that house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens." CHAPTER VIII.

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS THAT Freemasonry, for more than twenty‑eight hundred years, was governed by fixed laws, rigidly lived up to, we have every reason to believe. These primitive laws were few and simple, and, therefore, easily understood.

 

It will, doubtless, startle the progressive Masons of the present day, to say that the fundamental laws of the Society are now precisely the same, and yet, truth permits us to say neither more nor less. Put the difficulty which we have to encounter, consists in pointing out those laws, and in showing their appli cation and adaptation to the changes which the Grana Lodge system has seemed to occasion.

 

The appearance of Anderson's Constitutions and History of English .Masonry. seems to have operated as a license to other, to take up the subject of Masonry, and make it subserve their views. Throughout Continental Europe, writer after writer appeared, each vieing with the other, in an effort to enlarge, extend, and multiply its teachings, until it would appear that Freemasonry is sufficiently capacious to take within its embraces any, and all secret associations, which have been, or may be devised. A Dermott, a Ramsey, a De Bonnville, a Zinendorf, a Fessler, and a host of kindred spirits, taking advantage of the novelties of a restless people, and the cliangee of a progressive age, instituted system after system of secret ceremonies, teaching as many and different doctrines ; and, to give character and dignity to these precious bantlings, each parent selected the venerated name of Freemasonry. These rites, each and all, assumed the Masonic degrees as their foun. dation ; and, as nothing new is without its admirers; these new Masonic Societies soon had numerous followers; and thus the 17

 

257 858

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

laws of Masonry became so intermixed with foreign gewgaws, as to bewilder and mislead the honest seeker after truth. Since the introduction, into France and Germany, of the great batch of degrees referred to, Ancient Craft Masons have stood in need of a digest of the laws of the Order, separated from the innovations which have been insidiously engrafted upon the original simple code; but so long has this work been deferred, that the task is now beyond the capacity of any one roan, and the need of the digest is the more apparent.

 

No work, not even a Lodge Manual, is more wanted than a digest of Masonic laws.

 

More than eight years ago, we announced our intention to prepare and publish a code of Masonic jurisprudence; since `which time two brethren have undertaken to supply this desideratum, and though one of these is a brother of great learning and extensive research, they have both failed of their end, . because, as we think, they started out without a fixed standard Cor the dissemination of truth. So long as a portion of the laws laid down are to be tested by Anderson's Constitutions, another portion by Dermott's .Rhiman Rezon, another by the scrap publications and stray leaves which, from time to time, have been picked up since 1663, and still another portion by that infidel theory, which makes Masonry but a cast off of the Egyptian Mysteries, so long will the laws of Masonry remain enveloped in impenetrable mists.

 

The unwritten Landmarks of the Order, have now become so corrupted by the innovations of the eighteenth century, that the best informed Masons are liable to be misled. The brother made in France, since the introduction of the various modern rites, finds it difficult to believe that the English ritual contains all the secret Landmarks ; while the English Masons have, from time to time, yielded, little by little, to the innovations of France and Germany, until they, themselves, have become bewildered by the corr‑;ptions. Fortunately, however, for the identity and perpetuity of our Institution, the written Land. marks have remained unchanged, and, by a careful study of the great principles there laid down, it is yet possible to separate the pure ritual from the foreign interpolations.

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

258 We have not the vanity to suppose it will be in our power to rescue our ritual from the unholy amalgamations, and present a perfect digest of Masonic laws. Nay, we shall be satisfied, if we shall be able to lay the foundation upon which others may build a complete structure.

 

We lay down the following, as fundamental principles, by which all Masonic laws should be tested.

 

1. There is no Freemasonry except Ancient Craft Masonry. 2. The fundamental laws of Freemasonry are its Landmarks ‑these are 1. The oral, or secret Landmarks, and 2. The written Landmarks.

 

The oral, or secret Landmarks embrace all the essential rituals and teachings of the Lodge room, none of which can be written. The written Landmarks are a code of Masonic common law principles, of immemorial origin ; and though, perhaps, the most concise ever penned for the government of a great Institution, they are so perfect in their adaptation to all the wants of Masonry, that, by acclamation, they were ever regarded as unalterable; certainly, for a period beyond our knowledge, the Fraternity have held that no man, or body of men have the right to alter or change them. This venerable code is divided into six great heads, and these, again, into sections, covering every branch of Masonic jurisprudence.

 

They were first publislied in 1723, by order of the Grand Lodge of England, under the title of "The Old Charges of the Freemasons," in Anderson's book, called the Constitutions of the Freemasons.

 

The mutilated copy of these Old Charges, contained in Dermott's .Amman Rezon, early found its way into the American Colonies, and being so mixed up with the Regulations, as to cause the general belief that they, the Regulations, constituted the highest Masonic law, though they were known to be subject to amendment, alteration, and abrogation. Thus were the Grand Lodges in the United States groping in the dark, talking about Ancient Regulations and Ancient Landmarks, without knowing where they were to be found.

 

lu 1813, Bro. Joseph Foster offered a resolution to the Grants Lodge of Missouri, calling for a committee to report what were 260

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

the Ancient Landmarks, Ancient Constitutions, and Ancient Usages of Freemasonry, accompanied by somo remarks, to the effect that he had long observed brethren engaged in writing, and talking about the old laws of Masonry, but he had not seen any one who could say what they were, or where they were to be found. In obedience to this resolution, a Committee of three intelligent Masons was appointed, and they were continued from year to year, vainly searching for the hidden treasure, and, as evidence that this want of knowledge was general, New York offered Missouri the use of her library to search for the law.

 

In December, 1848, we published, in the Masonic Signet, the "Old Charges," as they are found in Anderson's Constitutions and called attention to the difference between these true laws, and the spurious code of Dermott. At the nest session of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, the Committee, above mentianed, was discharged, and a new one appointed, at the head of which our name was placed. At the following session, May, 1850, we made the following report, which we extract from the printed proceedings, believing it furnishes an account of the first action had by a Grand Lodge in the United States, pointing out, or defining the secret, as also the written Landmarks of Freemasonry REPORT Moll COMM=E ON ANCIM USAGE.

 

"The Committee appointed by this Grand Lodge to collect information, and define what are the Ancient Usages and Ancient Constitutions of Masons, beg leave to report that they have examined, with great care, all the authorities to which they could have access, and have arrived at the conclusion that it is beyond their province to define all the Ancient Usages, in this place, were it even in their power to do so, but your Committee believe that nearly all which may be written, can readily be pointed out.

 

"At the revival of Masonry in the South of England, in 1717, the brethren of four Lodges, in the city of London, met and formed a Grand Lodge, which they styled the Grand Lodge of England. Soon after this organization, a resolution was adopted requesting the brethren, everywhere, to bring forward any old manuscripts, or records in their possession, which being DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

261 complied with, the Grand Lodge appointed Dr. Anderson a Committee to collect the Ancient Charges, or Usages of Masonry, and the Ancient Constitutions. In 1721, Bro. Anderson reported that he had performed the duty assigned him, and a Committee of fourteen learned Masons was appointed to examine, and report upon the same ; who, having performed that 'duty, the Grand Lodge, on the 25th of March, 1722, ordered Bro. Anderson to have the documents, so collected and revised, printed in a book ; and, in 1723, Bro. Anderson furnished said book to the Grand Lodge, which was again examined and ap proved.

 

Your Committee believe that all the manuscripts, of which this book was made up, emanated from Masons who bad been made under the authority of the Grand Lodge at York, which, if not the oldest organized body of Masons then on the globe, was surely regarded as the highest authority in Masonry.

 

" Anderson's Ancient Charges and dncient Constitutions are, therefore, believed to contain more nearly the original laws and usages of the Order. than are to be found anywhere else. Your Committee would state that, in the several editions of Anderson's Constitutions, published by order of the Grand Lodge of England, no sentence, line, or word of the Ancient Charges has been altered, while the Ancient Constitutions, designed for the government of Masons. and adapted to Grand Lodges, have been altered, amended, and changed, from time to time. Your Committee, not wishing to occupy the time of this Grand Lodge with an argument in favor of the views enter‑* tained by them, arc satisfied with presenting this concise statement of facts, and recommend the adoption of the following resolutions "Resolved, That the Ancient Char.‑Cs, as published by the order of the Grand Lodge of England, in Anders< n's Constitutions, contain all, or nearly all the Ancient Landmarks and Usages cf Masonry, proper to be published.

 

"‑Resolved, That no Grand Lodge has the right to alter, change, or amend any portion of said Ancient Charges.

 

'░ Resolved, That the Ancient Constitutions, as contained in the first edition of Anderson's Constitutions, is, or should be regarded as the highest Masonic author My, on which to found a code of laws for the government of the Craft.

 

"All of.which is respectfully submitted.

 

"J. W. S. MITCHELL, t;'hairmcat." 262

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

This report was adopted, without discussion or opposition, and very soon after, Foreign Correspondence Committees com. Inenced writing, learnedly, about the true lairs, and some of them denied, out and out, that they had ever quoted from the 4himan Rezon as authority, or in any way given credit to its author.

 

We have thought the foregoing statement of facts was called for, in justice to ourself, for though it was well known that we had been the humble instrument in first calling the attention of the Grand Lodges of the United States to the true law, no Masonic writer, so far as we know, has had the magnanimity to give us the credit, except Bro. Tucker, of Vermont.

 

Altllouali we have heretofore given‑as far as circumstances permitted‑a history of these old laws, we deem it proper, in this connection, to subjoin the following brief sketch. simply premising that while a proper construction of the " Old Charges" will develope the true character of Freemasonry, and pohit out the whole duty of the Brotherhood, due allowance must be made for any obsolete language, as well as for an apparent want of adaptation (in some particulars) to the present state of things. superinduced by that change in Freemasonry itself which lopped off its Operative character.

 

We also beg to warn the reader, that if, in our efforts to explain the application of the " Old Charges," anything shall appear which tends to set aside, or run counter to the teachings of that venerated code of laws; the same is to be regarded as not only wgrthless, but mischievous.

 

By the term Ancient Constitutions oú Masonry, we do not mean to include the Regulations which were made, from time to time, by the Grand Assembly at York; we do not mean the Regulations which were made at the Convention, over which the Earl of St. Albans presided, in 1663 ; nor do we mean the Regulations. or Constitution of. the Grand Lodge of England, under its organization of 1717 : for all these were like the Constitution or By‑Laws of the present Grand Lodges throughout the world, subject to amendment, alteration, or change, in con. formitv with the Ancient Landmarks.

 

By the term Ancient Constitutions of Masonry, we mean DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

163 those immemorial laws which have been handed down from ago to age, and from generation to generation, no one. know ing whence they originated, and no one having the right to alter or change them, but all being equally bound, by a fair and liberal interpretation of them.

 

As precedents, the edicts and Regulations of the Assembly at York, in 026 ; at the Convention, in 1663 and 1717, are all entitled to the highest regard and consideration ; and all good Masons, who can consistently be governed by them, should be so. But, as all these were legislative enactments, intended to be suited to the times, and as all Assemblies, Conventions, or Grand Lodges, claimed and exercised the privilege of altering, amending or repealing, any preceding enactments, and to make new Regulations (provided, always, that the Ancient Landmarks be not removed); these enactments can not be regarded as immovable or fundamental laws, unless, by their universat adoption and uninterrupted use, they have become the settled or common law of the Fraternity.

 

It will be observed that, as far back as we have an account of a Grand Lodge, Assembly, or Convention of Masons, an immemorial law is referred to as being not only fundamental, but unalterable ; and this is the code which we call the Constitutions of Masonry.

 

We say the immemorial law, which constitutes the written Landmarks of Masonry‑the Ancient Constitutions of Masonry ‑‑is to be found in Anderson's Constitutions, under the head of "THE OLD CHARGES OF THE FREE AND ACCEPTEP MASONS.P' It appears that, durinri the Grand Mastership of Sir Christopher Wren, these old laws were well understood by the Craft generally, as we hear nothing of difficulties arising from a want of uniformity in the rituals or duties of Masons; but when this eminent Grand Master, who was the last over Operative Masons, became so old and infirm as to be unable to take an active part, the Craft ceased to hold quarterly communications, and even the least days were neglected, until, finally, Masonry in London was reduced to four old Lodges. A revival was set on foot in 1.716, and, in 1717, the four old Lodges, together with all the Masons then in London, assembled, formed and opened a 264

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

Grand Lodge, when it was found that the Ancient Usames, of Constitutions of Masonry were not understood, there being different opinions in relation to many of the provisions of that immemorial code. It further appears, that a full and complete copy of the ancient law was nowhere to be found on record, but that manuscript copies of certain portions of it were in the hands of some old Masons, and the Grand Lodge appointed Dr. Anderson. and Dr. Desamlliers to collect and collate from these old manuscripts all that they deemed to be truly ancient usage.

 

To further this design, the Grand Lodge requested all those havin ; manuscripts, to bring or forward them to the Grand Lodge.

 

It was understood that the Grand Lodoe intended to print these old laws, as soon as they were collected, which, at that time, was a new and unheard of proposition; and some of the brethren, being horror‑struck at the suggestion, committed their manuscripts to the flames, from which it seems quite probable that some portions of the immemorial Constitutions were forever lost.

 

But a code, deemed to be full and complete, was collated by Dr. Anderson, presented to the Grand Lodge, and after undergoing the close scrutiny of a Committee of fourteen learned brethren, they were ordered to be published, on the 25th of March, 1722. These Old Charges have never been altered or changed; from that day to this.

 

They stand in the Grand Lodge of England, at this day, clothed in the same language, without a word being stricken out or added to.

 

No Grand Lodge in the world has attempted to alter or change the wording of this old code of laws ; and, though they have been violated again and again, generally through ignorance, no Masonic body has ever republished a mangled copy of them, or in any way altered their meaning, except the illegal Grand Lodge of London, calling itself the Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons, generally known as the Athol Grand Lodge. Law. rence Dermott was, for several years, Grand Secretary of the Athol Grand Lodge, and, in 1772. lie was appointed D. G. Master, in which cear\he published. by order. or permission of his Grand Lodge, a book, called The True Ahiman Rezon, pur. porting to contain the Ancient Constitutions of Masonry. That said look was brought to the United States, and has been DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

265 republished i n Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, and, perhaps, in one or two other States.

 

THE OLD CHARGES OF THE FREE AND ACCEPTED DIASONS.

 

Collected from their old records, at the command of the Grand Master, approved by the Grand Lodge, and ordered to he published in the first edition of the Book of Constitutions, on Alarch 25th, 1722.

 

I. CONCERNING COD AND RIZICTON.

 

"A Mason is obliged, by his tenure, to obey the moral law; and, it' lie rightly understands the ART, be will never be a stupid atheist, nor an irreligious libertine. But though, in ancient times, Masons were charged, in every country, to be of the religion of that country or nation, whatever it was, yet it is now thoufflit more expedient only to oblige them to that religion iu which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves ; that is, to be good men and true, or men of honor and honesty, by whatever denominations or persuasions they may be distinguished, whereby Masonry becomes the centre of union, and the means of conciliating true friendship among persons that must have remained at a perpetual distance.

 

11. OF THE CIVIT. MAGISTRATE, EIIPREJIE AND SUBORDINATE.

 

" A liason is a peaceable subject to the civil powers, wherever he reside:; or works, and is never to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the peace and welfare of the nation, nor to bebave himself undutifully to inferior magistrates ; for as Dlasonry Math always been injured by war, bloodshed, and confusion, so ancient Kings and Princes have been much disposed to encourage the Craftsmen, because of their peaceableness and loyalty, whereby they practically answered the cavils of them adversaries, and promoted the honor of the Fraternity, who ever flourished in times of peace.

 

So that if a brother should be a rebel against the State, lie is not to be countenanced in his rebellion, however lie may be pitied as an unhappy man, and if convicted of no other crime, though the loyal Brotherhood must, and ought to disown h s rebellion, and give no umbrage or 2fift ground of political.jealousy to the government, for the time being, they can not expel biro from the Lodge, and his relation to it remains indefeasible.

 

"A Lodge is a place where Masons assemble an(] work ; hence, that assembly, or duly.or‑anized Society of Masons, is called a Lodge ; and every brofor ought to belong to one, and to be subject to its By‑Laws and the general regulations. It is cithei oarticular or general, and will be best understood by attending it, and by the Regulations of the General, or Grand 110d'‑re, here unto annexed.

 

In ancient times, no ?luster or Fellow could be absent from it, especially when warned to appear at it. without insuring a severe censure, until it appeared to the 1l7astcr and Wardens, that pure necessity hindered him.

 

" The persons admitted members of a Lodge, must be good and true inen‑free born, and of mature and discreet age. No bondmen, no women, no immoral or scandalous men, but of good report.

 

nIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

III. OF LODCM Iv. OF IIASPERS, IPARDFNis, FEII.OR'S, AND AT'PREA"nCM All preferment, among Masons, is grounded upon real worth and personal merit only ; that so the Lords may be well served ‑the brethren not put to shame, nor the royal Craft despised ; therefore, no Master or Warden is chosen by seniority, but for his merit. It is impossible to describe these things in wi‑itina, and every brother must attend in his place, and learn them in a way peculiar to this Fraternity.

 

Only candidates may know that no Master should take an kpprentice, unless lie has sufficient employment for him, and unless lie be a perfect youth, leaving no maim or defect in his body, that may render kiln incapable of learning the art‑of ‑erving his Master's Lord, and of being made a brother, and then a Fellow Craft, in due time, even after tie has served such a term of years as the custom. of the country directs; and that lie should be descended of honest parents, that so, when other.yise qualified, lie may arrive to the honor of being the Warden, and then the Master of the Lodge, the Grand Warden, and, at length, the Grand Master of all the Lodges, according to his merit.

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

" No brother can be a Warden until lie has passed the pact of a Fellow Craft; nor a Master until lie has acted as Walden; nor Grand Warden until lie has been blaster of a Lod=e ; nor Grand Master unless lie has been a Fellow Craft before his election, who is also to be nobly born, or a gentleman of the beat fashion, or some eminent scholar, or some curious architect, Or other artist, descended of honest parents, and who is of singular great inerit in the opinion of the Lodges. And for the better, and easier, and more honorable discharge of his office, the Grand Master has a power to choose his own Deputv Grand Master, Nvho must be then, or must have been formerly, the Master of a particular Lodge, and has the privilege of acting whatever the Grand Master, his principal, should act, unless the said principal be present, or interpose his authority by a letter.

 

~` Thescrulersand governors, supreme and subordinate, of the ancient Lodge. are to be obeyed in their respective stations by all the brethren, according to the Old Charges and Regulations, with all humility, reverence, love, and alacrity.

 

\'. OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE CRAFT IN WORKING.

 

" All Masons shall work honestly on working days, that they may live creditably on holy days, and the time appointed by the law or the land, or confirmed by custom, shall be observed.

 

" The most expert of the Fellow Craftsmen shall be chosen or appointed the Master or overseer of the Lord's work, who is to be called Master by those that work under him. The Craftsmen are to avoid all ill language, and to call each other by no disobligin‑ name, but brother or Fellow, and to behave themselves courteously within and without the Lodge.

 

"The blaster, knowing himself to be able of cunning, shall undertake the Lord's work as reasonably as possible, and truly dispend his goods as if they were his own; nor to give more wages to any brother or Apprentice, than lie really may deserve.

 

" Both the Master and the Masons, receiving their wages justly, shall be faithful to the Lord, and honestly finish their work, whether tasle or journey; nor put the work to task that bath been accustomed to journey.

 

"None shall discover envy at the prosperity of a brother nor 264 268

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

supplant him, or put him out of his work, if lie be capable to finish the same ; for no man can finish another's work so much to the Lord's profit, unless lie be thoroughly acquainted with the designs and draughts of him that began it.

 

When a Fellow Craftsman is chosen Warden of the work, under the Master, he shall be true both to Master and Fellows shall carefully oversee the work in the Master's absence, to th Lord's profit, and his brethren shall obey him.

 

14 1111 Masons employed, shall meekly receive their wages, without murmuring or mutiny, and not desert the Master till the work is finished.

 

" A younger brother shall be instructed in working, to prevent spoiling the materials for want of judgment, and for increasing and continuing of Brotherly Love.

 

" 111 tile tools used in working shall be approved by the Grand Lodge.

 

.

 

" No laborers shall be employed in the proper work of Masonry ; nor shall Freemasons work with those that are not free, without an urgent necessity ; nor shall they teach laborers and unaccepted Masons, as they should teach a brother or Fellow.

 

VI. OF BEHAN70R, VIZ.

 

" l. In the Lodge, while constituted.

 

"You are not to hold private committees, or separate conversation, without leave from the Master, nor to talk of anything impertinent or unseemly, nor interrupt the Master or Wardens, or any brother speaking to the Master ; nor behave yourself ludicrously or jestingly, while the Lodge is engaged in what is serious and solemn ; nor use any unbecoming language, upon any pretence whatsoever, but to pay due reverence to your Master, Wardens, and Fellows, and put them to worship.

 

"1f any complaint be brought, the brother found guilty shall stand to the award and determination of the Lodge, who are the proper and competent judges of all such controversies (unless you carry it, by appeal, to the Grand Lodge), and to whom they ought to be referred, unless a Lord's work be hindered the meanwhile, in which case, a particular reference may be made; but ,yon must never go to law about what concerneth Masonry, without an absolute necessity apparent to the Lode.

 

DIGEST CF MASONIC LAWS.

 

269 " 2. Behavior after the Lodge is over, and the brethren not gone. " You may enjoy yourselves with innocent mirth, treating one another ‑(░cording to ability ; but avoiding all excess, or forcing any brotl;er to cat or drink beyond his inclination, or hindering him from going when his occasions call him, or doing or saying anything orl'ensive, or that tnay forbid an easy and free conversation, for that Nvould blast our harmony and defeat our laudable purposes. Therefore, no private piques or quarrels must be bronglit within the door of the Lodge, far less any quarrels about religion, or nations, or State policy.

 

We being only, ai Masons, of the Catholic religion above mentioned ; we are also of all nations, tongues, kindreds, and languages, and are resolved against all politics, as what never yet conduced to the welfare of the Lodge, nor ever will.

 

This charge has always been strictly enjoined and observed ; but, especially, ever sinco the reforiuation in Britain, or the dissent and secession of these nations from the comnnmion of Rome.

 

" 3. Behavior when brethren meet without strangers, but not in a Lodge formed.

 

"You are to salute one another in a courteous manner, as you will be instructed‑ca'ling each other brother ; freely giving mutual instruction, as sllall be thought expedient, without being overseen or overheard, and without encroaching upou each other or dero‑atlng from that respect which is duo to any brother, were 11e not a Mason, for, though all Alasons are as brethren upon the same level, yet Masonry takes no honor from a man that lie had before ; nay, rather it adds to his honor, especially if lie has deserved well of the Brotherhood, who rnest give honor to whom it is due, and avoid ill manners.

 

`' 4. Behavior in presnice of strangers NOT ,Masons.

 

You shall be cautions in your words and carriage, Vaunt the most penetrating stranger shall not be able to discover or find out what is not proper to be intimated ; and sometimes you shall divert a discourse, and manage it prudently, for the E‑mor of the worshipful Fraternity.

 

" 5. Behavior at home, and in yoner neighborhood.

 

" You are to get as becomes a moral and wise man ; p~irticnlarly, not to let your family, friends, and neighbors, klkow the 210

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

concerns of the Lodge, etc., but wisely to consult your own honor, and that of the ancient Brotherhood, for reasons not to be mentioned here. You must also consult your health, by not continuing together too late, or too long h‑oni home; after Lod,òc hours are past, and by avoiding of gluttony or tirunl:enness, that your families be not neglected or injured, nor you disabled from worki╗g.

 

" 6. Behavior towards a strange brother.

 

"You are cautiously to examine hint. in such 1 inetliod as pru'dence shall direct you, that you may not be iuiposed upon by an ignorant, false pretender, whom you are to reject with contempt and derision, and beware of giving pint any hints of knowledge ; but if you discover him to be a, trite and genuine bro.,her, you are to respect him accordingly ; and if lie is in want you must relieve liiin, if you can, or else direct hint how lie may be relieved; you must employ him sonic days, or else recommend him to be employed. But you are not charged to do beyond your ability‑only to prefer a poor brother, that is a good man and true, before any other poor people in the same circumstances.

 

" Finally, all these charges you are to observe, and also those that sliall be communicated to you in another way‑cultivating Brotherly Love, the foundation and cape‑stone‑the cement and glory of this ancient Fraternity, avoiding all wranglinw and quarreling‑all slander and backbiting‑nor perinittinl; others to slander any honest brother, but defending his character. and doing him all good offices, as far as is consistent Nvith your honor and safety, and no farther ; and if any of them do yon injury, you must apply to your own, or his, Lodge, and from thence you may appeal to the Grand Lodge, at the quarterly communication, and froin thence to the atinual Grand Lodge, as has been the ancient laudable conduct of our forefttliers in every nation‑never taking a legal course, but when the ease can not be otherwise decided, and. patiently listening to the honest and friendly advice of Master and Fellows, when they would prevent your going; to law with strangers, or woidd ex. eite you to put a speedy period to all law‑suits, that so you may wind the affairs of Masonry with the more alacrity and success, DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

But with respect to brothers or Fellows. at law, the Master and Brethren should kindly otter their tuediation, which ought to be thankfully submitted to by the contending Brethren, and ii' that submis iou is impracticable, they must, however, carry on their process, or law‑suit, i% ithout wrath and rancor ( not in the common way), saying or doing nothing which may hinder Brotherly Love and good offices to be renewed and continued, that all may see the benign influence of Masonry, as all true Masons have done, front the beginning of the world, and will do to the end of time. AMEN. SO MOTE 1T BE." THE OLD AND NEW REGUIATIONS.

 

The General Regulations of the Free and Accepted Masons, Cam. piled by Ja?nes Anderson. Approved, and ordered to be publish ed, by the Grand Lodge of Eng'and, 25th of March, 1722. Together with Amc7ulments, as approved by said Grand Lodge, June 271h, 1754.

 

"ART. I.‑‑The Grand Lodge consists of, and is formed by the Masters and Wardens of all the particular Lodges upon record, with the Grand Master at their head, the Deputy on his left hand, and the Grand Wardens in their proper places. (Old Regulations.) "All who have been, or shall be Grand Masters, shall be members of, and vote in all Grand Lodges. (New Regular tions, November 21st, 1724).

 

" X111 who have been, or shall be Deputy Grand Masters, shall be members of, and vote in all Grand Lodges. (New Rege lations, February 286, 17 25).

 

" All who have been, or shall be Grand Wardens, shall be members of, and vote in all Grand Lodges. (New Regulations, May 10th, 1727).

 

░` The Grand Treasurer, for the time being, shall be a member of the Grand Lodge.

 

(See Grand Treasurer, Art. 2.) In like manner, the Grand Secretary shall be a member of the Grand Lodge, by virtue of his office, and shall vote in every. thing except in choosing Grand Officers.

 

(Old Regulatiom) 271 27 2

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

"ART. II.‑A brother Master Mason should be appointed ths Tyler, to look after the door ; but he must be no member of this Grand Lodge.

 

" ART. III.‑No brother shall be admitted into the Grand Lodge. but those that are the known members thereof', viz the four present, and all former Grand Officers, the Treasurer and Secretary ; the Masters and Wardens of all regular Lodges; the Masters and Wardens, and nine more of the Steward's Lodge; except a brother who is a petitioner, or a witness in some case, or one called in by a motion.

 

(New Regulations.

 

See Steward's, Arts. (i‑9, and Provincial Grand Masters.) " ART. IV.‑These must have three quarterly communications before the Grand Feast, in some convenient place, as the Grand Master shall appoint ; where nonc.arc to be present but its own proper members, without leave asked and given : and while such a stranger (though a brother) stays, lie is not allowed to vote, or even speak to any question, without leave of the Grand Lodge ; or unless lie is desired to give his opinion. (Old Re.‑ulations.) `' ART. V.‑If at any Grand Lodge, stated or occasional, quarterly or annual, the Grand Master and Deputy should both be absent ; then the present Master of a Lodge that has been longest a Freemason, shall take the Chair. and preside as Grand Master pro tempore, and shall be vested with all his honor and power, for the time being: provided there is no brother present that has been Grand Master, or Deputy Grand Master, formerly ; for the last former Grand Master, or Deputy, in company, takes place, of right, in the absence of the present Grand Master, or Deputy.

 

(Old Regulations.) " In the first edition, the right of the Grand Wardens was omitted in this Regulation ; and it has been since found, that the old Lodges never put into the Chair the Master of a particular Lodge, but when there was no Grand Warden in company, present or former ; and that, in such a case, the Grand Officer always took place of any Master of a Lodge that had not been a Grand Officer.

 

Therefore, in case of the absence DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

273 of all Grand Masters and Depuiries,, the present Senior Grand Warden fills the Chair ; and, in his absence, the present Junior Grand Warden ; and, in his absence, the oldest former Grand Warden in company ; and if no former Grand Officer be found, then the oldest Freemason who is now the Master of a Lodge. (See Grand Warden, Art. 1.) " But to avoid disputes the Grand Master usually gives a particular commission, under his hand_ and, seal of office, countersigned by the Secretary, to the Senior Grand Warden, or, in his absence, to the Junior, to act as Deputy Grand Master,, when the Deputy is not in town.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 4.) "'Old Grand Officers are now, some of them, officers of partieur lar Lodges; but are not thereby deprived of their privilege 7n the Grand Lodge, to sit and vote there as old Grand Officers; only lie diputes one of his particular Lodge to act, pro tempore, as the officer of that Lodge, at the quarterly communication, (gee Art. 1. See also Grand Master, Art. 6, and Deputy Grand Master., Art. 2.) "ART. VI..‑On March 17, 1731, the Grand Lodge, to curia' some irregularities, ordered that none but the Grand Master; his Deputy and Wardens (who are the only Grand Officersk shall wear their jewels in gold, pendant about their necks, and white leather aprons with blue silk ; which sort of aprons may, he also worn by former Grand Officers. (See Steward's Arts. 3,. 7,,8,9.) "ART. VIL‑On February 24, 1735, upon a motion made by! the former Grand Officers, it was resolved, that the Grand Of& cers, present and former, each of them, who, shall attend the Grand' Lodge, in communication (except‑ on the Feast Day), phall.pay half a crown towards the charge of such communication, when he attends.

 

RT. V111 ‑On June 26, 1728.

 

Masters and Wardens of Lodres shall never attend the Grand Lodge without them jewels and clothing.

 

"'On November 26. 1728, one‑of the three officers of a Lodge was admitted into the Grand Lodge without his jewel, becansr %W jewels were in the custody of the officer absent.

 

28 274

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS, " If any officer can not attend, he may send a brother of that Lodge (but not a mere Entered Apprentice), with his jewel, to supply his room, and support the honor of his Lodge. (New Regulations, Art. 12.) " ART. IX.‑At the Grand Lodge, in quarterly communication, all matters that concern the Fraternity in general, or particular Lodges, or single brothers, are sedately and maturely to be discoursed of.

 

(Old Regulations.) " On December 13, 1733.

 

What business can not be transacted at one Lodge, may be referred to the Committee of Charity, and by them reported to the nest Grand Lodge.

 

(New Reg. ulations, Art. 13.) "ART. X.‑Apprentices must be admitted Fellow Crafts and Masters only here, unless by a dispensation from the Grand Master.

 

(Old Regulations.) " This being attended with many inconveniences, it was ordained, on November 22, 1725:‑The Master of a Lodge, with his Wardens, and a competent number of the Lodge, assembled in due form, can make Masters and Fellows at discretion. (New Regulations, Art. 13.) "ART. XI.‑All differences that can not be made up, or acaommodated privately, or by a particular Lodge, are to be seriously considered and decided, in the Grand Lodge; and if may brother thinks himself aggrieved by the decision, he may appeal to the Annual Grand Lodge next ensuing, and leave his *ppeal in writing with the Grand Master, the Deputy, or Grand 'W,ardew.

 

(See Grand Feast, Art. 5.) `` Hither, also, all the officers of particular Lodges shall bring ta 1ist.a scab members as have been made, or even admitted by &em, since .the last Grand Lodge.

 

(Old Regulations.) ‑1░ A,RT..'XJJ.‑They shall also appoint a Treasurer, a brother Qr., ood,,

 

ld ,y substance, who shall be a member of the Grand Lodge, by. vir.We of his office, and shall be always present, and Ire a power,to move to the Grand Lodge anything that con. mans his,ofi e.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 13.) '" Am. XTLL‑'!"he Grand Master, or Deputy, have authority, DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

X76 dways, to command the Treasurer and Secretary to attend him, with their clerks, and books, in order to see how matters go on; and to know what is expedient to be done, upon any emergency. (Old Regulations.

 

See Grand Treasurer, Art. 3.) "ART. %IV.‑Every Annual Grand Lodge has an inherent power and authority to make new Regulations, to alter these for the real benefit of this ancient Fraternity ; provided, always, that the old Landmarks be carefully preserved, and that such new Regulations and alterations be proposed and agreed to, at the third quarterly communication preceding the Annual Grand Feast; and that they be offered to the perusal of all the brethren, before dinner, in writing, even of the youngest Entered Prentice ; the approbation and consent of the majority of all the brethren present, being absolutely necessary to make the same binding and obligatory; which must, therefore, after dinner, and after the new Grand Master is installed, be solemnly desired : as it was desired and obtained for the old Regulations, when proposed by the Grand Lodge, to about 150 brethren, at Stationer's Hall, on St. John the Baptist's Day, 1721. (Old Regulations, Art. 39.) " On June 24, 1723, at the Feast, the Grand Lodge, before dinner, made this resolution: That it is not in the power of any man, or body of men, to make any alteration or innovation in the body of Masonry, without the consent, first obtained, of the Grand Lodge. And, on November 25, 1723, the Grand Lodge, in ample form, resolved : That any Grand Lodge, duly met, has a power to amend or explain any of the printed Regulations in the Book of Constitutions, while they break not in upon the ancient Rules of the Fraternity.

 

"But that no alterations should be made in this printed Book of Constitutions, without leave of the Grand Lodge. (New Reg6 ulations, Art. 39.) Accordingly, all the alterations, or new Regulations, in this edition, are only for amending or explaining the old Regulations for the good of Masonry, without breaking in upon the ancient Rules of the Fraternity, still preserving the old Landmarks ; and were made at several times, as occasion offered, by 276

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

the Grand Lodge ; who have an inherent power of amending what may be thought inconvenient, and ample authority of makò ins new Regulations, for the good of Masonry, without the con. sent of all the brethren, at the Grand Annual Feast, which has not been disputed since the said 24th of June, 1721. For the members of the Grand Lodge are truly the .representatives of all the Fraternity, according to old Regulation X.

 

" No motion for a now Regulation, or for the alteration of an old one, shall be made, till it is first handed up in writing to the Chair : and after it has been perused by the Grand Master, at least about ten minutes, the thing may be moved publicly; and it shall be audibly read by the Secretary: and if he be seconded and thirded, it must be immediately committed to the consideration of the whole Assembly, that their sense may be fully heard about it; after which, the Grand Master shall put the question pro and con.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 39).

 

"ART. XV.‑All matters in the Grand Lodge are to be determined by a majority of votes ; each member having one vote, and the Grand Master two votes; unless the Lodge leave any particular thing to the determination of the Grand Master, for the sake of expedition.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 12.) " The opinions or the votes of members are always to be sig, nified by each holding up one of his hands: which uplifted hands the Grand Wardens are to count ; unless the numbers of hands be so unequal, as to render counting useless.

 

Nor should any other kind of division ever be admitted among Masons.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 39.) " ART. XVI.‑At the third stroke of the Grand Master's hammer (always to be repeated by the Senior Grand Warden), there shall be a general silence, whenever the Grand Master or Deputy shall think fit to rise from the chair and call to order.

 

" In the Grand Lodge, every member shall keep his seat, and not move about from place to place, during the communication; except the Grand Wardens, as having more immediately the care of the Lodge.

 

" According to the Order of the Grand Lodge, on April 21, 1730 (as in the Lodge Book), no brother is to. speak but once DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

to the same affair, unless to explain himself, or when called by. the Chair to speak.

 

" Every one that speaks shall rise

 

and

 

keep

 

standing, addressing himself to the Chair : nor shall any presume to interrupt him, under the foresaid penalty ; unless the Grand Master, finding him wandering from the point in hand, shall see fit to reduce him to order ; for then the said speaker shall, sit down : but, after he has been set right, he may again proceed, if he pleases.

 

" If, in the Grand Lodge, any member is twice called to order, at one assembly, for transgressing these Rules, and ie guilty of a third offence of the same nature. the chair shall peremptorily command him to quit the Lodge room for that night.

 

" Whoever shall be so rude as to hiss at a brother, or at what another says, or has said, he shall be, forthwith solemnly excluded the communication, and declared incapable of ever being a member of any Grand Lodge for the future, till another time he publicly owns his fault, and his grace be granted. (New Reg‑, ulations, Art. 40.) " ART. XVIL‑There shall be a book kept by the Grind Mater, or: Deputy, of rather, by some brother appointed"Secretary, of the Grand Lodge, wherein shall be recorded all the Lodges,,: with the usual times and places of their forming, and the names of all the members of each Lodge ; also all the affairs of the Grand Lodge, that are proper to be written. (Old Regulations,, Art. 13.) " ART. XVIII.‑Carnarvan, Grand Master, December 4,_ 1755. It was unanimously agreed, That no brother, for the future, shall smoke tobacco in the Grand Lodge, at the quarterly communication, or Committee of Charity, till tho Lodge shall be closed.

 

OF THE GRAND MASTER.

 

" ART. I.‑The present Grand Master shall nominate his sues lessor for the year ensuing ; who, if unanimously approved by, the Grand Lodge, and there present, sball be proclaimed, salu~ *d, and congratulated the new Grand Master, and immediately 278

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

installed by the last Grand Master, according to usage.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 33.

 

See Grand Feast, Arts. 7, 10.) " But if that nomination is not unanimously approved, the new Grand Master shall be chosen immediately by ballot ; every Master and Warden writing his man's name, and the last Grand Master writing his man's name too ; and the man, whose name the last Grand Master shall first take out, casually, or by chance, ,shall be Grand Master of Masons, for the year ensuing; and, if present, he shall be proclaimed, saluted, and congratulated, as above hinted, and forthwith installed by the last Grand Master, according to usage.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 34.) "` ART. II.‑The last Grand Master thus continued, or the new Grand Master thus installed, shall next nominate and appoint his Deputy Grand Master, either the last or a new one, who shall be also proclaimed, saluted, and congratulated in due form.

 

(See Grand Feast, Art. 10.) The new Grand Master shall also nominate his new Grand Wardens ; and, if unanimously approved by the Grand Lodge,. they shall be forthwith proclaimed, saluted, and congratulated in due form.

 

' " But if not, they shall be chosen by ballot, in the . same way, as the Grand Master was chosen, and as Wardens of private, Lodges are chosen, when the members do not approve of their Master's nomination.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 35.) " By the 36th new Regulation, a Deputy is said to have been always needful, when the Grand Master was nobly born ; and that, in our time, the Grand Master‑elect has not publicly signified, beforehand, the names of his intended Deputy and Wardens, nor till he is first installed in Solomon's Chair.

 

z " For then first he calls them forth by name, and appoints them to officiate instantly, as soon as they are installed.

 

" But if the brother whom the present Grand Master shall nominate for his successor, or, whom the Grand Lodge shall choose by ballot, as above, is, by sickness, or other necessary occasion, absent, he can not be proclaimed Grand Master, unless the old Grand Master, or some of the Masters and Wardens of Lodges, can vouch, upon the honor of a brother, that the said DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

273 person, so nominated or chosen, will readily accept of the office. In which case, the old Grand Master shall act as proxy, and in his name shall nominate the Deputy and Wardens ; and in his name shall receive the usual honors, homage, and congratulations.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 36.) "The proxy must be either the last or a former Grand Master; as the Duke of Richmond was for Lord Paisley, page . 200; or else a very reputable brother; as Lord Southwell was for the Earl of Strathmore, page 215.

 

But the new Deputy and Grand Wardens are not allowed . proxies, when appointed.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 36.) 41 ART. III.‑Then the Grand Master shall allow any brother,. a Fellow Craft or Entered Apprentice, to speak, directing his discourse to his Worship in the Chair; or to make any motion for the good of the Fraternity, which shall be either immediately considered, or else referred to the consideration of the Grand . Lodge, at their next communication, stated or occasional.

 

" ART. IV.‑If the Grand Master die during his Mastership, or by sickness, or by being beyond sea, or any other way, should be rendered incapable of discharging his office, the Deputy, or, in his absence, the Senior Grand Warden, or, in his absence, the Junior Grand Warden, or, in his absence, any three present'. Masters of Lodges, shall assemble the Grand Lodge, immediately, in order to advise together upon that emergency, and to send two of their number to invite the last Grand Master to resume his office, which now, of course, reverts to him: and if he refuse to act, then the next last, and so backward. But if no former Grand Master be found, the present Deputy shall act as principal till a new Grand Master is chosen; or if there be no Deputy, then the oldest Mason, the present Master of a Lodge. (Old Regu lations, Art. 21.) " Upon such a vacancy, if no former Grand Master, nor former Deputy be found, the present Senior Grand Warden fills the Chair, or, in his absence, the Junior, till a new Grand Master is chosen: and if no present nor former Grand Wardens be found, then the oldest Freemason, who is now Master of a, Lodge.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 21.) 2"

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

"ART. V.‑No Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, Grand Warden, Treasurer, Secretary, or whoever acts for them, or in their stead, pro tempore, can, at the same time, act as the Master or Warden of a particular Lodge; but, as soon as any of them has discharged his public office, he returns to that post or station in his particular Lodge, from which he was called to officiate. (Old Regulations, Art. 17.) "ART. VI.‑The Grand Master, with his Deputy, Grand Wardens, and Secretary, shall, at least once, go round and visit all the Lodges about town, during his Mastership. (Old Regulations, Art. 20.) " Or else he shall send his Grand Officers to visit the Lodges. This old and laudable practice often readers a Deputy necessary and when he visits them, the Senior Grand Warden acts as Deputy, the Junior as the Senior, as above : or, if both or any of them be absent, the Deputy, or he that presides for him, may appoint whom he pleases in their stead, pro tempore.

 

" For, when the Grand Masters are absent, the Senior or the Junior Warden may preside as Deputy, in visiting the Lodges, or in the constitution of a new Lodge ; neither of which card be done without, at least, one of the present Grand Officers. (New Regulations, Art. 20.) " The Grand Master, or Deputy, has full authority and right, not only to be present, but also to preside in every Lodge, with the Master of the Lodge on his left hand; and to order his Grand Wardens to attend him, who are not to act as Wardens of particular Lodges, but, in his presence, and at his command fur the Grand Master, while in a particular Lodge, may com. stand the Wardens of that Lodge, or any other Master Masons, to act there as his Wardens pro tempore. (Old Regulations, Art. 1.) "That is, only when the Grand Wardens are absent : for the Grand Master can not deprive them of their office, without $hewing cause, fairly appearing to the Grand Lodge. So that, if they are present, in a particular Lodge, with the Grand Master, they must act as Wardens there.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 1.) " ART. VIL‑The Grand Master should not receive any private DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

281 Intimations of business, concerning Masons and Masonry, but from his Deputy first; except in such cases as his Worship can easily judge of: and if the application to the Grand Master be irregular, his Worship can order the Grand Wardens, or any other so applying, to wait upon the Deputy, who is immediately to prepare the business, and to lay it orderly before his Worship.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 16.) OF THE DEPUTY GRAND YASM " ART. I.‑He that is chosen Deputy at the Annual Feast, and also the Grand Wardens, can not be discharged, unless the cause fairly appear to the Grand Lodge: for the Grand Master, if he is uneasy, may call a Grand Lodge on purpose to lay the cause before them, for their advice and concurrence.

 

And, if the members of the Grand Lodge can not reconcile the Grand Master with his Deputy or Wardens, they are to allow the Grand Master to discharge his Deputy or Wardens, and to choose another Deputy immediately; and the same Grand Lodge, in that case, shall forthwith choose other Grand Wardens, that so harmony and peace may be preserved. (Old Regulations, Art. 18.) " Should this case ever happen, the Grand Master appoints his Grand Officers, as at first.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 18.) " AnT. II.‑If the Deputy be sick, or necessarily absent, the Grand Master can choose any brother he pleases, to act as his Deputy pro tempore.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 18.) " The Senior Grand Warden now ever supplies the Deputy's place; the Junior acts as the Senior, the oldest former Grand Warden as the Junior, also the oldest Mason as above. (New Regulations, Art. 18.) OF THE GRAND RARDENB " AnT. I.‑In the Grand Lodge, none can act as Wardens, but the present Grand Wardens, if in company; and, if absent, the Grand Master shall order private Wardens to act as Grand Wardens pro tempore; whose places are to be supplied by two Fellow Crafts. or Master Masons of the same Lodge, called forth to act, or sent thither by the Master thereof ; or, if by him emitted, the Grand Master, or he that presides, shall call them 282

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

forth to act; that so the Grand Lodge may be always complete. (Old Regulations, Art. 15.) " Soon after the first edition of the Book of Constitutions, the Grand Lodge, finding it was always the ancient usage, that the oldest former Grand Wardens supplied the places of those of the year, when absent; the Grand Master, ever since, has ordered them to take place immediately, and act as Grand Wardens pro tempore; which they have always done in the absence of the Grand Wardens for the year, except when they have waived their privilege for that time, to honor some brother, whom they thought more fit for the present service.

 

" But if no former Grand Wardens are in company, the Grand Master, or he that presides, calls forth whom he pleases, to art as Grand Wardens pro tempore.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 15.) " ART. II.‑The Grand Wardens, or any others, are first to advise with the Deputy about the affairs of the Lodges, or of private single brothers ; and are not to apply to the Grand Master without the knowledge of the Deputy, unless he refuse his concurrence.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 16.) This was intended for the ease of the Grand Master, and for the honor of the Deputy.

 

"In which case, or in case of any difference of sentiment between the Deputy and Grand Wardens, or other brothers, both parties are to go to the Grand Master, by consent; who, by virtue of his great authority and power, can easily decide the controversy, and make up the difference. (New Regulations, Art. 16.) "ART. III.‑The Grand Wardens shall have the care of pre. paring tickets, sealed with the Grand Master's seal of office, of disposing the tickets, of buying the materials of the Feast, of finding out a proper and convenient place to feast in, and of Avery other thing that concerns the entertainment. (Old Regulations, Art. 23.) "Assisted by a certain number of Stewards, at every feast, or by some general undertaker of the whole. (New Regulations, Art. 23.) 11 The Grand Wardens and Stewards shall, in due time, wait f DIGEST OF 31ASONIC LAWS.

 

283 dpon the Grand Master, or Deputy, for directions and orders about the premises : but if both their Worships are sick, or necessarily absent, they may call together the Masters and Wardens of Lodges, on purpose for their advice and orders or else they may take the whole affair upon themselves, and do the best they can.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 24.) " This having been found too fatiguing and expensive to the Grand' Officers, the Grand Lodge has left the care and conduct of the Grand Feast to the Stewards, who now, by the request of the Grand Lodge, take the whole affair upon themselves, and do the best they can.

 

"Nor are their accounts now audited by the Grand Lodge, because they are generally out of pocket. (New Regulations, Art. 24.) " Whatever might be the case, when it was ordained that the Grand Wardens and Stewards are to account for all the money they receive or expend, after dinner, to the Grand Lodge, or when the Lodge shall think fit to audit their accounts.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 24.) " The Grand Wardens or the Stewards shall, beforehand, appoint such a number of brethren to serve at table as they. think fit; and they may advise with the officers of Lodges about the most proper persons, if they please, or may retain such by their recommendation: for none are to serve that day, but Free and Accepted Masons, that the communication may be free and harmonious.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 27.) Now only the Stewards appoint the attenders at table, who are the more necessary, if the cooks and butlers are not brothers. (New Regulations, Art. 27.) OF THE GRAND TREASURER.

 

"ART. I.‑The Grand Treasurer is chosen by the Grand Lodge.

 

"ART. II.‑To him shall be committed all money raised for the General Charity, or for any other use of the Grand Lodge; Which he shall write down in a book, with the respective ends and uses for which the several sums are intended; and shall expend or disburse the same, by such a certain order, signed as the Grand Lodge shall hereafter agree to in a new Regulation.' 284

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

"ART. III.‑But by virtue of his office as Treasurer, withusk any other qualification, he shall not vote in choosing a new Grand Master and Wardens, though in every other transaction. (New Regulations.) " ART. IV.‑The Treasurer and Secretary may have each a Clerk or Assistant, if they think fit, who must be a brother and a Master Mason; but must never be a member of the Grand Lodge, nor speak without being allowed or commanded. (New Regulations.) OF THE GRAND SECRETARY.

 

" The Grand Secretary is nominated yearly by the Grand Master, and is a member of the Grand Lodge, by his office.

 

OF PROVINCIAL GRAND MASTERS.

 

" ART. I.‑The office of Provincial Grand Master was found particularly necessary in the year 1726 ; when the extraordinary increase of the Craftsmen, and their traveling into distant parts, and convening themselves in Lodges, required an immediate head, to whom they might apply in all. cases, where it was not possible to wait the decision or opinion of the Grand Lodge.

 

" ART. II.‑The appointment of this Grand Officer is a prerogative of the Grand Master; who grants his deputation to such brother of eminence and ability, in the Craft, as he shall think proper ; not for life, but during his good pleasure.

 

"ART. III.‑The Provincial thus deputed, is invested with the power and honor of a Deputy Grand Master; and, during the continuance of his Provincialship, is intitled to wear the clothing, to take rank as the Grand Officers, in all public assemblies, ‑immediately after the past Deputy Grand Masters; and to constitute Lodges within his own Province.

 

" ART. IV.‑‑He is enjoined to correspond with the Grand Lodge, and to transmit a circumstantial account of his proceedings, at least once in every year. At which times, the Provincial is required to send a list of those Lodges he has constituted, their contributions for the General Fund of Charity, and the DIGEST OF MASONIC LAw$‑266 +usual demand, as specified in his deputation, for every Lodge he has constituted by the Grand Master's authority.

 

OF THE COMMITTEE OF CHARITY.

 

" By the original order and constitution of nature, men are so made and framed, that they, of necessity, want one another'a assistance, for their mutual support and preservation in the world. Being fitted, by an implanted disposition, to live in societies, and establish themselves into distinct bodies, for the effectual promulging and propagating a communication of arts, tabor, and industry, of which Charity and mutual friendship are the common bond. It is in this respect only, that all the human face stand upon a level, having all the same wants and desires, and are all in the same need of each other's assistance ; as by this cement every one is bound to look upon himself as a member of this universal community, and especially the rich and great; for the truly noble disposition never shines so bright as when engaged in the noble purposes of social Love, Charity and Benevolence.

 

Influenced by these great and good principles, of ' the most prudent and effectual method of collecting and disposing of what money should be lodged with them, in charity, toward the relief only of a true brother, fallen into poverty and decay, but of none else " When it was resolved, That each particular Lodge might dispose of their own charity for poor brothers, according to their own By‑Laws, until it should, by all the Lodges, in a new Regulation, carry in the charity collected by them, to the Grand Lodge, at the quarterly or annual communication, in order to make a common stock for the more handsome relief of poor. brethren.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 13.) " ART. II.‑In consequence of which Regulation, at the Grand Lodge, on November 21, 1724, Charles Lennox, Duke of Richmond, Lennox, and Aubigny, being Grand Master; Brother Francis Scott, Earl of Dalkeith (afterward Duke of Baccleueh). the last Grand Master, proposed that, in order to promote the charitable disposition of Freemasons, and to render it more extensively beneficial to the Society, each Lodge may make a certain collection, according to ability, to be put into a join$ 286

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

stock, lodged in the hands of a Treasurer, at every quarterly communication, for the relief of distressed brethren, that shall be recommended by the contributing Lodges to the Grand Officers, from time to time.

 

"The motion being readily agreed to, Richmond, Grand Master, desired all present to come prepared to give their opinion of it, at the next Grand Lodge, which was held in ample form, on March 17, 1725, when " ART. III.‑At the Lodge's desire, Grand Master Richmond named a Committee for considering of the best methods to regulate the said Masons' General Charity. They met and chose for Chairman, William Cowper, Esq., Clerk of the Parliament, who drew up the report. But the affair requiring great deliberation, the report was not made till the Grand Lodge met in ample form, on November 27, 1725, when Richmond, Grand Master, ordered the report to be read.

 

It was well approved, and recorded in the book of the Grand Lodge; for which that Committee received public thanks, in this form : The Committee, to whom it was referred to consider of proper methods to regulate the General Charity, after several meetings for that purpose, carne to the following resolutions, as conducive to the end proposed by the reference " 1. That it is the opinion of the Committee, that the contributions from the several Lodges be paid quarterly and voluntarily. " 2. That no brother be recommended by any Lodge as 'an object of charity, but who was a member of some regular Lodge, which shall contribute to the same Charity, on or before the 21st day of November, 1724, when the General Charity was first proposed in the Grand Lodge.

 

" 3. That no brother, who has been admitted a member of any such Lodge since that time, or shall hereafter be so admitted, be recommended till three years after such admission ; and, as to the methods or rules to be observed by the Grand Lodge, in relieving such brethren, who shall be qualified as aforesaid, whom they shall think fit, upon application to themselves, to relieve, viz., those concerning the circumstances of the persons to be relieved, the sums to be paid, the times or terms of paycent, the continuance, suspending, or taking off such allowance, E DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

287 with the reasons thereof, whether arising from the circumstances of the assisted brother being bettered, or from his behavior in any respect, rendering him unfit to have it continued ; and, in general, all other circumstances attending the regular and ordinary distribution of the Charity, where the Grand Lodge thinks fit to put any one upon it, the Committee are of opinion they are most decently and securely left to the wisdom, care, and discretion of the Grand Lodge, to do therein, from time to time, as cases shall happen, in a manner most agreeable to the exigencies of them; which, as the Committee can not foresee with any certainty, so they are unable to lay down any fixed proposals concerning them ; but, as it may fall out, that a brother, who is, in all respects, qualified for relief, and in need of it, may, by the pressure of his circumstances, be forced to apply, perhaps, a good while before a quarterly communication may be had, or the Grand Lodge assembled, for a present relief or subsistance, till he can make his case known to the Grand Lodge, for their further favor. The Committee took that case into their particular consideration ; and, as to that, are humbly of opinion that three pounds, and no more, may be given to any particular distressed brother, who shall be recommended by any Lodge, as an object of this Charity, without the consent of the Grand Lodge.

 

" 5. That the above said casual charity, of three pounds or under, be disposed of as there shall be occasion, by a standing Committee of five, to consist of the Grand Master, Deputy, and Senior Grand Warden, for the time being, and two other members of the Grand Lodge, to be named by the Grand Master, of which Committee three always to be a quorum. And it being absolutely necessary that, for collecting and disbursing the sums which shall be for so charitable a purpose, there should be a receiver or Treasurer, publicly entrusted and known, the Committee were further of opinion, " 6. That there be a Treasurer, to be nominated by the Grand Master, and approved by the Grand Lodge.

 

And " 7. That after the first nomination, alt further Treasurers be nominated upon every election of a Grand Master, and approved 4a. before.

 

288

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

" 8. That all recommendations of any brother, as an object of casual charity, of three pounds or under, be made to the said Treasurer, who is to give notice of the application, forthwith, to the Committee of Five, for their directions in the matter.

 

"The Committee then proceeded to consider a proposal made to them, viz.: That the Treasurer should, from time to time, give some collateral security, for the due performance of his trust. which they found, or judged to be, a matter of some nicety, in many respects, as well in regard that it is probable none will ever be named to that employment of trouble and no profit, but some brother of distinction and sufficiency, and who therefore, rather does than receives a favor in it; as that, for the same reason, such brother would not care to ask any others, especially not of the Craft, to be collateral security for him; nor would any other, in all likelihood, in a voluntary undertaking of this nature, which induced the Committee to think that the requiring any such kind of security, would render it, at least, very difficult, if not impracticable, to get any Treasurer at all, more especially such a one, in respect of rank and estimation, as the Committee believes every brother would be glad always to see in that trust; and whose acting in it would really prove highly for the credit and service of the design itself : for which, and many other reasons of the same tendency, the Committee concluded against requiring of the Treasurer any such collateral security,or thathe should find any other persons to be bound with, or for him ; yet how unnecessary they think it may, and hope it always will be, to require even any security whatever from one whose rank, fortune, probity, and honor, might be alone sufficient in the case; and acting especially in a matter of public charity to Masons, himself a Mason, and under the high and solemn tie and obligation of that great character. The Committee, notwithstanding, conceived, that no brother, who may be nominated for that purpose, would probably decline giving the Grand Lodge the satisfaction, if they require it, of his own single personal security ; and, therefore, submit it as their bum ble opinion, " That the Treasurer do give hiapersonal security, by his ows bond, to the Grand Master, Deputy Grand Master, and Senior DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

289 Grand Warden, and the two brothers of the aforesaid Committee of Five, not officers, in the penalty and with condition to be approved by the Grand Lodge, hereafter, if they think fit to require it.

 

` And as concerning the Treasurer's accounts, the Committee were further of opinion, "'That the Treasurer do produce his accounts of his receipts and disbursements (either by order of the Grand Lodge, or Committee of Five), fair, and lay them before the Grand Lodge, at every quarterly communication, with the vouchers for the disbursements ; the items of the accounts to be then publicly read over ; and if any dispute or difficulty shall arise upon any of them, the matter to be referred to such five brethen present, as the person then residing shall nominate, and the Grand Lodge approve, to examine into thegrounds of tile same, against the next quarterly communication, when they are to report their proceedings in the case, with the state of it,, for tho final judgment and direction of the Grand Lodge. And, That the Treasurer's accounts be allowed, from time to time, by the Grand Master's signing them, as allowed in tho Grand Lode, and any seven Masters of Lodges present attest ing such signing in their presence, and two copies of such accounts, signed by the Treasurer, to be forthwith delivered by him to the two brethren of the Committee of Five, not officers, each one to be kept by them respectively ; and the Secretary. to enter the accounts, so signed and allowed, in the Grand Master's book.

 

And.

 

"The Committee, foreseeing that such a person as it may be thought proper to nominate, from time to time, to the office of Treasurer, upon this occasion, might, from many causes. not always be able to attend the personal discharge of it: alld, ludgillm it reasonable, that if he requires or wants the assistance of another, such assistant should have a suitable reward, which, as the Treasurer himself makes no profit, can not be expected he should be at the charge of: therefore they do further submit it as their opinion, " That if the Treasurer, when appointed, shall find it necoeò Fary to employ under him an assistant, or clerk, lie may be at U 29C

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

liberty so to do ; such clerk or assistant to be a brother, Ilnd to have such allowance, from time to time, by way of poundage, as the aforesaid Committee of Five shall think fit, out of the moneys passing through the Treasurer's hands, not exceeding twelve pence in the pound, without the particular allowance and direction of the Grand Lodge ; and this to be charged and allowed in the Treasurer's accounts.

 

" The Committee think it necessary, that every Treasurer, upon his appointment, be desired to give the earliest general notice he can, where he may be applied to, from time to time, for the purpose of this Charity, as need shall require. All which they submit to your judgment and direction.

 

" ALEXANDER HARDINE.

 

" DALBEITH.

 

" PAISLEY.

 

" DAN. HOUGHTON.

 

" THO. EDWARDS.

 

" G. TAYLOR.

 

" WM. PETTY.

 

" W. RICHARDSON. " J. T. DESAGULIERS.

 

" ART. IV.‑Yet no Treasurer was found, till, at the Grand Lodge, in ample form, on June 24, 1727, Inchiquin, Grand Master, requested Bro. Nathaniel Blakerby, Esq., to accept of that office, which he very kindly undertook.

 

"Then, also, it was resolved, that the four Grand Officers, for the time being, together with Bros. Martin Folkes, Francis Sorell, and George Payne, Esqs., as a Committee of Seven, should, upon due recommendation, dispose of the intended charity ; and fresh copies of the report were sent to the Lodges.

 

" ART. V.‑At last, this good work of Charity was begun, at the Grand Lodge, on November 25, 1729, Kingston being Grand Master, and, in his absence, Deputy Grand Master Blakerby, the Treasurer, in the Chair ; who, after a warm ex. hortation, ordered the Lodges to be called over a second time, when some officers gave in the benevolence of their respective Lodges, for which they were thanked ; and their Charity being forthwith recorded, was put into the hands of the Treasurer, as an hopeful beginning: . and other Lodges following the good example.

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

291 " ART. VI ‑‑At the Grand Lodge, in due form, on December 27, 1129, Deputy Grand Master Blakerby, the Treasurer, in the Chair, had the honor to thank many officers of Lodges, for bringing their liberal Charity ; when, by a motion of Bro. Thomas Batson, counselor at law, the Grand Lodge ordained, that every new Lodge, for their Constitution, shall pay two guineas toward this General Charity of Masons.

 

" And ever since, the Lodges, according to their ability, have, by their officers, sent their benevolence to every Grand Lodge, except on the Grand Feast Day; and several distressed brothers have been handsomely relieved.

 

"ART. VIL‑But the Committee of Seven being thought too few for this good work, the Grand Lodge, in due form, on August 28, 1730, Norfolk being Grand Master, and in his absence, Deputy Grand Master Blakerby, the Treasurer, in the Chair, resolved, that the Committee of Charity shall have added to them twelve Masters of contributing Lodges ; that the first twelve in the printed list, shall be succeeded by the next twelve, and so on : and that, for dispatch, any five of them shall be a quorum, provided one of the five is a present Grand Officer. Accordingly, " The Committee of Charity met the Treasurer, Blakerby, the first time, in the Mastership of Norfolk, "On November 13, 1730, when they considered the petitions of some poor brethren, whom they relieved,. not exceeding three pounds to each petitioner : and adjourned, from time to time, for supplying the distressed according to their powers ; or else ecommended them to the greater favor of the Grand Lodge.

 

"ART. VIII.‑This Committee had not all their powers at once,‑‑for, at the Grand Lodge, on December 15, 1730, Norfolk being Grand Master, and, in his absence, the Deputy Blakerby in the Chair, it was ordained that, for dispatch, all complaints and informations about charity, shall be referred, for the future, to the Committee of Charity ; and that they shall appoint a day for hearing the same, shall enter their proceedings in their own book, and shall report their opinion to the Grand Lodge. "From this time, the minutes of the Committee of Charity 292

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

have been read and considered at every Grand Lodge, except on the Grand Feast Day.

 

"ART. IX.‑At the Committee of Charity, March 16,1730‑M, it was agreed, that no petition shall be read, if the petitioner don't attend the Committee in person ; except in the cases of sickness, lameness, or' imprisonment.

 

"ART. X.‑At the Grand Lodge, on May 14, 1731, upon the motion of Lovell, Grand Master, it was resolved, That all former Grand Masters and Deputies shall be members of the Committee of Charity.

 

" That the Committee shall have a power to give five pounds, as casual charity, to a poor brother, but no more, till the Grand Lodge assemble.

 

"ART. XI.‑At the Committee of Charity, on June 18, 1731, it was agreed, that no poor brother, that has been once assisted, shall, a second time, present a petition, without some new allegation, well attested.

 

"ART. XIL‑At the Grand Lodge, on June 8, 1732, Viscount Montagu being Grand Master, and, in his absence, Deputy Grand Master Batson in the Chair, having signified that, notwithstanding the General Charity, some poor brothers had molested noblemen and others (being Masons) with private applications for charity, to the scandal of the Craft; it was resolved, that any brother who makes such private applications for the future, shall be forever debarred from any relief from the Committee of Charity, the Grand Lodge, or any assemblies of Masons.

 

"ART. XIII.‑At the Committee of Charity, on July 5, 1732, it was agreed, that no brother shall be relieved, unless his petition be attested by three brothers of the Lodge to which he does, or did once belong.

 

"ART. XIV.‑At the Grand Lodge, on November 21, 1732, Vis. count Montagu being Grand Master, and, in his absence, Deputy Batson in the Chair, it was resolved, that all former and present Grand Officers,, viz., Grand Masters, Deputies, and Wardens, with twenty Masters of contributing Lodges, in a rotation, DIGEST OF MASONIC LAW$.

 

299 according to the prided list; shall be members of the Com mittec of Charity.

 

And, "ART. XV.‑At the Grand Lodge, on December 13, 1733, upon the motion of Strathmore, Grand Master, in the Chair, it was resolved,. that all Masters of regular Lodges, that have 'contributed to the Charity, within twelve months past, shall be members of the Committee, together with all former and present Grand Officers, " ART. XV I.‑That considering the usual business of a quarterly communication, was too much for one time; whatever business can not be dispatched here, shall be referred to the Committee of Charity, and their opinion reported to the next Grand Lodge.

 

" ART. XVIL‑That all questions, debated at the said Com. mittee, shall be decided by a majority of those present.

 

`" ART. XVIII.‑That all petitions for charity, presented to the Grand Lodge, shall be referred to the said Committee, who are to report their opinion to the next Grand Lodge, viz., whether, or not, the case of any distressed brother deserves more relief than is. in the power of the Committee to give? " ART. XIX.‑That the said Committee shall twice give public notice, in some public newspaper, of the time and place of their meetings.

 

" ART. XX.‑At the Grand Lodge, on February 24,1734‑35, Craufurd, Grand Master, in the Chair, it was recommended by the Committee, and now resolved here, That no Master of a Lodge shall be a member of the said Committee, whose Lodge has not contributed to the General Charity, during twelve months past.

 

" ART. XXI.‑That one of the brethren, signing and certi . fying a poor brother's petition, shall attend the Committee to attest it.

 

" ART. XXII.‑At the Grand

 

Lodge,

 

March 31, 1735. Upon the motion of Craufurd, Grand Master, in the Chair, it was resolved, That no extraneous brothers, that is, not regularly made, but clandestinely, or only with. a view to partake of DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

the Charity ; nor any assisting at such irregular makings, shall be ever qualified to partake of the Masons' General Charity.

 

"ART. XXIII.‑That the brothers, attesting a petition for Charity, shall be able to certify that the petitioner has been formerly in reputable, at least, in tolerable circumstances.

 

" ART. XXIV.‑That every petition received, shall be signed or certified by the majority of the Lodge to which the petitioner does, or did belong.

 

"ART. XXV.‑That the name and calling of the petitioner be expressly mentioned.

 

"ART. XXVI.‑At the Grand Lodge, on April 6,1736, Weymouth being Grand Master, and, in his absence, Deputy Grand Master Ward in the Chair; upon motion of the Committee of Charity, it was resolved, That no petition for Charity shall be received, which has not been offered first to the Secretary, and laid in his hands ten days, at least, before the meeting of the Committee of Charity, that he may have time to be informed of its allegations, if they are dubious.

 

"ART. XXVIL‑At the Grand Lodge, on March 20, 1739, Raymond, Grand Master, it was resolved, That a brother's being entitled to, and receiving relief out of the charity of a particular Lodge, in pursuance of the laws thereof, shall be no objection to his being relieved out of the General Charity, in case such Lodge shall contribute to said General Charity, according to the laws of the Society.

 

"ART. XXVIII.‑At the Grand Lodge, on December 3,1741, Morton, Grand Master, it was resolved, That before the brethren proceed to business in any Committee of Charity, all the laws relating to the disposal of the General Charity of thin Society be first read ; and that, for the future, no petition shall be received, unless every brother shall, at the time of his signing the same, be a member of some regular Lodge, and the name of such, his Lodge, be always specified.

 

"ART. XXIX.‑At the Grand Lodge, on June 18,1752, C& rysfoxt, Grand Master, it was ordered. That the sum of threi DIGEST OF M‑tSONIC LAWS.

 

295 guineas be paid to the Grand Secretary, at every communication and Annual Assembly for his own incidental charges, and that of an Assistant Secretary, out of the public fund.

 

" Ordered, That any foreign brother, after due examination, shall be relieved by this Committee, with any sum not exceeding five pounds, any law to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

"ART. XXX.‑At the Grand Lodge, held on November 29, 1754, Carnarvan, Grand Master, it was resolved, and ordered to be entered as a standing regulation of this Society, That. if any Mason shall, without special license of the Grand Master, or his Deputy, for the time being, attend as a Mason, clothed in anf of the ,jewels, or clothing of the Craft, at any funeral or funeral procession, he shall not only be for ever incapable of being an officer of a Lodge, but even of tyling, or attending on a Lodge, or of partaking of the General Charity, if he shall come to want it.

 

" ART. XXXI.‑It was then also ordained, That if any Mason shall attend, tyle, or assist as Tyler, at any meetings, or pretended Lodges of persons calling themselves Masons, not being a regularly constituted Lodge, acknowledging the authority of our Right Worshipful Grand Master, and conforming to the laws of the G rand Lodge, he shall be for ever incapable of being a Tyler, or attendant on a Lodge, or partaking of the General Charity.

 

"ART. XXXIL‑At the Grand Lodge, on July 24, 1755, Carnarvan, Grand Master, it was ordered, That for the future,, every certificate granted to a brother of his being a Mason, shall be sealed with the seal of Masonry, and signed by the Grand Secretary ; for which five shillings shall be paid to the use of the General Fund of Charity.

 

(See Makings, Art. 9.) " Thus the Committee of Charity has been established among the Free and Accepted Masons of England, who have very generously contributed to their General Fund, and do still persevere in the good work.

 

"ART. XXXIII.‑‑The Committee regularly meets, according to the summons of the Grand Master, or his Deputy, and has ro‑' lieved many distressed brothers with small sums, not excewling DIGEST oe MASONIC LAWS'.

 

five pounds to each; but the Grand Lodge has ordered the Treasurer to pay to some petitioners ten, or fifteen. or twenty pouuds,as they thought the case required. So that the disò tressed have found far greater relief from this General Charity, than can be expected from particular Lodges ; and the contributions, being paid by the Lodges in parcels, at various times, have not been burdensome.

 

"ART. XXXIV.‑The Treasurer's accounts have been audited and balanced at every Grand Lodge ; whereby all know the stock in hand, and how every parcel of the Charity has been disposed of; everything being duly recorded in the Grand Lodge Book, and in that of the Committee, of which every Master of a contributing Lodge is a member.

 

OF THE STEWARDS.

 

"The first mention made of Stewards, is in the Old Regulaò tions 23, concerning the Annual Feast, where it is ordained, That in order to relieve the two Grand Wardens in the extra. ordinary trouble of that General Assembly, and that all matters might be expeditiously and safely managed, the Grand Master, or his Deputy, shall have power to nominate and appoint a certain number of Stewards, as his Worship shall think fit, to act in concert with the two Grand Wardens; and that all things, relating to the Feast, should be decided among them by a majority of votes; except the Grand Master, or his Deputy, interpose by a particular direction and appointment. (See Grand Wardens.) "ART. I.‑On April 28, 1724, the Grand Lodge ordained, That, at the Feast, the Stewards shall open no wine till dinner be laid on the tables ; that the members of each Lodge shall sittogether, as much as possible ; that after eight of the clock at night, the Stewards shall not be obliged to furnish any wine, or other liquors ; and that either the money, or tickets, shall be returned to the Stewards.

 

"ART. II.‑On November 26, 1728, the office of Stewards, that had been disused at three preceding Feasts, was revived by the Grand Lodge, and their number to be always twelve; DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

297 who, together with the Grand Wardens, shall prepare the Feast.

 

"ART. III.‑On March 17, 1730‑31, the Stewards for tiho near were allowed to have jewels of silver (though not gilded), pendant to red ribbons, about their necks, to bear white rods, and to line their white leather aprons with red silk.

 

" Former Stewards were also allowed to wear the same sort of aprons, white and red.

 

, "ART. IV.‑On March 2, 1731‑32, the Grand Lodge allowed each of the acting Stewards for the future, at the Feast, the privilege of naming his successor in that office, for the year ensuing.

 

"ART. V.‑On June 24, 1735, upon an address from those that have been Stewards, the Grand Lodge, in consideration of their past service, and future usefulne+s, ordained, "That they should be constituted a Lodge of Masters, to be called the Stewards' Lodge ; to be registered as such in the Grand Lodge Book and printed lists, with the times and place of their meetings.

 

"ART. VI.‑That the Stewards' Lodge shall have the privilege of sending a deputation of twelve to every Grand Lodge, viz., the Master, two Wardens, and nine more; and each of the twelve shall vote there ; and each of them that attends shall pay half a crown, toward the expense of the Grand Lodge.

 

"ART. VIL‑That no brother, who has not been a Steward, shall wear the same sort of aprons and ribbons.

 

"APT. VIII.‑That each of the twelve Deputies from the Stewards' Lodge shall, in the Grand Lodge, wear a peculiar jewel suspended in the red ribbon ; the pattern of which was then approved.

 

"ART. IX.‑That the twelve Stewards of the current year shall always attend the Grand Lodge, in their proper clothing and jewels, paying at the rate of four Lodges toward the expense of the communication ; but they are not to vote, not even to speak, except when desired, or else of what relates to the ensuing Feast only.

 

298

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

OF CONSTITUTIONS.‑THE ANCIENT MANNER OF CONSnTUT'TG A IA)DGF.

 

"A new Lodge, for avoiding many irregularities, should be solemnly constituted by the Grand Master, with his Deputy and Wardens; or, in the Grand Master's absence, the Deputy acts for his Worship, the Senior Grand Warden as Deputy, the Junior Grand Warden as the Senior, and a present Master of a Lodge as the Junior.

 

Or if the Deputy is also absent, the Grand Master may depute either of his Grand Wardens, who can appoint others to be Grand Officers pro tempore.

 

" The Lodge being 'opened, and the candidates, or the new Master and Wardens being yet among the Fellow Crafts, the Grand Master shall ask his Deputy if he has examined them, and find the candidate Master well skilled in the noble science and the royal art, and duly instructed in our Mysteries, etc.

 

" The Deputy, answering in the affirmative, shall, by the Grand Master's order, take the candidate from among his fellows, and present him to the Grand Master, saying, Right Worshipful Grand Master, the brethren here desire to be formed into a Lodge; and I present my worthy brother, A. B., to be their Master, whom I know to be of good morals and great skill, true and trusty, and a lover of the whole Fraternity, wheresoever dispersed over the face of the earth.

 

" Then the Grand Master, placing the candidate on his left hand, having asked and obtained the unanimous consent of the brethren, shall say, I constitute and form these good brethren into a new Lodge, and appoint you, brother A. B., the Master of it, not doubting of your capacity and care to preserve the cement of the Lodge, etc., with some other expressions that are proper and usual on that occasion, but not proper to be written.

 

" Upon this, the Deputy shall rehearse the charges of a Master; and the Grand Master shall ask the candidate, saying, Do you submit to these charges, as Masters have done in all ‑ ages ? And the new Master, signifying his cordial submission thereunto, , " The Grand Master shall, by certain significant ceremonies and ancient usages, install him, and present him with the Book of Cowtitutions, the Lodge Book, and the instruments of his DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

299 office ; not all together, but one after another ; and after each of them, the Grand Master, or his Deputy, shall rehearse the short and pithy charge that is suitable to the thing presented.

 

" Next, the members of this new Lodge, bowing all together to the Grand Master, shall return his Worship their thanks; and shall immediately do homage to their new Master, and signify their promise of subjection and obedience to him by the usual congratulation.

 

"The Deputy and Grand Wardens, and any other brethren present, that are not members of this new Lodge, shall next congratulate the new Master ; and he shall return his becoming acknowledgments to the Grand Master first, and to the rest in their order.

 

" Then the Grand Master orders the new Master to enter immediately upon the exercise of his office, viz., in choosing his Wardens: and, calling forth two Fellow Crafts (Master Masons), presents them to the Grand Master for his approbation, and to the new Lodge for their consent.

 

Upon which, "The Senior or Junior Grand Warden, or some brother for him, shall rehearse the charges of each Warden of a private Lodge; and they, signifying their cordial submission thereunto, " The new Master shall present them singly, with the several instruments of their office, and in due form install them in their proper places. And the brethren of this new Lodge shall signify their obedience to those new Wardens, by the usual congratulation.

 

"Then the Grand Master gives all the brethren joy of their new Master and Wardens, and recommends harmony ; hoping their only contention will be a laudable emulation in cultivating ò

 

the royal art and the social virtues.

 

.

 

"Upon which, all the new Lodge bow together, in returning thanks for the honor of this Constitution.

 

" The Grand Master also orders the Secretary to register this new Lodge in the Grand Lodge Book, and to notify the same to the other particular Lodges ; and after the Master's song, he orders the Grand Warden to close the Lodge.

 

" This is the sum, but not the whole ceremonial, by far, which the Grand Officers can extend or abridge at pleasure, explaining 300

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWa.

 

things that are not fit to be written ; though none but those that have acted as Grand Officers; can accurately go through all the several parts and usages of a new Constitution, iii the just solemnity.

 

" ART. I.‑On December 27, 1729, ordered, That every new Lodge, for the future, shall pay two guineas for their Constita. Lion; to the General Fund of Charity.

 

" ART. II.‑December 27, 1727. The precedency of Lodges, is grounded on the seniority of their Constitution. (New Regulations, Art. 3.) " ART. III.‑November 25, 1723.

 

No new Lodge is owned, nor their officers admitted into the Grand Lodge, unless it be regularly constituted and registered.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 12.) "ART. IV.‑If any set or number of Masons shall take upon themselves to form a Lodge, without the Grand Master's warrant, the regular Lodges are not to countenance them, nor own them as fair brethren, duly formed, nor approve of their acts and deeds; but must treat them as rebels, until they humbles themselves, as the Grand Master shall, in his prudence, direct, and until he approve of them by his warrant, signified to the other Lodges ; as the custom is, when a new Lodge is to be registered in the Grand Lodge Book.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 8.

 

See pages 265‑66.

 

See Makings, Art. 3.

 

Duty of Members, Arts. 5, 6.

 

OF XAffuva& "ART. I. No Lodge shall make more than five new brothers at one and the same time, without an urgent necessity ; nor any man under the age of twenty‑five years (who must be also his own master), unless by a dispensation from the Grand Master. (Old Regulations, Art. 4.) "At a quarterly communication, November. 23, 1753, Caryg. fort, Grand Master, it was unanimously ordered, "ART. II.‑That no Lodge shall ever make a 31ason without due inquiry into his character ; neither shall any Lodge be permitted to make and raise the same brother, at one and the   DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

301  same meeting, without a dispensation from the Grand Master, which, on very particular occasions only, may be requested.

 

"ART. III.‑That no Lodge shall ever make a Mason for a less sum than one guinea ; and that guinea to be applied either to the private fund of the Lodge, or to the public charity, without deducting, from such deposit, any money toward the defraying the expense of the Treasurer, etc., under the forfeiture Of their Constitution. But this not to extend to the making of Waiters, servitors, or menial servants, who may be instituted by the Lodge they are to serve ; provided, such making or institution be done without fee or reward. (See Art. 8, below.) "ART. IV.‑‑Every new brother, at his entry, is decently to clothe the Lodge, that is, all the brethren present ; and t.deposit something for the relief of indigent and decayed brethren, as the candidate shall think fit to bestow, over and above the small allowance that may be stated in the By‑Laws of tha.L particular Lodge : which charity shall be kept by the Cashier.

 

"Also, the candidate shall solemnly promise to submit to the Constitutions, and other good usages, that shall be inti mated to him in time and place convenient.

 

"ART. V.‑On April 25, 1723.

 

Every brother concerned in making Masons clandestinely, shall not be allowed to visit any Lodgc till lie has made due submission, even though the brothers so made may be allowed.

 

" ART. VI.‑On February 19, 1724. None who form a stated Lodge without the Grand Master's leave, shall be admitted into regular Lodges, till they make submission and obtain grace.

 

░`ART. VII.‑‑On November 21, 1724.

 

If any brethren form a Lodge without leave, and shall irregularly make new brothers. they shall not be admitted into any regular Lodge : no, not äa visitors, till they render a good reason, or make due submission.

 

"AP.T. VIII.‑On March 31, 17 35. Seeing that some extraneous brothers have been made lately in a clandestine manner, ò"Only particular Lodges are not limited, but may take their own method for ehtrrty.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 7.)"   301    302

 

DIGEST of MASONIC LAWS.

 

that, is, in no regular Lodge, nor by any authority or dispensation from the Grand Master, and upon small and unworthy considerations, to the dishonor of the Craft, " The Grand Lodge decreed, That no person so made, nor any concerned in making him, sbail be a Grand Officer, nor an officer of a particular Lodge ; nor shall any such partake of the General Charity, if they should come to want it. (New Regulations, Art. 8.) OF THE MASTERS AND WARDENS OF PARTICULAR LODGES.

 

" ART. I.‑On November 25, 1723.

 

It was agreed, that, if a Master of a particular Lodge is deposed or demits, the Senior Warden shall forthwith fill the Master's chair till the next time of choosing ; and ever since, in the Master's absence, he fills the Chair, even though a former Master be present.

 

(Old Regula lations, Art 2.

 

See Grand Lodge, Arts. 5, 6.) " The Master of a particular Lodge has the right and authority,of congregating the members of his Lodge into a Chapter, upon any emergency or occurrence, as well as to appoint the time and place of their usual forming ; and, in case of death or sickness, or necessary absence of the Master, the Senior Warden shall act as Master pro tempore, if no'brother is present who has been Master of that Lodge before; for the absent Master's authority reverts to the last Master present, though he can not act till the Senior Warden has congregated the Lodge. (Old Regulations, Art. 2.) "ART. II.‑On March 17,1730‑31. Masters and Wardens of particular Lodges may line their white leather aprons with white silk, and may hang their jewels to white ribbons about their neck.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 2.) " ART. III.‑The Master of each particular Lodge, or one of the Wardens, or some other brother, by appointment of the plaster, shall keep a book; containing their By‑Laws, the names of their members, and a list of all the Lodges in town, with the usual times and places of their forming ; and also all the transactions of their own Lodge, that are proper to be written. (Old Regulations, Art 3.

 

See Grand Lodge, Arts. 2, 8, 11, 17, DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

303 and Grand Feast, Art. 2.

 

Duty of Members, Art. 3.

 

Removals, Art. 2.) OF THE DUTY OF MEMBERS " ART. I.‑‑No man can be accepted a member of a particular Lodge, without previous notice, one month before, given to the Lodge, in order to make due inquiry into the reputation and capacity of the candidate, unless by a dispensation. (Old Regulations, Art. 5.) "ART. II.‑‑But no man can be entered a brother, in any particular Lodge, or admitted a member thereof, without the unanimous consent of all the members of that Lodge then present, when the candidate is proposed, and when their consent is formally asked by the Master. They are to give their consent in their own prudent way, either virtually, or in form, but with unanimity.

 

Nor is this inherent privilege subject to a dispensation ; because the members of a particular Lodge are the best judges of it ; and because, if a turbulent member should be imposed on them, it might spoil their harmony, or hinder the freedom of their communication, or even break and disperse the Lodge, which ought to be avoided by all true and faithful.

 

" But it was found inconvenient to insist upon unanimity in several cases; and, therefore, the Grand Masters have allowed the Lodges to admit a member, if not above three ballots are against him; though some Lodges desire no such allowance. (New Regulations, Art. 6.) " ART. III.‑The majority of every particular Lodge, when congregated, not else, sball have the privilege of giving instructions to their Master or Wardens, before the meeting of the Grand Cbapter or quarterly communication ; because the said officers are their representatives, and are supposed to speak the sentiments of their brethren at the said Grand Lodge. (Old Regulations, Art. 10.) " Upon a sudden emergency, the Grand Lodge has allowed a private brother to be present, and with leave asked and given, to signify his mind, if it was about what concerned Masonry (New Regulations, Art. 10.) .804

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

"ART. IV.‑All particular 'llrodges. are to observe the saino usages as much as possible ; in order to which, and also for cultivating a good understanding among Freemasons, some members of every Lodge shall be deputed to visit the other Lodges, as often has shall be thought cou< cnlent.

 

(Old Re7 ulations. Art. 11.)

 

' "The same usages, for substance, are actually observed in every Lodge : wideh is much owing to visiting brothers, who compare the usages.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 11.) "ART. V.‑On February 24, 1734‑35.

 

If any. Lodge within the bills of mortality, shall cease to meet regularly, during twelve months successive, its name and place shall be erased or blotted out of the Grand Lodge Book and en‑raved list ; and if they petition to be again inserted and owned as a regular Lodge, it must lose its former place and rank of precedency, and submit to a new Constitution.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 8.) "ART. VI.‑No set or number of brethren shall withdraw or separate themselves from the Lodge, in which they were made, or were afterward admitted members, unless the Lodge become too numerous; nor even then, without a dispensation from the Grand Master or Deputy; and when thus separated, they must. either immediately join themselves to such other Lodges, that they shall like best, or else obtain the Grand Master's warrant to join in forming a new Lodge, to be regularly constituted in good time.

 

"ART. VII.‑But if any brother so far misbehave himself, so as to render his Lodge uneasy, lie shall be thrice duly admonished by the Master and Wardens, in a Lodge formal : and if he will not refrain his imprudence, nor obediently submit to the advice of his brethren, lie shall be dealt with according to the Bv‑Laws of that particular Lodge, or else in such a manner as the quarterly communication shall, in theirgreat prudence, think fit.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 9.) On Pehruary 19, 1723‑24. No brother shall belong to more than one Lodge within the bills of mortality, though he may visit them all, except the members of a foreign Lodge (New Regulations, Art. 4.) DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

305 "This Regulation is neglected for several reasons, and now (says Dr. Anderson) is become obsolete. (See Grand Lodge Art. 11.

 

Grand Feast, Art. 5.) or vtrrroxs.

 

" On February 19, 1723‑24.

 

No ,visitor, however skilled in Masonry, shall be admitted into a Lodge, unless he is personally known to, or well vouched and recommended by one of that Lodge present. (New Regulations, Art. 6. See Makings, Arts. 5, 6, 7. Duty of Members, Art. 47. See also Grand Master, Art. 6.) OF REMOVAL& "ART. I.‑On November 21, 1724.

 

If a particular Lodge remove to a new place for their stated meeting, the officers ‑shall immediately signify the same to the Secretary.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 4.

 

See Duty of Members, Art. 6.) " On January. 25, 17;7‑38.

 

The Grand Lodge made the following Regulation.

 

" ART. IL‑Whereas disputes have arisen about the removal of Lodges from one house to another, and it has been questioned in whom that power is vested ; it is hereby declared, "That no Lodge shall be removed, without the Master's knowledge; that no motion be made for removing, in the Master's absence; and that, if the motion be seconded or thirded, the Master shall order a summons to every individual member, specifying the business, and appointing a day for hearing and determining the affair, at least ten days before : and that the determination shall be made by the majority, provided the Master be one of that majority: but if he be of the minority, against removing, the Lodge shall not be removed unless the majority consists of full two‑thirds of the members present.

 

" But if the Master shall refuse to direct such summons, either of the Wardens may do it: and if the Master neglects to attends on the day fixed, the Wardens may preside in determining the. affair, in the manner prescribed ; but they shall not in the Master's absence,* enter upon any other cause but what is particularly mentioned in the summons: and if the Lodge is thus. regularly ordered to be removed, the Master or Wardens shall' 20 s $06

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

send notice thereof to the Secretary of the Grand Lodge, for publishing the same at the next quarterly communication. (New Regulations, Art. 9.) "ART. III.‑Carnarvan Grand Master, November 29, 1754. It was ordained, That no Lodge shall, for the future, be deemed regularly removed, until the removal thereof shall be approved and allowed by the Grand Master, or his Deputy, for the time being.

 

OF THE GRAND FEAST.

 

"ART. I.‑The brethren of all the Lodges, in and about London and Westminster, shall meet annually, in some convenient place, or public hall.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 22.) " Or any brethren round the globe, who are true and faithful, at the place appointed, till they have built a place of their own.

 

" They shall assemble either on St. John Evangelist's, or St. John Baptist's Day, as the Grand Lodge shall think fit, by a new Regulation: having of late years met on St. John Baptist's Day .

 

" Provided the majority of the Grand Lodge, about three months before, shall agree that there shall be a feast and a general communication of all the brethren : for if they are against it, others must forbear it at that time. (See Grand Wardens, Art. 3.) "But whether there shall be a feast or not for all the brethren, yet the Grand Lodge must meet in Some convenient place on St. John's Day; or if it be a Sunday, then on the next day, in order. to choose or recognize every year a new Grand Master, Deputy and Wardens.

 

(See Grand Master. Art. 1.) "The Annual Feast has been held on both the St. John's Days, as the Grand Master thought fit.

 

And, " On November 25, 1723.

 

It was ordained, That one of the quarterly communications shall be held on St. John Evangelist's Day, and another on St. John Baptist's Day, every year, whether there be a feast or not, unless the Grand Master find it inconvenient for the good of the Craft, which is more to be regardod than days.

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

307 "But, of late years, most of the eminent brethren being out of town on both the St. John's Days, the Grand Master has appointed the Feast on such a day as appeared most convenient to the Fraternity.

 

.

 

" On January 29, 1730‑31. It was ordained, That no particular Lodge shall have a separate feast on the day of the General Feast.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 21.) " ART. II.‑The Masters of Lodges shall appoint one experienced and discreet brother of his Lodge, to compose a Committee, consisting of one from every Lodge, who shall meet in a convenient apartment, to receive every person that brings a ticket; and shall have power to discourse him, if they think fit, in order to admit or debar him, as they shall see cause. Provided, " They send no man away before they have acquainted all the brethren within doors with the reasons thereof ; that so no true brother may be debarred, nor a false brother, or a mere pretender admitted. This Committee must meet very early on St. John's Day, at the place, before any persons come with tickets. (Old Regulations, Art. 25.) "ART. III.‑‑On January 25, 1723. The Grand Lodge ordered That the Committee of Enquiry, and the Stewards, with others, shall be early at the place of the Feast, for those purposes mentioned in this old Regulation, and the order was confirmed by the Grand Lodge, viz., on November 17, 1725. (New Regulations, Art. 25. See Grand Wardens, Art. 3, and Stewards, Arts. 1, 2, 3 ) "ART. IV.‑The Grand Master shall appoint two or more true and trusty brothers to be porters and door‑keepers, who are also to be early at the place, for some good reasons; and who are to be at the command of said Committee. (Old Regulations, Art. 26. See Grand Lodge, Art. 2.) " The Tylers and other servants, within or without doors, are . now appointed only by the Stewards.

 

(New R‑gulations, Art. 26.)

 

.

 

"ART. 4.‑All the members of the Grand Lodge must be at the place of the Feast long before dinner, with the Grand Master, 808 DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

or his Deputy, at their head ; who shall retire and form them. selves.

 

And this in order, "To receive any appeals duly lodged, as above regulated (See Grand Lodge, Art. 11), that the appellant and respondent may both be heard, and the affair may be amicably decided before dinner, if possible.

 

But if it can not, it must be delayed till after the new Grand Master takes the Chair.

 

" And if it can. not be decided after dinner, the Grand Master must refer it to a special Committee, that shall quickly adjust it, and make report to the next Grand Lodge ; that so Brotherly Love may be preserved.

 

" To prevent any difference or disgust which may be feared to arise that day ; that so no interruption may be given to the harmony and pleasure of the General Assembly and Grand Feast.

 

" To consult about whatever concerns the decency and decorum of the Grand Assembly, and to prevent ill manners ; the assembly being promiscuous, that is, of all sorts of Freemasons." (Old Regulations, Art. 28.) "This, however, was found so inconvenient, and disconsonant with the intention of a day of mirth, that it was soon after, on November 25, 1723, ordained, That there should be no petitions or appeals on the day of the General Assembly and Feast. (New Regulations, Art. 13.) " ART. VI.‑‑The Grand Lodge must be formed before dinner. (See Grand Master, Arts. 1, 2, 3.) " ART. VIL‑It was formerly the custom, after the Grand Master was proposed, for the Grand Master, the Deputy, the Grand Wardens, the Stewards, the Treasurer, the Secretary, the Clerks, and every other person, to withdraw and leave the Masters and Wardens of particular Lodges alone ; in order to their amicable consulting about the election of a new Grand !Kaster, or the continuing of the present another year, if the H,tu Masters and Wardens had not met and done it the day before.

 

" And if they agreed, by a majority, to continue the present Grand Master, his Worship was called in, and, after thanks, T was humbly desired to do the Fraternity the honor of ruling them another year. . And, after dinner, and not before, it was made known whether he accepted of it or not. (Old Regular tions, Art. 29.) " But this being found inconvenient, a new Regulation was made at the assembly, on December 27, 1720, and thereby agreed, That the new Grand Master should, by the present, be proposed to the Grand Lodge at their communication, some time before the day of their Annual Feast; and that if he wam approved then, or no objection made, he was to be forthwit4 saluted Grand Master‑elect, if there ; or, if absent, his health was to be toasted as such ; and that, as such, he was to march to the Feast on the present Grand Master's left hand.

 

" Thus, on Lady Day, 1721, Payne, Grand Master, proposed the Duke of Montagu : and all have since been so proposed. Therefore, " Now, before dinner, there is no election, but only a recognizing of the former approbation of the new Grand Master, which is soon done.

 

" ART. VIII.‑Then the Masters and Wardens, and all the brethren may converse promiscuously, or, as they please, to sort together, until the dinner is coming in, when every brother takes his seat at the table.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 30.) " The Grand Master may say grace himself, or employ some brother who is a clergyman, or else the Secretary, to say grace, both before and after dinner.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 30.) " ART. IX.‑Some time after dinner, the Grand Lodge is formed, not in retirement, but in presence of all the brethren, who are yet not members of it ; and none of those that are not, must speak, until they are desired and allowed. (Old Regulations, Art. 31.) "This old method was found inconvenient; therefore, as the whole assembly sit together at dinner in the form of a Grand Lodge, there is no alteration, but the members of the Grand Lodge continue promiscuous in their seats. (New Regulations, Art. 31.) ' "ART X.‑If the Grand Master of last year has consented F DIGEST of MASONIC LAWS.

 

309 alo DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

with the Masters and Wardens, in private. before dinner, to continue for the year ensuing, then one of the ‑Grand Lodge, deputed for that purpose, shall represent to all the brethren his Worship's good government, etc., and, turning to him, shall, in the name of the Grand Lodge, humbly request him to do the Fraternity the great honor (if nobly born, if not, the great kindness) of continuing to be their Grand Master for the year ensuing: and his Worship declaring his consent by a bow or a speech, as he pleases, the said deputed member of the Grand Ledge shall proclaim him aloud GRAND MASTER OF MASONS.

 

" All the members of the Grand Lodge shall salute him in due form ; and all the brethren shall, for a few minutes, have leave to declare their satisfaction, pleasure, and congratulation. (Old Regulations, Art. 32.

 

See Grand Master, Arts. 1, 2.) " ART. XL‑But if either the Masters and Wardens have not, in private, this day, before dinner, nor the day before, desired the last Grand Master to continue in his Mastership another year ; or if he, when desired, has not consented, then the present Grand Master shall nominate his successor. (Old Regulations, Art. 33. See Grand Master, Art. 1.) " ART. XIL‑The Grand Master, or Deputy, or some other appointed by him, shall harangue all the brethren, and give them good advice.

 

And lastly,

 

‑ " After some other transactions, that can not be written in any language, the brethren may stay longer, or go away, as they please, when the Lodge is closed in good time. (Old Regulations, Art. 38.) " After the oration, the five public healths may be toasted ; and before, or after each, a Mason's song, with the best instruments of music.

 

" Other things relating to the Charges, etc., of the Grand Master, are best known to the Fraternity. (New Regulations, Art. 38.) Trr.ERS.

 

"By whom appointed.

 

(See Grand Lodge, Art. 2.

 

Grand Wardens, Art. 3.) DIGRSi or MASONIC LAWS.

 

311 Their punishment for attending on irregular Lodges. ' (Soe Committee of Charity, Art. 32.) " Who rendered incapable of being a Tyler.

 

(See Commit tee of Charity, Art. 31..) FUNERAI& "No funeral procession of Masons, properly clothed, without license from the Grand Master, or his Deputy. (See the penalty under Committee of Charity, Art. 31.)" THE TRUE AND SPURIOUS LAWS COMPARED.

 

As we are responsible for having been the first, in the United States, to call attention to the true laws, in contradistinction to the spurious laws of the Ahiman'Rezon, and with a view that our readers may have an opportunity of seeing, at a glance, the innovations introduced by Dermott, we proceed to present for comparison, chapter by chapter, the two codes From Anderson.‑(The Old Charges.) I. CONCERNING GOD AND RELIGION.

 

"A Mason is obliged by his tenure to obey the moral law; and if he rightly understands the ART, he will never be a stupid atheist, nor an irreligious libertine. But though, in ancient times, Masons were charged iti every country to be of the religion of that country or nation, whatever it was, yet it is now thought more expedient only to oblige them to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves: that is, to be good men and true, or men of honor and honesty, by whatever denominations or persuasions they may be distinguished, whereby Masonry becomes the centre of union, and the means of conciliating true friendship among persons that must have remained at a perpetual distance." From the Ahiman Raon_(Gbnatitudona.) CHAP. L, SEC. 1.‑OF GOD AND RELIGION.

 

" Whoever, from . love of knowledge, interest, or curiosity, desires to be a Mason, is to know that, as his foundation and great corner‑stone, he is firmly to believe in the eternal God, 812

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

and to pay that worship which is due to Him, as the Great Architect and Governor of the universe.

 

"A Mason must observe the moral law.

 

And if he rightly understand the royal art, he will never be an atheist, or an irreligious libertine;

 

and will never act against the great inward light of his own conscience.

 

" He will likewise shun the errors of bigotry and superstition ; making a due use of his own reason, according to that liberty wherewith a Mason is made free: for though, in ancient times. Masons were charged to comply with the religious opinions and usages of the country or nation where they sojourned or w(òrked, yet it is now thought most expedient that the brethren, in general, should only be charged to adhere to the essent‑als of religion in which all men agree, leaving each broth(r to his own judgment as to particular forms. Whence, being good men and true, of unsullied honor and unfailing honesi y, the Order becomes the centre of union, and the means of conciliating true friendship." We think it scarcely necessary to direct the attention of the reader to the studied innovations, manifested in the above article from the Athol Grand Lodge. It will be seen that some of the language of the original is retained ;

 

but by what authority was any change or additions made ?

 

Why tell us about "interest, or curiosity," or "the errors of bigotry and superstition," and the " liberty wherewith a Mason is made free ? " .&om Anderson.‑(The Old Charym) n. OF 'LHE CIM MAGISMATE, SUPREME AND SUBORDINATE.

 

"A Mason ‑is a peaceable subject to the civil powers, wherever be resides or works, and is never to be concerned in plots and conspiracies against the peace and welfare of the nation, nor to behave himself undutifully to inferior magistrates ; for, as Masonry hath always been injured by war, bloodshed, and confusion, so ancient kings and princes have been much disposed to encourage the.Craftsmen, because of their peaceableness and `‑ Gude menne acd true, hennynge eidher odher to be soche, doe always love the more as they be more gude."‑Ancient N8. Bodl.

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

loyalty, whereby they practically answered the cavils of their adversaries, and promoted the honor of the Fraternity, who ever flourished in times of peace. So that, if a brother should be a rebel against the State, he is not to be countenanced in his rebellion, however he may be pitied as an unhappy man; and, if convicted of no other crime, though the loyal Brotherhood must, and ought to disown his rebellion, and give no umbrage or grouud of political jealousy to the government for the time being, they can not expel him from the Lodge, and his relation to it remains indefeasible." From the Ah=man Raon.‑(Lbnatitidions.) CHAP. L, SEC. S.‑‑OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE CIVIL MAG181'RATg " Whoever would be a true Mason, is farther to know that, by the privileges of his Order, his obligations as a subject and citizen will not be relaxed, but enforced. He is to be a lover of peace, and obedient to the civil powers which yield him pro tection, and are set over him, where he resides or works.

 

Nor can a real Craftsman ever be concerned in conspiracies against the State, or be disrespectful to the magistrate ; because the welfare of his country is his most happy object.

 

"Now, if any brother, forgetting, for a time, the rules of his Craft, and listening to evil counsels,‑should unhappily fall into a contrary conduct, he is not to be countenanced in his crimes, or rebellion against the State; but he forfeits all the benefits of the Lodge, and his fellows will refuse to associate, or converse with him in private, while he continues in his guilt, that no offense may be given to lawful government. Such a person, however, is still considered as a Mason; his title hereto being indefeasible; and hopes are to be entertained, and endeavors used, that the rules of the Craft may again recover him to his duty.

 

" From the constant desire of true Masons to adorn the countries where they reside with all useful arts, crafts, and improvements, they have been, from the earliest ages, encouraged and protected‑ by the wisest rulers of states and commonwealths ; who have likewise thought it an honor to have their names enrolled among the Fraternity, and have become thq Us 1114 patrons of the Craft.

 

And thus Masonry, having always flour ished most in the peaceable times of every country, and having suffered, in a particular manner, through the calamitous effects of war, the Craftsmen are the more strongly engaged and in. clined to act agreeably to the prime principles of their art, in following peace and love, as far as possible, with all men.

 

"And as political affairs have occasioned discord amongst the nearest relations and most intimate friends, Masons are enjoined never to speak of, or discuss them in the Lodge." Mark the difference in the two foregoing sections. In Anderson, we are told, that though the Lodge can not sanction rebellion, or conspiracy, yet the brother, so acting, can not be expelled; but, on the contrary, his relation to the Lodge remains indefeasible: while the dhiman Idezon says, that he "forfeits all the benefits of the Lodge, and his fellows will refuse to associate, or converse with him in private." No wonder Sir John Johnson refused to assemble the Grand Lodge of New York, after the rebellion commenced, in 1775; for he was holding under the Athol Grand Lodge, and being governed by the Ahiman Rezon, he could not hold Masonic communion, or even converse in private, with his brethren in New York, who were almost unanimously rebels against the mother country. By the Ahiman Rezon, every brother loses his Masonic standing and privileges, from the moment he rebels . against tyranny and oppression, and declares his‑independence and by this book, all the Lodges that assembled in the American army, or in the towns, if composed of Americans, in favor of our indepedence, were irregular and clandestine assemblies.

 

It is not difficult to perceive that this alteration, like many others, was made by the Athol Grand Lodge, to curry favor with the royal family of England.

 

DICIEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

Prom Anderson.‑The Old Cha7yet.) III. OF LODGE& "A Lodge is a place where Masons assemble and work; hence, that assembly, or duly organized Society of Masons, is called a Lodge;. and every brother ought to belong to one, and to be subject to its By‑Laws and the general Regulations.

 

It is DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

$15 either particular or general, and will be best understood by attending it, and by the Regulations of the General or Grand Lodge, hereunto annexed. In ancient times, no Master or Fellow could be absent from it, especially when warned to appear at it, without incurring a severe censure, until it appeared to the Master and Wardens that pure necessity hindered him.

 

" The persons admitted members of a Lodge, must be good and true men; free born, and of mature and discreet age. No bondmen, no women, no immoral or scandalous men, but of good report." The third section in the Ahiman Rezon is devoted to a totally different subject, but the first Section of the second Chapter reads as follows CHAP. II., SEC. L‑OF A LODGE.

 

"A Lodge is a place where Masons assemble and work; hence, that assemby, or duly organized society of Masons, is called a Lodge : * and every brother ought to belong to one, and to be subject to its By‑Laws and the general Regulations. It is either particular or general, and will be best understood by attending it, and by the Regulations of the General or Grand Lodge hereunto annexed. In ancient times, no Master or Fellow could be absent from it, especially when warned to appear at it, without incurring a severe censure, until it appeared to the Master and Wardens that pure necessity hindered him." .

 

Here, it will be seen that, although the first paragraph from Anderson is given word for word, the second paragraph is omitted altogether. This, however, is ingrafted into another section, to which a long string of other qualifications are added, which we shall extract when we come to physical qualifications.

 

F3rom Andaaon‑(The Old Charges.) IV. OF MASTERS, WARDENS, FELLOWS, AND APPRENTICES.

 

"All preferment, among Masons, is grounded upon rear worth, and personal merit only; that so the Lords may be well served ò' So the word cauRcH is expressive both of the congregation and the place of worship." DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

‑‑the brethren not put to shame, nor the Royal Craft despised therefore, no Master or Warden is chosen by seniority, but for his merit. It is impossible to describe these things in writing, and every brother must attend in his place, and learn them in a way peculiar to this Fraternity. Only candidates may know that no Master should take an Apprentice, unless he has sufficient employment for him, and unless be a perfect youth, having no maim or defect about his body, that may render him incapable of learning the Art‑of serving his Mad ter's Lord, and of being made a brother, and then a Fellow Craft, in due time, even after he has served such a term of years as the custom of the country directs; and that be should be descended of honest parents, that so, when otherwise qualified, lie may arrive to the honor of being a Warden, and then the Master of the Lodge, the Grand Warden, and, at length, the Grand Master of all the Lodges, according to his merit.

 

"No brother can be a Warden, until he has passed the part of a Fellow Craft; nor a Master, until he has acted as Warden; nor Grand Warden, until he has been Master of a Lodge; nor Grand Master, unless he has been a Fellow Craft before his election, who is also to be nobly born, or a gentleman of the best fashion, or some eminent scholar, or some curious architect of other artist, descended of honest parents, and who is of singular great merit, in the opinion of the Lodges. And for the better, and easier. and more honorable discharge of his office, the Grand Master has a power to choose his own Deputy Grand Master, who must be then, or must have been formerly, the Master of a particular Lodge, and has the privilegd of acting what ever the Grand Master, his principal, should act, unless the said principal be present, or interpose his authority by a letter.

 

" These rules and governors, supreme and subordinate, of the ancient Lodge, are to be obeyed, in their respective stations, by all the brethren, according to the Old Charges and Regular tions, with all humility, reverence, love, and alacrity." From Me Ahiman I2azon.‑(Cbnddudiona.) CHAP. I., SEC. 4‑OF PREREQUISITPR " No person is capable of becoming a member, unless, together with the virtues aforementioned, or, at least, a dispo,Iition to seek DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

and acquire them. he is also free born ; of mature and discreet age; * of good report; of sufficient natural endowments, and the senses of a man, with an estate, office, trade, occupation, or some visible way of acquiring an honest livelihood, and of working in his craft, as becomes the members of this most ancient and honorable Fraternity, who ought not only earn what is sufficient for themselves and families, but likewise something to spare for works of charity, and supporting the true dignity of the Royal Craft. Every person desiring admission must also be upright in body, not deformed or dismembered, at the time of making, but of hale and entire limbs, as a man ought to be.

 

" No brother shall propose, for admission into this ancient and honorable Society, any person, through friendship or partiality, who does not possess the moral and social virtues, a sound head, and a good heart; and who has not an entire exemption from all those ill qualities and vices which would bring dishonor OR the Craft." We ask a careful attention to the difference in the wording of the above articles, especially in relation to physical qualifications. The original tells us, that the candidate must have16 no maim or defect about his body, that may render him incapa ble of learning the Art;" clearly showing that the intention of the law was not to exclude all who might have a slight blemish or who were stoop‑shouldered, or who, perchance, had their backs broken, but to guard against the introduction of any who were so deformed, or whose blemish prevented their learning, practicing; and teaching the rituals of the Order. Thus it excludes the blind, the deaf, the dumb, and those having but one foot, and those having but one hand, as none of these can learn, practice, and teach the rituals.

 

In the original, there is nothing said about " hale and entire limbs, as a man ought to be." It will also be seen, that the article from the Ahiman Reran gays nothing.about Masters and Wardens; but we extract the two following articles, third and fourth Sections of the second Chapter 0 ' Not under twenty‑one yearn" BIT $r DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

CHAP. H., SEC. 3.‑OF THE MASTER‑HIS ELECTION, OFFICE, AND DUTY.

 

" All preferment, among Masons, depends on real worth and personal merit only, that the Society may be well served, and the royal Craft maintained.

 

" No brother should be Master till he has first served a Lodge acceptably in the office of Warden; unless in extraordinary cases, or when a new Lodge is to be formed, and no past or former Warden is to be found among the members. But three Master Masons, although they have served in no such offic6s, i_` they be well learned, may be constituted Master and Wardens of such new Lodge, or of any old Lodge, in the like emergency and it shall be their first duty to qualify themselves thoroughly for their office.

 

"The Master of every Lodge shall be annually chosen by ballot, on some stated Lodge night.

 

Each member hath one vote.

 

And when the ballot is closed, the former Master shall carefully examine the votes, and audibly declare him who bath the majority, to be duly elected.

 

In like manner shall the Lodge proceed in the choice of all the other officers; great care being taken, that none be put in nomination, for favor or affection, birth, or fortune, exclusively of the consideration of real merit and ability to fill the office for the honor and advancement of Masonry. No Mason chosen into any office can refuse to serve unless he has served in the same office before.

 

The Master of every regular Lodge, thus duly elected and installed, has it in special charge, as appurtenant to his office, duty, and dignity, to see that all the By‑Laws of his Lodge, as well as the general Regulations from the Grand Lodge, be duly observed; that bip Wardens discharge their office faithfully, and be examples of diligence and sobriety to the Craft; that true and exact minutes and entries of all proceedings be made and kept by tho Secretary; that the Treasurer keep and render exact and just accounTs at the stated times, according to the By‑Laws and orders of the Lodge; and, in general, that all the goods and moneys belonging to the body be truly managed and dispensed, according to the vote and direction of the majority.

 

"The Master shall also take care that no Apprentice or Fellow Craft be taken into his house, or Lodge, anless ho has DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

819 sufficient employment for him, and finds him to be duly qualified, according to the rules before laid down, for learning and understanding the sublime Mysteries of the Art. Thus shall Apprentices be admitted, upon farther improvement, as Fellow Crafts ; and, in due time, be raised to the sublime degree of Master Masons, animated with the prospect of passing, in future, through all the higher honors of Masonry, viz., those of Wardens and Masters of their Lodges, and, perhaps, at length, of Grand Warden and Grand Masters of all the Lodges, according to their merit.

 

" The Master of a particular Lodge has the right, and authority of calling his Lodge, or congregating the members into a Chapter, at pleasure, upon the application of any of the brethren, and upon any emergency and occurrence, which, in his judgment, may require their meeting; and he is to fill the Chair when present. It is likewise his duty, together with his Wardens, to attend the Grand Lodge, at the quarterly communications; and such occasional, or special Grand communications as the good of the Craft may require, when duly summoned by the Grand Secretary, and within such reasonable distance of the place of holding the Grand Lodge, as the laws of the same may have ascertained. When in the Grand Lodge, and at general, as well as special communications, the Master and Wardens, or either of them, have full power and authority to represent their Lodge, and to transact all matters, as well and truly as if the whole body were there present.

 

"The Master has the right of appointing some brother, wha is most commonly the Secretary of the Lodge, to keep the book of By‑Laws, and other laws given to the Lodge by proper authority; and in this book shall also be kept the names of all t:1a members of the Lodge, and a list of all the Lodges within the same Grand communication, with the usual times and places of their meeting.

 

FFC. 4.‑OF THE WARDENS OF A 2hTV0.

 

" l . None but Master Masons can be Wardens of a Lodge.

 

" 2. The Senior Warden succeeds to all the duties of the blaster, and fills the Chair when he is absent.

 

Iú the Master 320 DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

goes abroad on business, resigns, or is deposed, the S‑3nior Warden shall fill his place until the next stated time of eleotion. And although it was formerly held, that, in such cases, the Master's authority ought to revert to the last Past Master who is present, yet it is now the settled rule, that the authority devolves upon the Senior Warden, and, in his absence, upon the Junior Warden, even although a former Master be present. But the Wardens will generally honor a Past Master, that may be present, and will call on him to take the Chair, upon the presumption of his experience and skill in conducting the business of the Lodge.

 

" Nevertheless, such Past Master still holds his authority under the Senior Warden, and can not act until he congregates the Lodge. If none of the officers be present, nor any former Master to take the Chair, the members, according to seniority and merit, shall fill the places of the absent officers.

 

" The business of the Wardens in the Lodge, is, generally, to assist the Master in conducting the business, and managing the Craft, in due order and form, when the Master is present. Particular Lodges do likewise, by their By‑Laws, assign particular,duties to their Wardens, for their own better government; which such Lodges have a right to do, provided they transgress not the old Landmarks, nor, in any degree, violate the true genius and spirit of .Masonry." These two articles so essentially differ from Anderson, that it is scarcely necessary to point to those differences, to satisfy any one that the two sections above are mainly of modern origin. No one can fail to see that they are simple regulations for the government of the subordinates of the Athol Grand Lodge.

 

Where, in the dncient Constitutions, can be found the immemorial rule, that, a Master shall be annually chosen by ballot, on a stated Lodge night?

 

Formerly, Lodges had no stated Lodge nights.

 

Where, in the ancient law, is to be found directions that no Mason can refuse to fill an office?

 

Where is the ancient law, requiring the Master to see that the Sec. retary keeps a true record? We know that, for some time after the reorganization of 1717, there was no such officer as Secretary, or even Grand Secretary.

 

Where do you find, in DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

321 the ancient law, directions to Lodges to raise candidates to the eublime degree of Master Mason? We know that. this degree was formerly conferred only by the Grand Lodge of England, and, before that period, we have reason to believe it was wn ferred only by the Grand Master of Masons.

 

Where shah_ ve find, that, by the ancient law, "none but Master Masons can be Wardens?" The original distinctly tells us, that "no wan can be a Warden, until he has passed the part of a Fellow Craft." From Anderson.‑(The Old Charges.) V

 

OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE CRAFT IN WORKING.

 

All Masons shall work honestly on working days, that they may live creditably on holy days ; and the time appointed by the law of the land, or confirmed by custom, shall be observed. " The most expert of the Fellow Craftsmen shall be chosen or appointed the Master, or overseer of the Lord's work, who is to be called Master, by those who work under him. The Craftsmen are to avoid all ill language, and to call each other by no disobliging name, but brother or fellow, and to behave themselves courteously within and without the Lodge.

 

" The Master, knowing himself to be able of cunning, shall undertake the Lord's work as reasonably as possible, and truly dispend his goods as if they were his own ; nor give more wages to any brother or Apprentice, than he really may deserve.

 

" Both the Master and the Masons, receiving their wages justly, shall be faithful to the Lord, and honestly finish their work, whether task or journey; nor put the work to task that hath been accustomed to journey.

 

" None shall discover envy at the prosperity of a brother, nor supplant him, or put him out of his work, if lie be capable to finish the same ; for no man can finish another's work so much to the Lord's profit, unless lie be thoroughly acquainted with the designs and draughts of him that began it. When a Fellow Craftsman is chosen Warden of the work, under the Master, he shall be true both to Master and Fellows‑shall. carefully oversee the work in the Master's absence to the lord's profit, and his brethren shall obey him.

 

"All Masons employed, shall meekly receive their wages, 21 r 322

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

without murmuring or mutiny, and not desert the Master till tLs work is finished.' " A younger brother shall be instructed in working, to prevout spoiling the materials for want of judgment, and for increasing. and continuing of Brotherly Love.

 

"All the tools used in working shall be approved by the (band Lodge.

 

"No laborers shall be employed in the proper work of Masonry; nor shall Masons work with those that are not free, without an urgent necessity; nor shall they teach laborers and unaccepted Masons as they should teach a brother or fcl low." P~= the Ahiman Rezon_(GUisditu(iona.) CHAP. m., SEC. 2.‑OF WORKING.

 

" All Masons should work faithfully and honestly.

 

All the working hours appointed by law, or confirmed by custom, are to oe strictly observed.

 

" The usual hours for working are,' from seven o'clock in the evening until ten, between the 25th of March and the 25th of September; and from six until nine, between the 25th of September and the 25th of March.' The Master and Masons shall faithfully finish their work. " None shall envy a brother's prosperity, or put him out of his work, if capable of finishing it.

 

All Masons shall receive their wages without murmuring. They must avoid all unbecoming modes of expression ; and shall: call each other brother, in the Lodge." Between the foregoing sections there is, evidently, this marked difference, that the first was a rule when Masonry was Operative as well as Speculative, as it regulates the working hours of the dmj; while the Ahiman Rezon presents a modern regulation, suited to the working of Lodges. How ridiculous, to suppose that the dncient Constitutions, made when the Society of Masons was a Society of mechanics. (stone masons and architects), provided that the hours of labor should be " from seven o'clock in the evening until ten," etc. As a local regulation for Lodges, as now constituted, this rule of the Athol Grand Lodge is well enough, but ;it will be seen, that even this could not be conNeniently DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

321 complied with in all latitudes; the principle, however, might properly be retained, and the precise hours of labor be regnlated by each Grand Lodge. As before intimated, we object to it, because it is given, in the Ahiman Rezon, as one of the ancient, or immemorial laws, which is preposterous upon its face.

 

From Anderson.‑(The 0W Charges.) VI. OF BEHAVIOR: " 1. In the Lodge, while constituted.

 

" You are not to hold private committees or separate conversation, without leave from the Master; nor to talk of anything impertinent or unseemly, nor interrupt the Master or Wardens, or any brother speaking to the Master ; nor behave yourself ludicrously or jestingly, while the Lodge is engaged in what is serious and solemn; nor use any unbecoming language, upon any pretense whatsoever, but to pay due reverence to your Master, Wardens, and Fellows, and put them to worship.

 

" If any complaint be brought, the brother found guilty shall stand to the award and determination of the Lodge, who are the proper and competent judges of all such controversies ,unless you carry it, by appeal, to the Grand Lodge), and to whom they ought to be referred, unless a Lord's work be hindered the meanwhile, in which case a particular reference may be made out you must never go to law about what concerneth Masonry, without an absolute necessity, apparent to the Lodge." From the Ahiman Ream.‑(Constitutions.) CHAP. In., SEC. 3.‑OF BEHAVIOR IN THE LODE.

 

" While the Lodge is open for work, Masons must hold no private conversation or committees, without leave from, the Master ; nor talk of anything foreign or impertinent, nor interrupt the Master or Wardens, or any brother addressing himself to the Chair; nor behave inattentively while the Lodge is engaged in what is serious and solemn; but every brother shall pay due reverence to the Master, the Wardens, and all his fellows.

 

"Every brother guilty of a fault shall submit to the Lodge, unless he appeal to the Grand Lodge.

 

$24

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

":No private of enses, or disputes about nations, families, religions, or politics, must be brought itrithin the doors of the Lodge." The difference between the foregoing sections are, perhaps, not very important, but still it shows a settled purpose of making a difference.

 

Fbw Anderson.‑(The Old Charga) VI. OF BEHAVIOR.

 

" 2. After the Lodge is over, and the brethren not gone.

 

`` You may enjoy yourselves with innocent mirth, treating one another according to ability; but avoiding all excess, or forcing any brother to eat or drink beyond his inclination, or hindering him from going when his occasions call him, or doing or saying anything offensive, or that may forbid an easy and free conversation, for that would blast our harmony and defeat our laudable purposes. Therefore, no private piques or quarrels must be brought within the door of the Lodge, far less, any quarrels about religion, nations, or State policy. We being only, as Masons, of the catholic religion above mentioned; we are, also, of all nations, tongues, kindreds, and languages, and are resolved against all politics, as what never yet conduced to the welfare of the Lodge, nor ever will. This charge has always been strictly enjoined and observed ; but especially since the Reformation in Britain, or the dissent and secession of these nations from the communion of Rome." FFom the Ahiman Rewn‑(CbnsWzdions.) ‑ CHAP. M., SEC. 4.‑OF BEHAVIOR AFTER THE LODGE I.4 CL03ED.

 

" When the Lodge is closed, and the labor finished, the brethren, before they depart home to their rest, may enjoy themselves with innocent mirth, enlivened and exalted with their own peculiar songs and sublime pieces of music; but avoiding all excess, considering each other, in the hours both of labor and festivity, as always free. And, therefore, no brother is to be hindered from going when he pleases; for although, after Lodge hours, Masons are as other men, yet, if they should fall into excess, the blame, though unjustly, may be cast upon the Fraternity, by the ignorant or the envious." In the foregoing there is a marked difference, without an imò provement.

 

"3. When brethren meet withmd strangers, but not in a Lodge formed.

 

" You are to salute one another in a courteous manner, as you will be instructed, calling each other brother ; freely giving mutual instruction, as shall be thought expedient, without being overseen or overheard, and without encroaching upon each other, or derogating from that respect which is due to any brother, were he not a Mason; for, though all Masons are as brethren upon the same level, yet Masonry takes no honor from a man that he had before; nay, rather it adds to his honor, especially if he has deserved well of the Brotherhood, who must give honor to whom it is due, and avoid ill manners." DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

328 Arm Anderson.‑(The Old Charym) VI. OF BEHAVIOR.

 

CHAP. IV., SEC. 1.‑WHEN A NUMBER OF BRETHREN HAPPEN TO MEET WITHOUT ANY STRANGER AMONG THEM, AND NOT IN A LODGE "In such case you are to salute each other in a courteous manner, as you are, or may be instructed in the Lodge, and freely communicating hints of knowledge, but without disclosing secrets, unless to those who have given long proof of their taciturnity and honor. Masonry divests no man of the honors due to him before, or that may become due after he was made a Mason.

 

On the contrary, it increases respect, teaching us to add to all his other honors those, which, as Masons, we cheerfully pay to an eminent brother, distinguishing him above all of his rank and station, and serving him readily according to our ability." Between the foregoing articles, the studied difference in the language is the only thing worthy of notice.

 

From Andermn.‑(The Old Charges.) VI. OF BEHAVIOR.

 

" 4. In presence of strangers NOT. Masons.

 

"You shall be cautious in your words and carriage, that the most penetrating stranger shall not be able to discover, or find out what is not proper to be intimated ; and sometimes you shall divert a discourse, and manage it prudently, for the honor of the Worshipful Fraternity." From the Ahiman R‑zm‑(ConatVuliw.) 326

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

Fran ae Ahiman Rrson.‑(Gbnati:atfon+.) CHAP. IV.. SEC. 2‑WHEN IN THE PRWENCE OF STRANGERS, WHO ARE NOT MASONS " Before those who are not Masons, you must be cautious in your words and carriage, so that the most penetrating stranger &hall not be able to discover what is not proper to be intimated. The impertinent and ensnaring questions, or ignorant and idle discourse of those who seek to pry into the secrets and mysteries of the Craft, must be prudently answered and managed, or the discourse wisely diverted to another subject, as your discretion and duty shall direct." The author of the Ahiman Rezon seems inclined to provide against "impertinent and ensnaring questions," and, in this his article is rather rich than racy.

 

F'ro= Anderson_(TAe Old Ckarym) VI. OF BFHAVIOR.

 

".5. .Rt home, and in your neighborhood.

 

" You are to act as becomes a moral and wise man; particularly, not to let your family, friends, and neighbors, know the concerns of the Lodge, etc., but wisely to consult your own honor, and that of the ancient Brotherhood, for reasons .not to be mentioned here. You must also consult your health, by not continuing together too late, or too lung from home,: after Lodge hours are past, and by avoiding of gluttony and drunkenness, that your families be not neglected, or injured, nor you:disabled from working." ilmm i& Aiiiman Raion_(GOmfitntions.) CHAP. IV., SEC. 3.‑WHEN AT HOME, AND IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

 

" Masons ought to be moral men. Consequently, they should be good husbands, good parents, good sons, and good ‑neighbors ; avoiding all excess injurious to themselves or . families, and wise as to all. affairs, both of their oven household and of the Lodge, for certain reasons known to themselves." Here, again, is a difference, for the sake of di$ering. From Anderan.‑(The Old Chwrm) VI. OF BEHAVIOR. " 6. Toward a strange brother.

 

`You are cautiously to examine him in such a ‑method an prudence shall direct yon, that you may not be imposed upon DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

327 by an ignorant, false pretender, whom you are to reject with contempt and derision, and beware of giving him any hints of knowledge; but if you discover him to be a true and genuine brother, you are to respect him accordingly; and if he is i:n want, you must relieve him if you can, or else direct him how he may be relieved; you must employ him some days, or else recommend him to be employed. But you are not charged to do beyond your ability‑only to prefer a poor brother, that is a good man and true, before any other poor, people in the same circumstances." Frmn the AMman Rezon_(CbndituUon&) CHAP. IV., SEC. 4.‑OF BEHAVIOR TOWARD A FOREIGN BROTHER, OR STRANGER.

 

"You are cautiously to examine a stranger, or foreign brother, as prudence and the rules of the Craft direct, that you may not be imposed upon by a pretender; and if you discover any one to be such, you are to reject him, but with proper caution. But such as are found to be true and faithful, you are to respect as brothers, relieving them, if in want, to your utmost power, or directing them how to, find relief ; and employing them, if you can, or else recommending them to employment." Our last remarks are applicable here. From Anderaon_(The Old Charges.) " Finally, all these charg*s you are to observe, and, also, those that shall be communicated to you in another way; cultivating Brotherly Love, the foundation .and cape‑stone‑the 'cement and glory of this ancient Fraternity ; avoiding all wrangling and quarreling, all slander and backbiting‑not permitting others to slander any honest brother, but defending his character, and doing him all good offices, as far as is consistent with your honor and safety, and no farther. And if any of them do you injury, you must apply to your own or his Lodge, and from thence you may appeal to the Grand Lodge, at the quarterly communication, and from thence to the annual Grand Lodge, as has been. the ancient laudable conduct of our forefathers in every nation‑never taking a legal course but when the case can not be otherwise decided, and patiently listening to the honest and friendly advice of Aiastel and DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

fellow, wnen they would prevent your going to law with strangers, or would excite you to put a speedy period to ali law‑suits, that so you may mind the affairs of Masonry with the more alacrity and success. But with respect to brothers of fellows, at law, the Master and brethren should kindly offer their mediation, which ought to be thankfully submitted to by the contending brethren, and, if that submission is imprActicable, they must, however, carry on their process, or law‑suit, without wrath and rancor (not in the common way), saying or doing nothing which may hinder Brotherly Love and good offices to be renewed and continued, that all may see the benign influence, of Masonry, as all true Masons have done, from the beginning of the world, and will do, to the end of time.

 

AMEN.

 

SO MOTE IT BE." ,F~om the Ahiman Raon‑(GYmatitutiono CHAP. IV., SEC. b ‑‑OF BEHAVIOR TOWARD A BROTHER, WHP.THFR PRESENT OR ABSENT. "Free and Accepted Masons have ever been charged to avoid all slander of true and faithful brethren, with all malice and unjust resentment, or talking disrespectfully of a brother's person or performance. Nor must they suffer any to spread unjust reproaches or calumnies against a brother, behind his back, or to injure him in his fortune, occupation, or character ; but they shall defend such a brother, and give him notice of any danger or injury wbereaith he may be threatened, to enable him to escape the same, as far as is _consistent with honor, prudence, and the safety of religion, morality, and the State, but no farther.

 

M 8.‑COi~ICERNING DIFFERENCES AND LAW‑SUITS, IF ANY SUCH SHOULD UNHAPPILY ARISE BETWEEN BRETHREN.

 

"‑If a brother do you injury, or if you have any differenoe with him about any worldly or temporal business, or interest, apply first to your own or his Lodge, to have the matter in dispute adjusted by the brethren. And if either party be not satisfied with the determination of the Lodge, an appeal may be made to the Grand Lodge; and you are never to enter into a law‑suit, until the matter can not be decided as above.

 

And if it be a matter that wholly concerns Masonry, law‑suits are to be entirely avoided, and the good advice of prudent brethren DIGEST OF MASONIC LAWS.

 

Is to be followed, as they are the best referees of such differences.

 

" But where references are either impracticable or unsuccessful, and courts of law and equity must, at last, decide, you must still follow the general rules of Masonry, avoiding all wrath. malice, rancor, and personal ill will, in carrying on the suit wita a brother; neither saying, or doing anything to prevent the continuance or renewal of that Brotherly Love and Friendship, which are the glory and cement of this ancient Fraternity.

 

" Thus shall we show to all the world the benign influences of Masonry, as wise, true and faithful brethren have done, from the beginning of time, and as all who shall follow us, and would be thought worthy of that name, will continue to do.

 

" These charges, and such others as shall be given to you in a way that can not be written; you are strictly and conscientiously to observe ; and, that they may be the better observed, they should be read or made known to new brethren at their malting, and at other times, as the Master shall direct.

 

Amen 1" We have now given every word of the Old Charges, contained in Anderson, and we have skipped about and brought forward everything from the Ahiman Rezon, which bears any resemblance to the original; and yet We have not given the one‑half of what, in that book, is called the Ancient Constitutions. Not thinking it proper to insert the balance here, we will mention the subjects treated of under separate heads, viz., "Private Duties, Instructions for Candidates, Proposing Candidates, The Candidate, Secretary of a Lodge, Treasurer, Deacons, Stewards, Tyler, Number to be Initiated; Of Grand Lodges in General: The Election of Grand Master and other Grand Officers," down to Pursuivant, including Grand Visitations; and then the author branches out upon the business of the Grand Lodge, et‑, etc.

 

Now, who can fail to see that what has generally been re= garded as the Ancient Constitutions of Masonry, in the Ahiman Rezon, is nothing more nor less than the Constitution for the government of the Athol Grand Lodge, adopted in 1772, more than fifty years after the compilation of Anderson. We believe nearly all the Grand Lodges in the United States hate 329 830

 

DIGEST OF MA80NIC LAWS.

 

a code of laws which they call the Constitution, and another code called the By‑Laws; and thus it was with the Athol Grand Lodge; they extracted as much from the Ancient Constitutions as suited their purposes, and added thereto rules that had never been heard of, as constituting portions of the fundamental law. This Constitution was drawn up by Dermott, and adopted by his Grand Lodge, was sent out and made the Daramount law of all the Provincial Grand Lodges established by that body ; and hence, in all the States of this Union where the Ahiman Rezon has been republished, it was not only looked upon as containing truly the Old Charges, but for many years it seems not to have been known that any higher authority ex isted.

 

Indeed, if we may judge by the extensive quotations made from this half‑got‑up and spurious book, in certain quarters, we are left to doubt whether it is not still regarded as containing the Masonic law.

 

But we are gratified in knowing that some of the States, long governed by it, have thrown it aside, and are being governed by the true law.

 

Two or three years ago, Bro. Hyneman of the Mirror and Keystone, called our attention, through his paper, to the fact, that he had in his possession a copy of Anderson's Constitutions, edition of 1738, which contained the Old Charges, as they are found in Dermott's dhiman Rezon, and differing from every other edition of Anderson. We replied to Bro. Hyneman, and felt constrained to say, that neither Bro. Anderson, nor,the Grand Lodge of England could ever have given sanction to such a publication.

 

We know that there was truly an edition of Anderson's Constitutions in that year, but, we gave it as oui opinion, that the copy in Bro. Hyneman's possession was a counterfeit.

 

Through the courtesy of Bro. Macoy, of New York City, we have bad access to his very rare Masonic library, and we have now before us Anderson's Constitutions of 1723, 1767, 1784, and the edition of 1738, purporting to be Anderson's.This latter book contains, as Bro. Hyneman stated, the Old Charges, almost word for word, as they are found in Dermott's .,Ihiman.Rezon of 1805 (now before us), and totally different from all the d'ther editions of Anderson. In short, the Old Charges are, word for word, the same in the other editions DIG19ST‑ t3! HdsONIC LAWS.

 

831 before us; and as we republished them from the edition of 17‑56, we can say, knowingly, that they are precisely the same in that edition also. We can not, for a moment, suppose that either Anderson, or the Grand Lodge of England, would have published a code purporting to be the fundamental law, in 1738, differing ‑essentially from that code, published in 1723, and, especially, when we find no mention made of the change. Still less can we believe that, in the next edition (1756), Entick and the Grand .Lodge of England would have thrown away the code of 1738, and adopt that of 1723, word for word, and give us no intimation of said change.

 

In short, we can not suppose that the true law, as collated in 1723, would have passed into :all the editions of the Book of Constitutions, except that of 1738, and no mention be made of that exception.

 

Bro. Anderson was a man of too much character as, an author, to admit such a Rupposition.

 

We believe the custom has ever been for the engraver to put his name to his work, unless he was ashamed of it, and ‑we find that in all the other editions of Anderson the name of the engraver of the frontispiece is given, while in that of 1738 no such name appears.

 

Again : we have no evidence that any other edition of Anderson was placed on sale in the book stores, while the book of 1738 contains, on the title page, an advertise. ment of its being on sale at three different book stores. But, we think, an extract from the Old Charges, found in all the other editions of Anderson, and an extract in reference to the same subject, from this book of 1'738, will force the reader to agree with us, that it is a spurious publication, got up on speculation, and to produce the impression on the minds of the Athol Masons, that the Old Charges were the same with each Grand body. The following is from Anderson, in all the editions except in the book referred to, viz " No brother can be a Warden, until he has passed the part of a Fellow Craft; nor a Master, until he has acted as Warden; nor Grand Warden, until he has been Master of a Lodge; ..or Grand Master, unless he has been a Fellow Craft before his election, who is also to be nobly born, or a gentleman of the best fashion, or some eminent scholar, or some curious architect or artist, descended of honest parents, and who is of shigular $82

 

DIGEST OF MASONIC, LAWS.

 

great merit in the opinion of the Lodges.

 

And for the better and easier, and more honorable discharge of his office, the Grand Master has a power to choose his own Deputy Grand Master who must be then, or must have been formerly, the Master of a particular Lodge, and has the privilege of acting whatever the Grand Master, his principal, should act, unless the said princi, pal be present, or interpose his authority by letter." The following is from the book of 1738 " The Wardens are chosen from the Master Masons, and no brother can be a Master of a Lodge till he has acted as a Warden somewhere, except in extraordinary cases, or when a Lodge is to be formed, where none such can be had ; for, then, three Master Masons, though never Masters or Wardens of Lodges before, may be constituted Master and Wardens of that new Lodge. But no number, without three Master Masons, can form a Lodge ; and none can be the Grand Master, or a Grand Warden, who has not acted as the Master of a particular Lodge." .

 

We shall not call special attention to the particulars in which the two articles above extracted differ, because they are so esseptially different throughout, as to command the attention of all.

 

We had intended to write and publish, in this connection, a dissertation upon the Masonic and moral application of each of the Old Charges; but, having heard read six lectures, written by Bro. S. Lawrence, of the Signet and Journal, upon these old laws, and, believing the brother handles the subject with more ability than we could do, we rely upon their publication, when we hope to find a copy in the hands of every brother we meet ; for we say, with great confidence, that they will be found to be of inestimable value to all who desire to understand the moral application of this wonderful code of laws.

 

CHAPTER IX.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

CAN A SUSPENDED MASON BE EXPELLED? HuN'TsvILL&, Mo., March 2, 1849.

 

R. W. BRO. J. W. S. MITCHELL.‑Dear Sir ~When

 

a Mason

 

lwa been suspended for the non‑payment of Lodge dues, and, after his suspension, removes Into the jurisdiction of some other Lodge, but both Lodges under the jurisdiction of the same Grand Lodge, can the Lodge under which jurisdiction be now is, try him for an offense of a more criminal nature, which, if sustained, will perhaps result in expulsion?

 

Please answer as early as possible.

 

With the highest esteem, I am, fraternally, etc.,

 

J. C. SHAEFER. Before answering the above question, we beg to say that it is a great mistake to suppose the editor of a Masonic journal is the proper person to look to for authentic advice upon mooted questions of local law. The Grand Lodge, or, in its recess, the Grand Master, constitutes the highest authority on Masonic jurisprudence; and this is proper, for the reason that an editor might very honestly advise a Lodge, in another jurisdiction, to do that which would violate the edicts of the Grand Lodge. For example, had we been asked by. a Lodge in_ Indiana, if expulsion from a Royal Arch Chapter should operate as expulsion or suspension from a Lodge of Master Masons, we should unhesitatingly have answered, No 1 and yet, two years ago, the Grand Lodge of that State had such a rule upon' its statute books. But of Masonic usage, or Ancient Regulations, we know of no one more likely to be correct, certainly ro one should be expected to use more diligence to be so, than the conductor of a Masonic work.

 

We have made these remarks, to guard our readers against adopting our opinions, in any case, in violation of a Grand Lodge regulation.

 

In relation to the above question, should our opinion be is opposition to the opinion of the Grand Master, or the Grand Lodge, when assembled, the Lodge, acting in obedience to on 0 ,334

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

opinion, might be excused, but could not be justified; while the same opinion, given by the Grand Master, and in opposition to the opinion of the Grand Lodge, would justify the subordinate. But, we apprehend, there can be but one opinion successfully maintained in relation to the matter called up by Bro. Shaefer, and we proceed to lay down the proper rule of action, as we understand it.

 

1. That every non‑affiliated Mason is amenable to the nearest Lodge.

 

2. That a brother, who has been suspended, indefinitely, for unmasonic conduct, should be arraigned and tried for any offense, the penalty of which is expulsion.

 

3. If a brother be suspended for a definite period, say twelve months, or for non‑payment of dues, he may, and should be arraigned and tried for any offense which would subject him to a higher grade of punishment, viz., indefinite suspension or expulsion. Some are of opinion that suspension for non‑payment of Lodge dues, only operates to deprive him of the privileges of his own Lodge.

 

We think a suspended brother, no matter for what cause, can not sit in any Lodge.

 

But a brother suahended for non‑payment of dues, is scarcely considered as guilty, thereby, of unmasonic conduct, but of a dereliction of Masonic duty.

 

This, perhaps, may, however, be a distinction without a difference; but certain it is, that the brother has it in his own power, at‑ any time, to remove the prohibition, by paying up his dues; and surely if, during this suspension, he is guilty of grossunmasonic conduct, it is competent for the Lodge to arraign and try him; and, if found guilty, inflict the penalty of indefinite suspension or expulsion, thereby placing it out of his power to impose on the Craft. As to the jurisdiction the accused brother hails from, it is a matter of no consequence‑‑he is amenable to the nearest Lodge for the time being.

 

DISOBEDn1dCE TO BY‑LAWS.‑RECONSIDERTNG A BALLOT. Mrssrsmm, February 26, 19‑19. d. W. S. MITCHELL.‑Dear Brother. ‑I beg leave, here, to lay before you a small domestic affair, and should you think proper, at any time, to give your views upon such proceedings, I should be happy to have them.

 

It is this: At e QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

$::X late meeting, a Committee reported favorably upon the petition of a minister of the Gospel, and a vote was taken, when two brothers blackballed the applicant, because the Lodge did not first pass a resolution that the money should net be refunded. I will here remark, that it has been a rule of our Lodge to admit ministers of the Gospel free of charge; or, if they pay, to refund them the amount, and only require them to pay the monthly dues, and, in this instance, the money was paid or vouched for.

 

Well, as I said, the candidate was blackballed by two members.

 

They then made a proposition to move a re‑ballot, on condition that the Lodge would first pars a revolution that the money should not be refunded, which the entire Lodge:, excepting only three, were compelled to agree to, to prevent a truly worthy man from being rejected‑the three in the minority ruling and controlling the entire Lodge. and they stated that they were satisfied with the petitioner‑in fact, wished him to come in, but refused to be governed by the majority, or almost the entire Lodge.

 

The candidate was, however, admitted on the terms of the three rebellious members. Was this conduct not unmasonic? The Worshipful Master was. at a loss, too, in regard to a reconsideration of the matter i denied the right to reconsider on the motion of one who voted a blackball, or on the motion of any member, etc.

 

However, he yielded, and has requested me to ae~ your views on the subject.

 

Can a ballot be reconsidered on the motion of one who voted a blackball?

 

I insisted it could be.

 

Was I right or not? With the warmest wishes for your prosperity, I remain very truly and fraternally yours,

 

D.

 

The propriety, or impropriety, of receiving a minister of the Gospel, or any one else, into a Lodge, without charge, is a matter for the determination of the Grand or subordinate Lodges, and if, by law or usage, the subordinate Lodge fixes the terms or amount to be paid by each applicant, it is the bounden duty of every member to submit cheerfully to the constitutional majority of his Lodge, though the price agreed upon be greatly above, or greatly below the views of the minority. Every brother knows this to be his duty, and the same rule will apply in all cases, except such as may set at naught a paramount lave. We hold, that a brother is not bound to obey an edict of his Grand Lodge, provided it is clearly requiring a violation of an established Landmark, but in no other case.

 

Had this Lodge, by a constitutional majority, agreed to confor the degrees, without charge, on any man who had served ,,Aelve months in the Mexican war, would these brethren have rejected every such applicant, because, in their ,judgment, such an exemption should not have been made? We were for a long time in favor of giving ministers the degrees, free of $36 QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

charge, and we are now, upon principle, as much opposed to it, but, of course, we should cheerfully submit to the constituted authority, whether from the Grand or subordinate Lodge.

 

In reference to the last inquiry, we have to say, that we do not know of any safe rule by which a ballot can be reconsidered. By parliamentary rules, a motion to reconsider must come from one of the majority ; but. in a secret ballot, we have no constitutional or Masonic means of ascertaining what individua' voted in the majority or minority; and, hence, we consider i. motion to reconsider not only out of order. but contrary tI Masonic usage. Most Lodges have a clause in their By‑Laws, saying how often the ballot may be taken before the candidate is declared rejected, and, in the absence of such rule, the custom is (and we believe it a good one), for the Worshipful Master to exercise a sound discretion in ordering, or not, the ballot to be taken a second or third time.

 

We were presiding in a Lodge recently, when on the first ballot one blackball was put in, and we ordered a second ballot, when all were clear ; and it was afterward ascertained, that the blackball had been put in through mistake.

 

Of course, we mean by a second ballot the retaking of the same ballot, at the same meeting.

 

MUST A MASON MAKE KNOWN HIS OBJECTIONS TO A CANDIDATE? ALTCN, January 14th, 1849. Bao. J. W. S. Mrrcusu.‑‑I wish to make a single inquiry, and ask you to be so kind as to state what you conceive to be the duty of the members of a Lodge, in an instance as follows: When a petition is presented by a person, desirous of becoming a member of our Order, on being received, is referred to a committee, whose duty it is to report at a subsequent meeting, favorably or unfavorably; if unfavorably, the matter in relation to it ends ; if favorably, it is presumed the candidate will be favorably received.

 

What is the duty of the members of the Lodge, who know of objections to the said applicant? .

 

Is it not absolutely the.duty of a brptber, who may know of valid objections to the petitioner, to make them known to the Committee? Very fraternally,

 

J. C. KETCHAM. To these questions we answer, that it may er may not be the duty of a brother to make the communication to the Committee. If the objections are founded on mere rumor, and he is at lil)crty to speak upon that subject, he owes it to the Lodge, to see that QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

337 an investigation of the charges is had, so that an unworthy man may not be admitted, or that even a good man be not admitted, without a proper effort to relieve his character from false charges ; he likewise owes this to the applicant.

 

But, if his objections are founded upon absolute knowledge, there is no use of an investigation, as this could not alter the facts, or, in any way, remove the objection, and it becomes his duty to keep the applicant from imposing on the Craft, and he is under no obligations to let any one know that he is the one who does so. First, because it could do no good ; and, second, it might create unkind feelings in the breast of some member of that Committee toward him.

 

But.agaiu, there are cases where he could not do so without acting basely. We will put a case, by way of illustration Suppose we know a man who has applied to be made an Odd, fellow, and a Committee calls on us for information in refer. ence to his character, and we agree to give what knowledge we have of him, on the condition that they pledge their honor as gentlemen (not as Oddfellows), never to communicate to any other person what we say.

 

They agree to these terms, and we satisfy that Committee that the applicant is unfit to associate with gentlemen, what will be the course pursued by that Committee?

 

They will report unfavorably, and vote to reject the candidate; but they will, if they are honorable men, never give their reasons for doing so.

 

Well, surely, we have a right to expect as much fidelity of a brother Mason. who may come under a similar pledge.

 

There are many cases, where no man, or set of men, could induce us to give the information asked for, and, hence, the great utility of the secret ballot‑box; we can keep an unworthy man out, without being under the necessity of betraying our trust, or wounding the feelings of those, who, knowing of no objections, believe the candidate worthy.

 

But this question involves the sacred use of the ballot‑box, for, if it can be made the duty of the brother to communicate his objections to a Committee, it may be made equally his duty to communicate them to the Lod(re, and if, after the ballot has been taken, the indivi.lual depgsiting the black')all can he 22 338

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

required to state his reasons for doing so, what use is there for a secret ballot?

 

None, whatever; you had as well vote. by a show of the right hand.

 

The usage is, and has generally

 

een. to admit no one into the Lodge by initiation, or otherwise, except by the unanimous consent of all the members present. Now, if a brother can be required to state his objections, it presupposes the existence of a power in the Lodge to overrule his objections, and admit the applicant, in opposition to the objector, and, of course, the usage of unanimity is thrown to the winds.

 

Masonry has ever protected its members against the introduction of discordant materials.

 

Harmony, Concord, and Brotherly Love, have ever been an essential ingredient to the well‑being of the Order; but, could harmony exist in a Lodge that would admit a man contrary to the will of one of its mem bers?

 

As a general rule, we think we could not consent to fellowship a man against whom we had deposited a negative vote, and, if we could not, an application for a demit would be our only remedy.

 

Candor constrains us to admit, that this is not the first time that the sacredness of the ballot‑box, and the wholesome regulation of unanimity have been assailed.

 

In the reign of Henry VI., Masonic Lodges were little more than so many drinking clubs, where, we have reasons to believe, candidates were proposed on the spur of the occasion; and voted for by a show of hands, and a unanimous vote was not required. At a much later period, in England, when the 1. Warden was in the habit of calling to refreshment at the close of every section of the lecture (and there were three times as many sections then as now), for the purpose of drinking and singing Bacchanalian songs; yea, when it was honorable for a man to get drunk, provided lie was the "last to fall;" then were men made Masons without a due observance of rules; for example, a man was proposed to a Lodge in London, and the members contribated his initiation fee, on the ground, that he was a " three‑bottle man,"and could tell a good story.

 

CAN A NON‑AFFILIATED MASON PREFER CHARGES AGAINST A MEMBER OF A LODGE? CAN THE ACCUSER WITHDRAW CHARGES? To the first question, we answer that we know of no differ ence between non‑affiliated Masons and members, except, so far QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

339 as obedience to local regulations are concerned. The ByLaws, for example, requires the members to convene once a month, and every member is bound to obey, while the nonaffiliated Mason is not so bound. So in‑ reference to all the local regulations designed for the government of the Lodge, or the especial well‑being of its members, but, otherwise, we all stand upon a level, subject to the same restraints, and entitled to the same immunities.

 

If it were not so, the members would be held guiltless, should they basely slander the non‑affiliated, and no means of redress could be resorted to; for, it will be remembered, that the latter has no more right to use violence. than the former.

 

It is in the power of the Grand Lodge to make distinctions, but those distinctions must not be in violation of the Ancient Landmarks. For example, the Grand Lodge can not suspend, censure, or expel any Mason, except for good cause shown. On the contrary, the Grand Lodge may issue an edict, requiring non‑affiliated Masons to do any reasonable thing for the good of the Craft, and a failure or refusal, on their part, to comply with the law, will subject them to all the degrees of punishment known to Masonic jurisprudence; provided, always, that the right of the Grand Lodge can not extend beyond its acknowledged jurisdiction.

 

We assert that, formerly, nothing was known of non‑affiiliated Masons, in the sense we now use the term. Masons were allowed to demit from their Lodge only to join another, or to travel beyond its jurisdiction, and it was made their duty to connect themselves with another Lodge, as soon as they had an opportunity, and a failure to comply released the Fraternity from any obligations to them.

 

At this day, it is quite common to permit Masons to demit at pleasure, and remain nonaffiliated, nor is there any Grand‑Lodge regulation which impairs their standing, or weakens their claims upon the Fraternity at large.

 

We, therefore, conclude that non‑affiliated Masons have the right to prefer charges against a member of a Lodge, and that it becomes the duty of the Lodge to hear and determine the case, if deemed of sufficient importance.

 

To the second question, we have to say, that the character $40

 

QUESTIONS OF MASOIVI0 USAGE.

 

and dignity of the Lodge is assailed, whenever charges are pre ferred against one of its members, and it becomes the duty of the Lodge to purify itself, either by removing the stain, improp. erly cast on the brother, or by cutting him off from the family associations. Suppose a brother should so far forget himsel& as to be instigated by vindictive feelings, and make false charges against another, and thus, to.say the least, excite doubts of his innocence in the minds of the members, it would be an outrage upon the innocent brother, to stay the proceedings, until he can be be fully heard, in his defense; and especially is it the duty of the Lodge to prosecute the trial, if there be reasons to believe that the charges have been made with a knowledge of their falshood, for should it so turn out, it will be the duty of the Lodge to punish the offender even more severely than would have been the accused, if found guilty.

 

We wish further to be understood, that if the Lodge have a Committee of Grievance, and the charges are made before that Committee, the same principle will apply, for the Committee being the authorized agents of the Lodge to bring, in a proper manner, offenders before the Lodge, they can not permit charges to be withdrawn, unless they are deemed too trivial to require the action of the Lodge. Whenever charges and specifications are legally filed, whether before a committee or the Lodge, they become the property of the Lodge, and can not be withdrawn without its consent.

 

Of course the Lodge can suffer the charges to be withdrawn, or any other amicable adjustment of the difficulties that it may deem proper.

 

CHICAGO, Ill., Dec. 13th, 1848.

 

DxA$ BRO. MrrcazLL :‑I should like to see in the Siyred: 1. When a brother is under censure before Lodge? 2. Can the Master send e Master Mason from the Lodge room for misconduct ! S. Can a member appeal from the decision of the W. Master on points of order! Yours fraternally,

 

G. D.

 

the following questions answered trial or sentence, can he visit the 1. If a brother stands charged with unmasonic conduct, to which is, or may be attached the penalty of suspension or expulsion, he can not visa any Lodge. The ordinary rule of e'; idence QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGN.

 

341 Is, and ever has been reversed in Masonry.

 

In law, a man is presumed to be innocent until his guilt is proven, on a final trial; but, in Masonry, so elevated is the character, and so sacred are the obligations of a Master Mason, that it is fairly presumed that he will never institute and file charges against any brother, unless lie has ample reasons to believe him guilty, and, especially, as he knows that a malicious prosecution, or _false charge, willfully made, will be visited upon the offender with a punishment adequate to the crime; and, hence, the standing of the brother charged, as first stated, is impaired by a very high order of testimony.

 

And we can not sit with a brother who is not acknowledged to be in good standing.

 

We think, therefore, that, after charges and specifications are filed, the brother has no Lodge privileges, except so far as may be necessary to a fair trial, by confronting and questioning the witnesses. There are some who go further, and say that a Mason, legally charged, has no right to sit in the Lodge during his trial ; that the testimony should be taken elsewhere than in open Lodge, when the accused may be present, but that he can not be present when the case is being determined by the Lodge.

 

2. It is the bounden duty of the Master to preserve order, and secure the harmony of his Lodge, and, as he has no power to inflict fines and imprisonment, if the ordinary Masonic means fail, lie is thrown upon the reserved rights of the Master of the Craft, and it becomes his duty to preserve harmony within, by ordering the disorderly member to be excluded. Nor has the member a right to appeal from the Master to the Lodge; but, if he feel aggrieved thereby, he may 12riug the conduct of the Master before the Grand Lodge.

 

3. There is nothing in the Ancient Constitutions that has any direct reference to this subject. That appeals from the decision of the Master were formerly allowed, in any case, we do not believe; but, since Grand Lodges have assumed legislative powers, convenience has made it necessary to resort to parliamentary rules; and, notwithstanding many of the Grand Lodges in the United States have, in unmeasured terms, denounced the use of such rules, we venture the assertion. that there is not one where some of the rules are not u~ad.

 

342 Virginia, for example, fraternally lashes Missouri for calling the yeas and nays, and does this in committee of the whole. Legislative bodies must be governed by some rules applicable to the business of legislation..

 

The right to appeal from the decision of the presiding officer, is clearly provided for in Jefferson's Manual, and is practiced by some of the Grand Lodges ; but a subordinate Lodge is not a legislative body, and may not, thereby, claim the right to use this rule, and however wholesome may such a restraint be upon an irritable or hasty tempered Master, there is no Masonic law or usage that gives the members such a right. We, therefore, conclude that, in the absence of a local regulation, a member can not appeal from the decision of the Master, as to points of order, in any case where the laws or usages are involved.

 

It is the duty of the Master to see that the laws are executed, and the rituals observed ; and, as he is responsible for the neglect of this duty to his G. Lodge, he alone must be the judge of the law; but, in cases where the settled laws of Masonry are not involved, an appeal should lie.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

NON‑AFFILIATED MASONS.

 

"This subject has, for several years past, engaged the atten tion of the Grand Lodges of the United States, without producing anything like uniformity of opinion. ‑It is one of much interest to the Fraternity, because of the large number of nonaffiliated brethren, who claim all the privileges, rights, and benefits of the Order, without contributing anything to its support, or to the Charity Fund.

 

" Your Committee beg leave to remark, that the rights, privileges, responsibilities, and benefits of the Order are reciprocal. Every Mason, as a return for the privileges and benefits conferred upon him by his admission to the Order, is required to attend the meetings of the Lodge; to share its labors and responsibilities; to contribute to its support, and especially to the Charity Fund. It is a principle laid down in the Ancient Regulations, that every Mason should be a contributing member to some Lodge, unless he be released from the obligation by the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

$43 action of the Lodge, or unless he be excluded from its privileges, by the act of suspension or expulsion. In the latter case, his connection with the Order is dissolved; but so long as he remains in good standing, the obligations are mutual and binding.

 

" By withdrawing from membership, which he has always the right to do (unless under gensure), a Mason does not cast of his allegiance, nor is he released from any of those duties and obligations he took upon himself, upon his entrance into the Order. Your Committee believe that every Mason, whether attached to the Lodge or not. is bound by every principle of honor and justice, to contribute something to its support.

 

If he fail, or refuse to contribute, according to his means‑if he disregard the calls of charity on the ground that he is not a member of a Lodge, as many have done, what just claims can he have to its protection, or to a participation in its benefits ? " Although your Committee hold, that every Mason in good standing, although not a member of any Lodge, is bound to contribute something to sustain the Institution, and meet the applications of the distressed, yet they know no constitutional means by which the Lodge can impose a tax upon such, or enforce its payment, by any Masonic law. The only means which have occurred to your Committee, is, to direct the subordinate Lodges to require a small sum for every visit which a nonaffiliated Mason may make to such a Lodge.

 

Mason may make to such a Lodge.

 

" Rather than levy a certain tax upon non‑affiliated brethren, your Committee would appeal to their sense of justice, to their sense of what they owe to the Lodge, and to themselves as members of an Institution, whose privileges and benefits they claim. When a Mason, for a long series of years, has contributed nothing to the support of the Order, he ought not to consider himself entitled to its privileges, nor can he lay any just claims to its honors."‑Port Folio.

 

We desire to see the question of taxing non‑affiliated Masons, fairly and fully investigated, in order to a speedy settlement of it ; for, if one Grand Lodge has the power, all have; and, if exercised by one, it should be by all. We have made the foregoing extract from the report of the Committee on Foreign Correspondence, of the Grand Lodge of Tennessee, believing it 844

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

calculated to shed much light upon this subject ; but, if we are not greatly mistaken, the conclusions of the Committee are pre. cisely the reverse of that to which their reasoning forcibly leads. The Committee say, it is the duty of every Mason to contribute to the Charity Fund‑"that it is a principle laid down in the Ancient Regulations, that every Mason should. be a contributing member." That though the Lodge may release him from membership, he is not released from his obligations‑that every Mason "is bound by every principle of honor and justice, to contribute something to its support."

 

That " every Mason, in good standing, is bound to contribute something to sustain the Institution."

 

Yet, with all this, the Committee declare, that they know of no Constitutional means by which the Grand Lodge can impose a tax.

 

Is it possible that that Committee believes the Grand Lodge has no constitutional means to compel a Mason to do what his obligations require of him ? If it is laid down in the Ancient Regulations, that every Mason should be a contributing member, can the Committee believe the Grand Lodge has no power to require obedience to that Regulation? If the demitted Masom still holds a claim upon the Loage and its members for assistance, can not the Grand Lodge require him to do all his Masonic duties, or sever the tie which, otherwise, becomes unequal and unjust ? We regard the Chairman of that Committee with great veneration, but we are sadly mistaken, if the Grand Lodge has not all power necessary to carry out the principles of the Institution, and compel obedience to the Ancient Regulations. When Masonry was Operative as well as Speculative, a Mason was permitted to demit only for two causes‑first, that he was about to join another Lodge‑and, second, to travel beyond the jurisdiction of his Lodge; and, in this case, lie was bound to have his name enrolled as soon as he located in the vicinity of a Lodge, which, if he failed to do, released the Craft from all obligations to assist him; and now, when by a modern regulation, a Mason demits from a Lodge at will, is he not still under obligations to comply with that Ancient Regulation, which requires all Masons to enroll their names on the books of some Lodge? If the Grand Lodge has not the power founded on first principles to tax non‑affiliated Masons, who QUESTIONS OF MASONIC 1JSAGN.

 

845 are ackowledged to be under its jurisdiction and control, so far as their Masonic conduct is concerned, then the Grand Lodge of England has been transcending its powers for more than one hundred years.

 

That Grand body required, by law, that the officers and members should each pay, annually, a sum of money, over and above that which other Masons were required to pay, and if all Masons are members of the same great family, and all the Masons of England are amenable to the Grand Lodge of England, will any one doubt the right of that Grand body to legislate for the government of all ? We hold that the Grand Lodge of Tennessee has the right to require every Mason in the State to pay a reasonable sum to the support of Masonry, and, unless it can be shown that their Masonic College is not, and will not be a charitable Institution, every Mason in the State, who is able, should be taxed to sustain it, and, if they refuse to pay, rid the hive of its useless drones.

 

We have no idea of reqiring good and true men (who are generally working men), to lose the time necessary to do all Lodge duties, contribute all the charity. and then be bound to assist those who stand aloof from their known Masonic duties. We are unwilling to remain bound to those out‑door managers, who often undertake to dictate to the members of the Grand Lodge, and then openly defy its edicts.

 

We wish to be on the level with all, and not rob Peter to pay Paul.

 

‑ CAN THE GRAND MASTER LEGALIZE THE ILLEGAL ACTS OF A LODGEt L'nrron MASONIC SIGNET :‑As editors are presumed to know everything, and are expected to answer everybody's questions, I should like to have your opinion of the matter that follows Suppose a Lodge. II. D., whose dispensation expires at the annual session of the Grand Lodge, fails to make return, and, of course. fails to obtain a charter, meantime, the Lodge continues to work, confer degrees, etc., but when their attention is called to the expiration of their dispensation, they apply to the Grand Master to exercise his prerogative, and renew their dispensation, which application is granted, the renewal, on the face of it, purporting to cover the interval betwon the expiration of the dispensation and its renewal.

 

Has the Grand Master, or even the Grand Lodge, the power to renew a dis pensation, so as to cover the interval between the expiration and renewal, and legalize the work of that interval! QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Admitting that the renewal might relieve the Lodge from censure, for working without legal authority, in what attitude do those stand who were received by the Lodge, after the expiration of their dispensation? If they were not regularly made Masons at first, can the renewal of dispensation make them so t B.

 

A.

 

We hold that all powers which, by usage, were anciently vested in the Grand Master, remain unchanged, except so far as they have been abrogated, or withheld by Grand Lodge edicts. Most Grand Lodges do not leave this to mere conjecture, but specifically set forth that the duties and powers cf the Grand Master, not therein stated, shall be such as were anciently, and usually exercised by Grand Masters.

 

The Grand Lodge of Missouri never authorizes, except in extreme cases, the issuing of a dispensation for a longer period than until the next succeeding communication, or annual meeting, when it is made the duty of the subordinate Lodge to surrender it to the Grand Lodge, and ask a charter, or a continuance of the dispensation. Should the subordinate fail to make the return, it must cease all business and work, its authority having expired.

 

But suppose the subordinate fails to make the return by reason of some providential cause, and suppose the Lodge improperly regards the possession of the expired dispensation as authority to continue work, and when satisfied of its error, seeks all honorable means to correct and atone for that error, does the power anywhere exist to legalize their illegal acts?

 

We unhesitatingly answer, Yes.

 

Formerly, the Grand Master was the great head of the Craft, at all times, and now, under the Grand Lodge system, the Grand Master exercises a controlling influence and guardianship over all the Craft in his jurisdiction, and may do all to promote the prosperity and well‑being of the Fraternity, that ancient Grand Masters might do, except so far as restrained by Grand Lodge edict. In the absence, then, of any written law, the case cited is clearly one coming within the purview of the prerogatives of thb Grand Master, and calling for the exercise of a sound discretion, and thus, by the high power in him vested, he can, and should legalize any illegal act, if, by so doing, he promote3 the ends of Masonry ; and the act of legalizing the meetings, or communications of the subordinate Lodge, clearly removes any QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

347 disability under which individuals may have been laboring, by being illegally made. We doubt whether it would be best, in. any case, to antedate a dispensation, but the same results would be accomplished by fixing the true date of renewal, and ordering an entry on the records of the Lodge, legalizing their intermediate acts.

 

Masonry is conservative in its principles of government, and hence the errors in the practice of our ritual, too often occasioned by want of means of correct information, should not be held amenable alone to the letter of the law. Thus, when the Grand Master is apprised of the existence of an error, evident ly the result of ignorance, or even where the known law has seen transcended, under a firm conviction that the interests of Masonry imperiously demanded it, he, in the recess of the Grand Lodge, not only has the power, but it becomes his duty to remove the bar to a legal recognition of the act. We conclude, then, that the indorsement on the dispensation, spoken of by our correspondent, is amply sufficient to authorize the Lodge to continue its work, and the previous illegal acts being legalized by said endorsement of the Grand Master, all Masons made therein must be regarded as regularly made.

 

IS IT RIGHT TO BLACKBALL A CANDIDATE WHOSE FITNINS IS VOUCHED FOR! BRO. MITCHELL:‑‑IS it Masonry, or anti‑Masonry, to blackball a candidate when he is well recommended, a Committee report favorably, and two other worthy brethren state, for the satidaction of the Lodge (the candidate being unknown to the major part of the members), to be a man of good character, moral in all his ways, steady and industrious.

 

I now ask you for information. as I am fearful anti‑Masonry is creeping into our Lodge, viz., St. Mark's, No. 93.

 

.

 

The secret ballot has, in most ages of Masonry, been held sacred. No Lodge has the right to go behind the ballot, and inquire into the motives which actuate any brother, in the discharge of this duty‑indeed, were it otherwise, where would be the necessity of the ballot‑box 7

 

A viva voce vote would better answer the purpose, if brethren are to be held responsible, and required to give their reasons for rejecting a candidate ; and, as stated in another place, there are cases where a brother 848

 

QUESTIONS OF XASONIC USAGE.

 

would be violating a sacred principle of the Order, were he to divulge that which had been privately communicated, under his honor as a gentleman, or a Mason. But if, as intimated by our correspondent, a brother has suffered himself to reject a candidate, whose standing and moral worth was vouched for by a member of the Lodge, simply because lie was personally unacquainted with him, and did not positively know the candidate to possess these qualifications, we think that brother has greatly mistaken his duty, both to the candidate and the Fraternity.

 

If we are unacquainted with a candidate, to whom shall we look for information ?

 

Certainly, to a committee, or a brother in good standing.

 

We shall have sunk very low in the scale of moral worth, when we can not rely upon the Masonic pledge of a brother ; and, especially, in relation to things about which he is not more interested than in the admission of a candidate.

 

Were it necessary that every member of the Lodge should personally know the character and standing of the applicant, more than three‑fourths would be rejected in all large towns.

 

We are aware that committees of investigation are sometimes remiss in their duty; and where we have reason to believe this the case, we have been in the habit of requesting the Committee to state the facts thus elicited ; and, though our conclusions be the opposite to those of the Committee, we have never felt at liberty to doubt their motives.

 

We should never reject an applicant, whose worth was vouched for by a brother, in the absence of counter testimony, but where we are satisfied, no matter from what source, that the ‑applicant is unworthy, we should secretly deposit a blackball.

 

ARE MASONS JADE IN A IODGE UNDER DISPENSATION ENTITLED TO VOTE t ROCKY SPRINGS, CIArRORNB COCwry, Miss., Sept. 2S, 1849. DEAR BRO. Mrrcmcm :‑Have initiates, made in a Lodge working under dispensation, a right to vote on any question before the Lodge, and also for the reception of candidates? and is it necessary for all the members named in the dispensation, to be present at the regular communications, and vote. to make it legal and Masonic? Your answer to the above is respectfully requested, by private letter, or through the Signd.

 

If you answer through the Signet, please mend me the number containing it, and oblige Yours truly and fraternally,

 

Jis. N. COLAJAN.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.'

 

349 To the first question, we answer, that we believe Masons, made in a Lodge under dispensation. have all the "rights, benefits, and privileges," that Masons made in a chartered Lodge have. If the writer intends to ask whether Entered Apprentices, so made, have a right to vote in the Lodge‑we answer, that this depends upon the local regulation of the Grand Lodge, under which, the subordinate is held. Most of the Grand Lodges in the United States, require all the business of the Lodge to be transacted in a Master's Lodge; and hence, none but Master Masons can participate.

 

We believe this is not only a modern regulation, but a very bad one. It is the duty of every member of a Lodge to use all honorable means to preserve harmony and good fellowship with all the members; yea, to cultivate fellowship and Brotherly Love with all the Fraternity.

 

But, have we any assurance that this can be done, if the balloting for the first degree takes place in the Master's Lodge?

 

May not a Mason ‑be thus made, with whom an Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft can not, and will not fellowship, and who, therefore, would be compelled, as an honorable man, to decline taking any further degrees, and leave the Lodge.

 

We have been told that, if an Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft objects to the applicant, it is the duty of the Master Mason, to whom the objection is made, to prevent his being initiated; but we answer, if the petition is received in a Master's Lodge, the Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft has no right to know anything of its introduction, and, besides, if he has a right to object to the making of a Mason, he should have the right to make that objection known only by a secret ballot. The Grand Lodge of England, as far back as we have any authentic account, required all the business of the subordinate to be transacted in the first degree, and every brother had the right to say, by his ballot, who should be added to the number.

 

We know that the Baltimore Convention gravely determined that an Entered Apprentice Lodge is not a Lodge, that a Fellow Craft Lodge is not a Lodge, and yet, we suppose, there is not a member of that Convention who would not require an applicant to visit, distinctly to declare that he had been made an 850 QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Entered Apprentice, in a just and legally constituted Lodge f Ancient, Free, and Accepted Entered Apprentice .Masons.

 

The second question propounded by our correspondent, we think, admits of no doubt. The same rule applies in a Lodge working under dispensation as under charter. A Lodge is competent to transact business, if seven of its members are present; this is the smallest number that can receive and act on a petition, and there is no law or usage which requires more. The balloting for a candidate must be had at a regular communication, because it is of the highest importance that no one be admitted who is not acceptable to all, and all the members are presumed to have notice of said meeting, when it is their duty to attend ; but if any portion fail to do so, the business and work of the Lodge may not be suspended thereby, provided there is a constitutional number in attendance.

 

We now return to the first question propounded by our correspondent, viz., has a Mason made in a Lodge under dispensa= tion, a right to become a member thereof, and vote for the reception of candidates. We think we have answered this question correctly, but, ‑as Bro. Moore, of Boston, entertains quite a different opinion, and as we desire to disseminate true Masonic light, regardless of any pride of opinion, we will extract his remarks in the October number of the Magazine, and, although we happen to be pressed by our compositor, we will hastily offer some of the reasons on which our opinions are based, and then ask the reader to make up his verdict by the law and the testimony "We have heretofore so fully discussed the nature of the powers vested is Lodges working under dispensation, that we do not feel the necessity of entering so much at length into the consideration of the inquiries proposed by our correspondent, as we should otherwise do.' `4 The business of this class of Lodges is defined in terms, by the dispensation. This authorizes the brethren to whom it is granted. to ' form and open a Lodge, after the manner of Ancient, Free, and Accepted Masons, and therein to admit and make Masons.'

 

This we conceive to be the full extent of the powers delegated to, or that can be legally exercised by such Lodges.

 

Entertaining this view or their powers, we, of course, are constrained to give a negative answer to the first inquiry of our correspondent, referring him, for the argument on which our ' See this Hayazine, vol. vii., pp. 23, and 225, and vol. viii., p. 68.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

851 aw‑‑ is predicated, to the Magazine, as indicated in the note appended to tbia article.

 

"If one of the petitioners become disorderly, or is guilty of other unmasonie conduct, he may be removed by the Grand Master; or, if the offense be of a character to justify it, suspended from his privileges as a Mason, until such time as his case can be brought before the competent tribunal for adjudication. This tribunal may be the Lodge nearest his residence, working under a charter. Brethren made in the Lodge under dispensation, and ' demitted Masons' occupy, in this respect, the same ground.

 

If either be derelict in duty or conduct, they may be proceeded against as though the Lodge (under dispensation), did not exist.

 

Neither are members of any Lodge, in the proper and legal sense of the term." We have not read the articles referred to in his note, but we respectfully express a doubt whether any reasons can be urged to justify his position. If the business of a Lodge under dispensation " is defined, in terms," so, also, is the business of a Lodge under charter, for the terms are much the same.

 

Neither gives the power in express terms, to try and punish disorderly mentbers, to levy and collect dues, give alms, bury the dead, protect and support the widow and orphans, and many other of the most important duties known to the Order.

 

If a Grand Lodge in the United States does not constitute the brethren under dispensation into " a regular Lodge of Ancient, Free, and Accepted Masons," then does. it not do what is its bounden duty, for every Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft Mason does, or should know, that if he has not been made a Mason in a "just and regularly constituted Lodge. of Ancient, Freei and Accepted .Masons," he can not be received and acknowledged as a regular Mason, in any regular Lodge, nor are we under any obligations, as Masons, to him.

 

Now, we all know that Masons, made in a. Lodge under dispensation, are entitled to the right hand of fellowship, all the world over.

 

If, then, a Lodge under dispensation, is a regularly constituted Lodge, for the time being, can a Lodge working under charter be anything more, only so far as the one is a charter limited in its time, and the other is perpetual? The Baltimore Convention so decided, and we think correctly. If so, a Lodge under dispensation may open a Lodge, make Masons, and do all other things which regular Lodges m<~,v do, being governed by the Landmarks and usaoes of the Order.

 

552

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Bro. Moore says, that if Masons, made in a Lodge under dice pensation, or non‑affiliated Masons, are guilty of unmasonic conduct, they must be dealt with by the nearest chartered Lodge. Now there is a rule, which obtains everywhere, that gives the authority, and makes it the duty of the nearest Lodge to deal with non‑affiliated brethren, for unmasonic conduct, and another rule requires each Lodge to deal with its own dis orderly members.

 

Then the only question to be determined, is whether a Lodge under dispensation is, in truth and in fact, a Lodge.

 

We hold that it is so, to all intents and purposes ; that Masons can only be made in a regular Lodge; that neither the Grand Master nor Grand Lodge can authorize Masons to be made in any other way; that, being so made, they are entitled to all the privileges, and subject to all the restrictions of those made in a chartered Lodge, and, of course, can become members of the Lodge in which they are made, with full and equal rights with the original petitioners, and these with those of a chartered Lodge.

 

If the doctrine of Bro. Moore be correct, then a Mason made in a Lodge under dispensation in one county town, may become a member of a chartered Lodge in another county town, provided it is the nearest chartered Lodge to his residence.

 

A reason urged why Masons made in a Lodge under dispensation, should not be admitted members, is, that the Lodga might take in a large number of young men, who, without a knowledge of their duty, might, by their votes; control the old Masons, and trample under foot, or violate the Landmarks. Now, we think, there is generally less danger to be apprehended from young, than old Masons, in this particular, for the reason that they soon become the best workmen. But, take the other horn of the dilemma, and it will equally apply, to Lodges, under charter.

 

We leave the subject for the present, inviting discussion from any who believes we are wrong.

 

CAN ONE MEMBER ARREST THE BUSWES8 OF THE LODGE.

 

CALHOUN, Mo., March 5, 1850.

 

Rise. J. w. S. MTTcHELL.‑Dear Sir:‑The twenty‑second Section of the Aft Article of By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, provides that, QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAG14:

 

353 ò No applicant for initiation or membership, in any Lodge, shall be.reeeived, e.oept,by the unanimous consent.of all the members, present." Quay,‑Should a member present refuse to vote, does his refusal prevent the. proper officer from deciding (in case the ballot is fair), that the petitioner is,. duly elected? and, if so, is there any law, custom, or usage by which a member eau be compelled to vote when he does not wish to do so ? An answer to the above question, will much oblige Yours fraternally, Jsanaa. A: Tort.

 

The: first question is an important one, and, at a, first view,, may seem difficult to answer.

 

But, as all laws are intended for the good of the whole, and, in no. instance, designed to favor or encourage perverseness or rebellion in any one, we take it for granted that the statute here quoted is not violated, if the Lodge should declare the candidate elected, notwithstanding member has failed, or refused to vote.

 

It is not in the power, of any brother to arrest the proceedings of a Lodge, by a, refusal to do his duty.

 

If a member, having objections to a candidate, be present, it is his duty to manifest his objection through the ballot‑box, and if he refuse to vote, the fault is his and not that, of the Lodge.

 

(Of course it is the duty of the W. Master to, dgmand his vote.)

 

We think the Lodge does not ' violate the. above rule in receiving a candidate under the circumstanew. stated by our correspondent, for the reason that the same rule. requiring a unanimous vote to elect, requires every member pres, unt to.vote.

 

The law also requires one blackball to reject: The answer to the second question, we think, is plain. 'If's. brother refuse to obey an edict of the Grand Lodge, or an established rule of the Order, it is the duty of the Lodge to deal with the offender. It is common in some Lodges to excuse a brother from voting, but we regard this as altogether wrong,, in the case of a petition, and, certainly, when not excused, no one, can willfuly violate our rules with impunity.

 

Should a, member choose to be obstinate (and some Masons are. prone, to be so, if no penalty is attached to such conduct), every, petitioner might be rejected if a refusal to vote could effect Chat object, and a brother who will not yield obedience to our laws, should be suspended from the privileges of Musonry,, in order that the business of the Society may 'Move ‑on. ia: harmony.

 

354 QUESTIONS OF, MASONIC USAGE.

 

MUST A GRAND WARDEN HAVE FIRST SERVED AS MASTER OF A LODGE? BRO. MITCHELL :‑Allow me to inquire, through your widely circulated work, if the Grand Lodge of Missouri approves of the '░ Old Charges of Free and Aocepted Masons ?"

 

If she does, has she not violated the fourth Article, in elect ing one who has not been Master of a Lodge, as Junior Grand Warden?*

 

Is it contrary, or not, to the twenty‑fifth Article, second Section, of the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge of Missouri? To the first question, we reply that the Grand Lodge of Missouri has always aimed to hold in veneration the Ancient Charges, but, until very recently, it was not known in that Grand body, what the Ancient Charges really were. This appearing manifest, a few years since, a Committee was raised to ascertain and report upon that subject.

 

At the last communication, as Chairman of that Committee, we reported that the Old Charges found in Anderson's Constitutions, as republished in the first volume of the Signet, contained all the Ancient Landmarks and usages that are proper to be written, and that, as far as we know, no attempt had ever been made to alter or change them ; for although the Grand Lodge of England has several times disregarded some of their provisions, in every republication, by order of that Grand body, the entire language has been preserved.

 

Our report was adopted without opposition, and we feel proud in saying, that we believe no Grand Lodge in the Union desires more strictly to act within the pale of the ancient law; but it is not, to be expected that the members should be very familiar with the Ancient Charges, so soon after their publication‑indeed, some of the members are not subscribers to the Signet, and, probably, never read them.

 

We are not authorized to say whether the Grand Lodge violated the Article referred to by our correspondent, or not, in the election of the Junior Grand Warden. If he was never Master of a Lodge, of course the Ancient Charges were violated; but others, we suppose, voted for the brother as we did, without inquiring or thinking of the prerequisite qualification.

 

To the second question, we answer that if the brother had not been Master of a Lodge, the Article of the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge referred to, was violated, and the same apology does not ` See Sigma, vol. 1, p. 300.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

exist for so doing, for it is the duty of every member to be familiar with that instrument, and see it faithfully executed. In connection with this subject, we' feel called upon to say, that we are very sure the Junior Grand Warden did not know, or think of the existence of such a law, at the time of the elec, tion, or he would have promptly admonished the Grand Lodge, for we know he manifested no desire to be elected.

 

WHEN IS A MAN TOO OLD TO BE MADE A MASON? A correspondent, from Arkadelphia, Ark., requests us to say at what age we consider a man too old to be a Mason. A moment's reflection will enable the brother to answer, as we do, by saying a man can not be made a Mason when lie is in his dotage. This is the only rule upon the subject.

 

WHERE MAY A REJECTED CANDIDATE PETITION t ARKADELPHIA, ARK., Sept. 22, 1850.

 

BRO. MITCHELL .‑Please answer, through your Signet: Has a sister Lodge a right to act on a petition of a candidate, after he has been twice rejected by another Lodge, and the same made known to them !

 

W. M. B.

 

Most Grand Lodges prohibit a candidate from petitioning a second time, until twelve months have elapsed from his rejection. Indeed, so general is this practice in the United States, that it may now be considered common law, even where a Grand Lodge has made no edict in reference to it ; and, we suppose, a second rejection would only require a probation of an additional year.

 

If, then, the petitioner has served out his probation, and resides nearest to a sister Lodge, we think he has a right to petition that Lodge; but we are clearly of opinion that the Lodge, acting in good faith to the great family of Masons, should not consent to initiate him without the approbation of the Lodge in which he had been rejected.

 

SHOULD THE MASTER OF A LODGE HAVE THE CHAPTER PAST MASTER'S DEGREE? BmToN couNTY, ALA., Oct. 1, 1850. BRO. MITCHELL :‑You will confer a favor by answering whether a M. Mason can be qualified to preside, without taking the degree of P. Master in a regular Chapter'

 

If say would a P. Master, who had taken the Chapter degrees, do 346 QUESTIONS,, OF XASOXIC gssGX,, right to et in the Lodge without claiming, the Chair, or assisting:him In.the,Ah+cttArge of his duty?

 

You will please answer in the next Sig* or by privato. letter,‑ as you may prefer.

 

The cause of,my.making this request is this: Comp. Brandidge (G. Lecturer); in the presence of. myself and two. otber.Compauionq,.qualified a Master Mason to, preside over a new; Lodge, and some of the Companions in the Chapter, where I have my. membership, contend we .have done wrong, and said they could not sit in said Lodge.

 

In haste, fraternally yours,,

 

WILLIAM JOHNSON.

 

In answering questions of Masonic law, we wish it understood that we are governed, as far as. possible, by ancient usage, and can not, therefore, be expected to meet the views of aik well informed Masons, for the reason, that most of the Grand Lodges in the United States have, at various times, set at naught the ancient or paramount law, by edicts, hastily or incautiously adopted, and where such edicts have long, remained upon the statute books of said Grand Lodges, many intelligent Masons are disposed to regard them as correct, and in accordance with the Ancient Landmarks. In some jurisdictions, the opinion prevails that no one can preside over a Lodge who has not received the degree of Past Master, because. of his being elected to preside over a Lodge of Master Masons, truly so called,, and, say they, inasmuch as the Wardens. succeed to the office ofMaster, in the event of his death or absence, they, too, must have the Past Master's degree.

 

Virginia is governed by this rule.

 

Other Grand Lodges take the ground that, while it is indispensably necessary that a Past M_ aster should preside. one who has received the degree in a Chapter is every way qualified in that particular; while still another, and, we think, the larger number of Grand Lodges, indirectly admit that the degree of Past Master is not necessary to, qualify a Master for the. Chair.

 

We say they indirectly admit this, because, while they require the Master of every. Lodge; under, charter, to have the degree of P. Master, they permit, and even make it the duty of the Senior Warden to preside over the Lodge, in the absence of the Master; and, in the absence of both the Master and Senior Warden, the Junior Warden takes the Chair,_ and neither of the Wardens are required to be a P. Master, from which it follows that they do not regard the degree: as necessary to the presiding officer.

 

100.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC VSArE.

 

':357 We will refer to the oldest records upon the subject, and, We think; there can be but little difficulty in arriving at corrdet conclusions.

 

Our readers will bear in mind, that the oldest record which we can consult is Anderson's Constitutions‑all other documents, claiming an earlier 'date, are, to say the least, of doubtfhl authority. No work, we have reason to believe, was ever more carefully prepared than Anderson's book. Every precautidu was used, not only by the compiler, but by an able Committee of fourteen members of the Grand Lodge of England, to have all, and no more than all, the ancient usages, as far aa'they could be written, embraced in that book. The 'first printed editlo'n of Anderson's Constitutions contains a rule, giving the Chair to the oldest P. Master; but, soon after, they tell us the true lair has been found, and, hence, they passed the following regulation on the 25th of November, 1723, after Anderson's Constit tions were adopted by the Grand Lodge.

 

" If the Master of 'a particular Lodge is deposed, or demits, the Senior Warden shall forthwith fill the Master's Chair, till the next time of choosing." If it had then been deemed necessary for the presiding officer to have the degree of Past Master, provisions would have been made, so ‑to qualify the Senior Warden.

 

The Ahiman Rezon of 1764, which, as stated elsewhere, is authority as far as it agrees with Anderson, contains the following " The Senior Warden succeeds to all the duties of the Master, and fills the Chair in his absence; or, if the Master goes abroa'ti on business, resigns, demits, or is deposed, the Senior Warden shall forthwith fill his place, till the next stated time of election.' We believe the degree of Past Master, and the distinctions given to Past Masters, by a seat in Grand Lodge, originated with the so called Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons, formed in London, of suspended, expelled, and seceding Masons, and which was familiarly known as the Athol Grand Lndge, because the Duke of Athol was its avowed head. This illegal body published the Ahiman Rezon, above referred to, whicb 858 QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

contained much of Anderson's Constitutions, correctly; but very many of the Ancient Regulations were perverted, or made to answer the purpose of said spurious Grand Lodge; and yet, uF to 1764, even that body did not deem it necessary that the Master of a Lodge should have the Past Master's degree, if for no other reason, because, as we think, no such degree was then known. We do not remember that any distinctions or privileges were ever given to Past Masters by the Grand Lodge of England, until the union of the two Grand Lodges, in 1813, when, by way of compromise, some of the usages of the illegal Grand Lodge were retained, one of which we recognize in thi present English Constitutions, as follows " If the Master should die, be removed, or be incapable of discharging the duties of his office, the Senior Warden.; and, in the absence of both the Wardens, then the immediate Past Master; or, in his absence, the Senior Past Master shall act as Master, in summoning the Lodge, until the next election of officers." Now, it would seem to us that no one can fairly conclude, from the above, that the Grand Lodge of England attaches any sort of importance to the degree of Past Master, for the Wardens have a preference over Past Masters, in occupying the chair of Master. We think, however, the Grand Lodge acts wisely in requiring a Past Master to preside over the Lodge, in the absence of the three principal officers (though we deny that a Lodge can be opened in such case), not because he has the Past Master's degree, but because of his experience as a presiding officer, and his supposed knowledge of the interests of the Lodge and the Fraternity.

 

The Grand Lodge of Scotland, where Masonry is more pure, and in more strict accordance with the Ancient Landmarks, than in England, requires the Wardens (who may not be Past Masters) to succeed the Master, in his absence.

 

We have not access to the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, but, we apprehend, the same practice prevails there as in England and Scotland, for most of the innovations and additions of modern Masonry are traceable to France and America. By QUESTIONS OF XASONIC USAGE.

 

359 reference to the usage of the Grand Lodges in the United States, it will be seen that, while they all require a Past Master to preside over a Lodge, under charter, none of them, we believe, requires the Master of a Lodge, under dispensation, to have that degree. We hold that a Lodge, under dispensation, is, and must be (the opinion of the Baltimore Convention to the contrary notwithstanding) a legally constituted Lodge, otherwise no one can be legally made a Mason therein.

 

Who ever heard of a brother Mason being admitted to visit, or being recognized as a Mason, who did not first give evidence that he had been made in a legally, or regularly constituted Lodge?

 

And does not every one know, that those made in Lodges under dispensation, are as fully recognized as those made in Lodges under charter ? We received the three first degrees in a Lodge under dispensation, and, thus far, our right to be recognized as a regular Mason has never been questioned ; and yet, we have several times been compelled to say, in that peculiar manner pointed out by the rites of our Order, that we had been Initiated, Passed, and Raised in a legally constituted Lodge of Ancient, Free, and Accepted Masons. Well, surely, if we can sit in a Lodge under dispensation, presided over by a brother who is only a Mastei Mason, we can, with the same propriety, do so in a Lodge under charter; indeed, we deny that the question can be raised in a Master's Lodge.

 

By what rule of propriety can we discuss the rights of Past Masters in a Lodge of Master Masons ?

 

We acknowledge the Grand Lodge has the right to open in the Past Master's degree, and make regulations in reference to that degree; and each subordinate Lodge, under charter, has the right to open a Past Master's Lodge, and confer the degree upon tke Master‑elect ; but no question, in relation to a degree above, can, or should be entertained in the third degree.

 

We have repeatedly stated, that we attach very little importance to the degree of Past Master ; that we do not believe it adds to the qualifications of a brother to preside over a Lodge, and that it is no part of, nor has it any legitimate connection with Ancient Craft Masonry; but so universal is the custom, requiring a Lodge under charter to have it, that it may now be regarded as common law, and we are not seeking to disturb 880 QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

that law; but we do object to the doctrine, that no one call preside over a Lodge who has ‑not this honorary degree. The Grand Lodge of Alabama. we are aware, attaches great importance to the degree of Past Master, and our opinions, of course, are not expected, or intended to encourage disobedience to any of its edicts.

 

' In the case referred to by our correspondent, we do not know that we rightly understand the question. If Bro. Brundidge undertook to qualify a brother to preside ‑over a Lodge, under charter, without the degree of Past Master, he acted in violation of an edict of his Grand Lodge, and contrary to general custom.

 

But we do not, for a moment, suppose he so acted.

 

We know his more than ordinary zeal for true Masonry, and his reputation for Masonic 'knowledge, forbids such a supposition; and, hence, we are compelled to believe, the writer means what he says‑that some of the brethren of that Lodge, had sprung an almost unheard of question, viz., Must not the Master of a Lodge, under charter, be a Past Master, made in a Chapter?

 

Now, we hold that the Past Master's degree, originally, and still belongs to the Grand Lodges ; that though the Chapters in the United States have assumed control over the degree, and all the Grand Lodges, except Pennsylvania, have tacitly admitted the legality of the degree, conferred in a Chapter‑yet, no Grand Lodge has yielded its own right to confer the degree as a mark of distinction upon_ the Masters of Lodges, and we hope they never will.

 

The Chapters in England do not confer the degree of Past Master, except when it is understood that the Companion intends visiting the United States‑it is then given as a side degree, to enable the Companion to visit Chapters in this country.

 

By the custom of the Grand Lodge of England, and the Grand Lodges in the United States, three or more Past Masters have the right to open a Past Masters' Lodge in any Lodge under charter, and confer upon the brother elected Master of said Lodge, the degree of Past Master; of course, if the brother elected Master had previously received the degree, either in Lodge or Chapter, he need only to be installed, or, if you please, reinstalled.

 

QUESTIOlvs of MASONIC USAd

 

861 From what we have said, it will scarcely be deemed neces. sary to add, that we know of no rule by which a Past Master, made in a Chapter, has any rights or privileges as such, not guaranteed to a Past Master made under the authority of a Grand Lodge, save and except, that the former can visit ,a Past Masters' Lodge in a Chapter, and the latter can not, for the reason that he has not the preceding degree of Mark Master.

 

CAN THE MASTER DECLARE A CANDIDATE ELECTED WITH A BLACKBALL AGAINST HIM? ‑IF HE BE INITIATED, MUSE THE BROTHER WHO VOTED THE BLACKBALL FELLOWMP HIM?‑CAN THE MASTER ORDER A SECOND BALLOT? MANSFIELD, De Soto Parish, La., Dec. 21, 1860. COIL MITCHELL.‑I)ear Sir:‑We are in some doubt, in this place, relative to the extent of the powers of the Worshipful Master, and wish your opinion on the subject.

 

Has the Worshipful Master the right to order a second ballot, when %Le first was cloudy?

 

Has he the right to order the third, when one blackball appeared on the second balloting?

 

Is he justifiable, and is it in accordance with ancient customs, in announcing from the stand his determination to declare the candidate elected over one negative vote ?

 

Is the brother casting the blackball Found to recognize the person thus made a brother, in good faith and fellowship? In giving your opinion on the above, you will confer a favor on Your fraternal brother,

 

WILSON GODFREY. P. S.‑In order that you may the better understand the above, I will state, the new Constitution was adopted in June last, and one copy sent to De Soto Lodge, No. 26.

 

On the evening of the balloting, the copy could not be found, and the Lodge fell back on the old Constitution, which had gone out of use, and acted under the sixty‑fifth and sixty‑eighth Articles. This occured the second Saturday in October last.

 

Fraternally yours,

 

W. G.

 

In answering the foregoing questions, we desire to be understood as not intending to interfere with local regulations. By ancient usage, the powers of the Worshipful Master are almost unlimited, but Masonry, like religion, naturally assimilates itself more or less‑ to the government and conventional rules of the society in which it exists ; and hence it is that the Institutution assumes, in the United States, many of the forms of a republican government; and, though we may be bound tc acknowledge that there was a time when, in a monarchical gov ernment every Worshipful Master was a monarch, and, like ‑the king, could do no wrong, such powers and exemption from responsibility are not, and never were willingly accorded to him 862

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

in America.

 

The powers of the Worshipful Master are generally more or less pointed out by local regulations, emanating either from the Grand or subordinate Lodge ; but, in the absence of local regulations, he must be governed by common usage.

 

We, therefore, say, in reply to the first question of our correspondent, that, if no local regulation reserves to the Lodge tli l, right to order a second ballot, the Worshipful Master has clearly the right to order it, provided it be correct to take a second ballot, in such cases‑and, we think, common prudence and sheer justice calls for the exercise of this practice. The object of the Worshipful Master and the Lodge should be, to become satisfied that no mistake has been made. We have several times known a blackball deposited on the first ballot, through the carelessness and inattention of a member, and this is likely, to occur where Lodges are in the habit of requiring their members to deposit a white and a blackball at the .same time‑one in the right hand, and the other in the left hand box, or apartment‑but, whatever may be the method of voting, we think the ballot should be retaken, until the Lodge is satisfied that no mistake has been made.

 

On the other hand, we should regard the conduct of a Master as exceedingly blameable, who would order the ballot retaken, after it was manifest that no mistake had occured. We think a Lodge should never be bound to regard an applicant rejected on the first ballot, for, if this principle were admitted, it would preclude the correction of a mistake after it had been discovered, and proclaimed by the brother who had made it.

 

These remarks will apply to the second question also.

 

To the third question, we answer, No.

 

Upon this subject, there should be no diversity of opinion. A unanimous vote alone can admit to membership, or entitle a candidate to initiation. From the revival oú Masonry in England, in 1717, until within a few years, this question was seldom mooted.

 

Every Mason understood and acted up to the ancient custom of requiring a unanimous vote.

 

But, since the institution of Oddfellowship, we hear of the question being sprung in almost every State in the Union‑and why?

 

Because, by a rule of the Oddfellowsi QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

363 one blackball does not reject, unless, indeed, the Lodge shall deem the reasons, given by the brother so voting, good and sufficient. In the event the Lodge differs in opinion with the objecting member, or, if the brother shall decline making his reasons known to the presiding officer, the candidate is declared elected‑the negative vote to the contrary, notwithstanding. Now, we do not complain that this is a rule with our friends; the Oddfellows, but we do complain, and solemnly protest . against the introduction of that rule into a Masonic Lodge. In the first place, we may reject an applicant for reasons which, as an honoralfle man, we dare not communicate to any one, and which no power on earth could extort from us. Secondly, the peace and harmony of the Lodge renders it necessary that its members shall not be compelled to give their reasons for their vote, as the opposite course would be liable to wound the feelings of the friends or relatives of the candidate, and thus create heart‑burnings and distrust among the members. And last. though not least, because it would be ridiculous to require a secret ballot to be taken, if its secrets were liable to be exposed.

 

To the last question we unhesitatingly answer, No. We oelieve there is something like a halo of divine charity hovering within the walls of a Lodge room. Our very approach to the holy altar seems to dispel all bitter feelings, and we are too apt to err on the side of mercy, flattering ourselves with the hope (too often delusive) that Masonry will reform the man. But suppose injustice is sometimes done to a good man‑they only form exceptions to a necessary and wholesome rule, and a remedy is provided whereby, in due time, atonement may be made.

 

We must have some serious objection to an applicant, before we can resolve to reject him; but when, in the performance of a solemn duty to the Craft, we have done so, no power on earth should attempt to make us fellowship that man. There may be cases where we could do so, but, as a general thing, the introduction of such a man into the Lodge would compel the brother who blackballed him, in justice to himself, to demitfor no good Mason will reject' a good man, and no good man will feel willing to call a bad man brother. It is true we might feel compelled to vote against an applicant, because we thought 364

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

he was deficient in intellect, or was wanting in physical qualifications‑in either of which cases we could have no good grounds for refusing the right hand of fellowship, if admitted; but such cases rarely occur, and can not affect the principle contended for. We say, however, to our correspondent, that should such an outrage be perpetrated, as the making a Mason of a man against whom stood a negative vote, and should' the brother who deposited it choose to sit in open Lodge with him, he does thereby fellowship him, and in debate, or otherwise addressing him, he must call him brother.

 

We have confined' ourself to the foregoing limited view of the subjects referred to, because we have heretofore answered similar questions.

 

CAN e BROTHER BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR s cximT COVMrrrSD BEFORE HE WAS a )(ASON f Bumwnltr, TEXAS, December 27th, 1850.

 

J. W. S. MrrcHLLL.‑=As I Bud others have done so, I am, therefore, emboldened to make an inquiry about Maaonic usage, suppressing names.

 

A, who emigrated from another State, and had resided among us about eighteen months or two‑ years, during which time he bad conducted himself with such propriety, as to justify our Lodge in accepting his application for membership. He received the three degrees, and has continued an orderly member for about' two years.

 

There have now come charges from the State from which he emigrated, that, if true, would have prevented his reception, or if committed since his adoption, would justify his expulsion.

 

Now, I hold the opinion that we can not take cognizance of the matter, but we have many well informed Masons who hold that we can inquire, and, if the charges are sustained, expel, or do as we deem proper. Will you, in acknowledging the receipt of this, give me your opinion Yours fraternally, The foregoing question is one of great importance, and of difficult solution.

 

We hold that a man can not violate a com pact before he is a party to that compact.

 

A man can not offend against an institution with which he is in no wise connected.

 

A man who is not a Mason can not violate a Masonic law, and thereby incur the penalty annexed.

 

It; therefore, follows that a brother can not justly be held to account for an offense committed before his initiation into the Order.

 

But while all this░seems, from the very nature of things, manifestly correct in principle, yet a literal adherence to this rule would, in some QUESTIONS OF. MASONIC; USAGEA

 

365'; cases, subject our Institution to, reproach, and our members to deep mortification.

 

By way, of, illustration, we will state a case which has actually, occurred in this jurisdiction. A man petitioned a Lodge in due form; the,petition was referred, and a Committee of good men reported favorably, and the candidate was initiated. Before he bad taken the second degree, evidence was produced which showed that, in a certain class of the community where the man was best known, he was generally regarded to be a, thief.

 

At this, stage of the affair, we were consulted as to what the 1odge could do, or what was its duty to do.

 

We answered that, by the rules of our Grand Lodge, each subordinate waa expected to ballot for each degree, and that. if the members‑: disbelieved the report, or if they were satisfied that, though he, had been guilty, he had repented and reformed, it would be their duty to advance him‑in other words, if he is now man. ifestly a good man, all former. sins should be forgiven; but if, on the contrary, they believed, the man had a bad charaster, even though they might have hope of a reform, they ought not to suffer him to advance, for they had no right to compel the Craft to fellowship a, man of bad, or even doubtful character.

 

We further hold that although a man is not amenable to the Lodge for an offense committed before he became a Mason, it is clearly within the power of the Lodge to arraign, and put upon trial a brother whose character stands impeached before the community in which he resides, or, if you please, where lie is best known.

 

In the case alluded to by our correspondent, we should, if he were a member of our Lodge, feel disposed to inquire whether the brother is now a good'. man. If the testimony is clearly affirmative, we would not, by indirection, hold him responsible for former improprieties. Masonry is Benevolence, Charity, Love‑which not only hides a multitude of faults, but forgives actual crime, if it car oe made appear that true repentance and thorough reformation has taken place.

 

If, on the other hand, there were no fruits of repentance, or evidence of reformation, and‑if his conduct was still of a suspicious or doubtful character, we should be disposed to connect,, or take into consideration 866 QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

his former acts with his recent ones, in order to arrive at cor rect conclusions as to the true ‑haracter of the man ; and though the Lodge could not arraign him for crimes committed before he was a Mason, it might very properly charge that he was a man of bad character, and call upon him to make defense. On this trial, we apprehend it would be strictly legitimate for the prosecution and the defense to produce testimony to prove what had been his character through life, and an important item, with us, would be to prove whether, at the time he petitioned to become a Mason, he knew his character was not good in the community in which he formerly resided, and whether he concealed this fact from the members of the Lodge, and, especially, if he continued to do so after lie became a Mason, and while he was applying for advancement. We take it for granted that any man who would petition for the degrees in Masonry, could not fail to know that he was asking to become the associate, the boon companion, the brother of a Society of gentlemen, who would scorn to admit a man of bad, or even doubtful character. For the attempt to commit a fraud like this, we should feel inclined to hold the brother responsible.

 

No man whose character stands impeached and unvindicated by an investigation, has a right to to throw himself under the protection, and seek the intimacy of our family, without apprising us of the fact, and offering facilities for investigation.

 

The Society of Freemasons is a great family, every member of which is linked together by strong fraternal ties, and he who could fraudulently become a member, in violation of its known rules, would deserve to be cast out as an unfit associate.

 

We repeat, then, that it is competent for a Lodge to put a brother on trial, on the charge of having now a bad character, without being compelled to make any specification, and if, from the testimony, the charge be sustained, the Lodge may suspend or expel the accused.

 

MUST A MMER STATE HIS REASONS FOR ASKING A DEMITP‑OAN A BROTHER DISOBE2 A LODGE SUMMONS P TALLEQUAH, CuEROEES NATION, April 8, 1851. Bao. MrrcHELL :‑Will you be so kind as to give me, through the medium of your valuable periodical, your views on the following questions: QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

367 4. When a Master Mason becomes dissatisfied with his Lodge, and asks for a lemit, have the members of the Lodge a right to make him give his reasons before they grant the demit Y 2. If he (the applicant for the demit) should be summoned, for the purpose of making him give his reasons, would he be justifiable in refusing to obey the summons, if he believed it to be contrary to the principles of Masonry Y Respectfully and fraternally,

 

JNO. W. WILLIAMS.

 

To the first question, we answer that, by ancient usage, a brother can only demit for the purpose of traveling, or to join another Lodge; from which it will be seen that, in order to obtain a demit, the reason had to be stated. We believe, therefore, that a Lodge has the right to make the giving of his reason, and the reasonableness of it, a condition upon which the demit shall be granted. .

 

To the second question, we have to say, that no brother has the right to disobey a summons to attend at the Lodge room, at any usual hour, and within' a reasonable time; but this being done, the Lodge has no right to demand of him the exposition of his reasons for wishing to withdraw. It may very properly say to him, that if he does not give the reason, and even when given, if it is not esteemed sufficient, his application will be, refused, but further it can not go.

 

No Lodge has a right to extort the secrets of any member.

 

A brother may desire to leave the Lodge, because he feels unwilling to fellowship one of its members, and he should know that if he gives this as a reason, it becomes the duty of the Lodge not only‑ to withhold the leave asked, but also to take steps for the amicable adjustment of the difficulty. But the brother feeling himself aggrieved' may think this course would lead to evil results, and although we think he would be wrong in so believing, still he can not be forced to state these facts, nor can he be punished for refusing, in a respectful manner.

 

He may prefer remaining a member, and fellowship the objectionable brother.

 

We have seen brethren rise up, and demand a demit, because the Lodge failed to do what they thought it ought to do, and, in all such cases, we have voted against granting them leave. We have known others ask a demit, when we had good reason to believe the motive was a bad one, and, in such cases, we have Tok3 against the leave, but we never thought of compelling, o: 888

 

QUEBTIONS OF MASONIC t1SAa& even demanding‑ that the reason should be given. Any member of a Lodge, in good standing, has a right to ask the Lodge to grant him a, demit, and the Lodge has as. clearly the right to refuse it.

 

Of course, we have undertaken to answer the foregoing questions‑ by the true principles of our Institution and its ancient laws, aside from any By‑Law, for all By‑Laws are wrong which do not conform to the ancient law; and it is the duty of every Grand Lodge to see that its subordinates do not err in this particular.

 

WHOOSE DUTY IS rr TO PREFER CHARGES? Bao. MrrouELL :‑There is a question I wish you to answer through the Siyp4 tf you should think it worthy of a place in its pages : Suppose a man, a stranger, comes into your section, satisfies the Craft generally that he is of the Brotherhood (but has not a diploma), is examined, received into full fellowship, in the usual way, conducts himself as well as most men for a few months; reports reach the section where his membership is, that he is not worthy as a man or a Mason to be countenanced by anybody‑and these reports come through Masons who formerly knew him, who are themselves in good standing, both as men and Masons.

 

Now, the question I wish answered is,‑whose duty is it to ascertain whether the reports be true or not.

 

Some of the leading Masons here say that: those brothers that notified the Craft to be on their guard are the proper persona to notify the Lodge, officially.

 

Some say that it is the duty of the Lodge where his, membership is, to make the necessary inquiries, through their Secretary. Some say that any,brotber, being a member of the Lodge to which he belongs, has the right to make such inquiries as they may think proper.

 

One report against the brother is, that he was expelled at Glasgow, Mo., from all the benefits of Masonry.

 

Some contend, that neither the Lodge to which he belongs, nor anyof the members, have any right to make inquiries, with regard to his former character, or standing as a Mason.

 

I am rather a poor hand to express anything. in writing, but I hope you will be able to understand my meaning.

 

The foregoing is an extract from a letter of a highly esteemed brother of Florida, whose name and location we withhold, be ^,ause of the delicacy of the question asked.

 

In reply, we have to say, that some Lodges have a By‑Law pointing out the manner in which grievances shall be inquired into.; but, in the absence of local regulations, we think it is the privilege of any member of a Lodge to make a complaint, and ask the Lodge to investigate the truth or falsehood of any charge or rumor; affecting the good Masonic standing of any QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

869 brother, within the jurisdiction of the Lodge, whether lie be a member or not; but if, from timidity, or any other cause, the brethren fail to take this course, it is the bounden duty of the '_luster to bring the matter before the Lodge, and require an investigation. The doctrine that no one has a right to inquire into the former standing of a member, is preposterous and dangerous in the extreme, for it tolerates the grossest imposi tions.

 

An expelled or suspended Mason has no right to visit a Lodge, or hold Masonic communication with a Mason‑ in good standing; and a man who would take advantage of a Lodge, key palming himself upon them, knowing they were not apprised of his expulsion, forfeits all claim to common respect, and should be published as an impostor; and, surely, no Master of a Lodge will consent to sit with a man so charged, without ordering a strict investigation. It is the duty of the Master and each member, to look to the purity and harmony of the Lodge, to see that no brother's character is unjastly assailed, and also to see that the Lodge is not imposed on by an unworthy man.

 

We think, in the case referred to, no member of the Lodge can claim exemption from the duty of ascertaining whether the rumor is well, or ill founded; and the Master will lay himself liable to have the charts= of his Lodge arrested, if he refuses to institute an inquiry, to learn whether he is sitting with an expelled Mason or not.

 

Expulsion is the highest punishment known to Masonic law, and the Lodge owes it to the brother charged to order an investigation; and should it be found that the charge is malicious and unfounded, suitable punishment should be inflicted upon the slanderer.

 

MAY ANY MEMBER INFORM A CANDIDATE OF HL4 RF.TEMON, AND BY WHAT rWEt ARKADELPHIA, ARK., May 14, 1851.

 

BRo. MrreHRLL:‑I wish to know from you, whether or not a member of a Lodge has the right to make known to a candidate that he has been rejected, either by committee or by ballot?

 

Has the member the right to state to the candidate the number of blackballs which he received? Please answer the above in your next Sfgnd.

 

W. W. BRCCB.

 

In answer to both questions, we say, any member tlaa the right to tell the candidate that he has been rejected ; but there 2 t 840

 

.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

he should stop.

 

No brother has a right to divulge the privata transactions of the Lodge to any but the Fraternity, and, in some cases, he can not properly communicate them to any but the members of his Lodge.

 

We have known much evil speaking of the transactions be avoided, were the Master Lodge, that such conduct would subject the offender to a repri mand, suspension, or expulsion. The world should not know who petitions a Lodge; for, should he not be received, the world would have a right to believe lid had been rejected ; and no rejection should be made public, unless authorized by the Grand Lodge.

 

grow out of a careless manner of of a Lodge, much of which might to remind the members, in open MAIMED CANDIDATES.

 

HuNT8VILLE, Mo., June 21, 1851.

 

BRO. MITCHELL :‑As I have never been very troublesome to you, in asking your opinion on unsettled points in questions of Masonic usage, I indulge the belief that. you will be kind enough to give me your views on the following case Can a Lodge, with propriety, under the Ancient Constitution of our Institution, initiate a man who can not walk without the aid of a crutch, and who, in taking a step, can not bring his right foot to the ground without his crutch? Yours fraternally,

 

J. C. S.

 

On no subject have the Grand Lodges in the United States differed so widely, as in relation to physical disqualification of candidates for the mysteries of Masonry. Some have taken the ground, that no species of deformity is admissible, and quote, as authority, from the .1himan Rezon, which fully sustains them; others admit the authenticity of the law, but contend that it was instituted when Masonry was Operative only, and was design( ,d to protect the Institution against the introduction of men who were not able of body to earn a living, etc. ; but that Masonry being now Speculative only, the reason no longer exists, and, hence, the law is no longer binding.

 

If the position of C~e first class was true, that all who were not perfect in form "as a man ought to be." were excluded by the ancient law; then should we be constrained to admit the correctness of the position, and the appropriate conclusions of the second class.

 

QtESTICNS Ol MASONIC USAGE.

 

371 We believe that most, if not all the rules established by our ancient brethren, for the government of the Craft, were founded ,n justice, and sustained by sound reason.

 

We claim for the Institution of Masonry the approbatory, if not the creative influence of the divine will; but we are not justified in supposing that a rule, restricting its recipients to certain classes, was the work of Jehovah, and, hence, we are not prepared to conclude that a necessity existed for excluding from Masonry, as of old from the priesthood, all who had spot or blemish. But we can readily perceive a very satisfactory reason for excluding those who, by reason of their deformity, could not practice our Art, and perform all the requirements of Masonry. This, and no more, we apprehend, our ancient brethren did.

 

That the preservation of our rites, and the perpetuity of Masonry, mainly depends upon obedience to its ancient laws, can not be questioned ; and, hence, it is of the utmost importance to know what those laws are. If the mongrel code, adopted by the clandestine Grand Lodge of London, about 1754, bearing the imposing title of the Ahiman Rezon, is to be regarded as authority, then is there none other deserving the name of ancient law.

 

But, we apprehend, no well informed Mason of the present day will, for a moment, hesitate to pronounce that code collated by Dr. Anderson, by order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722, as the first written, and only fundamental law now known for the government of Ancient Craft Masonry. We have, heretofore, so fully given the history and exposed the abr~urdities of the Ahiman Rezon, that we do not feel called upon to say more of it in this connection, except to remind our readers, that it is not remarkable that it should have acquired the force and effect of fundamental law in this country, because the clandestine Grand Lodge of London sent Masonry into several States, and with it their spurious Constitutions, which were republished and regarded as the true Masonic law.

 

And it is a lamentable fact that, very recently, brethren who claim to possess a sufficient acquaintance with ancient lore to become teachers in Masonry, have published manuals for the government of Lodges, containing the same spurious laws, headed "Ancient Constitutions," and thus have thousands been misled.

 

$72

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

The Old Charges, collated by Anderson, so far as we know have never been altered or changed, in a single particular, by any regular Grand Lodge, if we except the late attempt of the Grand Lodge of England to strike out the word " born " in its connection with "free." These old laws contain, it is believed, all the Ancient Landmarks proper to be written; to these, and these only, then, do we appeal for authority to guide us in finding a correct answer to the question of our correspondent, and that our readers may judge our opinions fairly, we make the following extract from the fourth of the Old Charges " Only candidates may know that no Master should take an Apprentice, unless he has sufficient employment for him, and unless he be a perfect youth, having no maim or defect about his body that may render him incapable of learning the Artof serving his Master's Lord and of being made a brother, and then a Fellow Craft, in due time, even after he has served such a term of years as the custom of the country directs; and that he should be descended of honest parents, that so, when otherwise qualified, he may arrive to the honor of being a Warden, and then the Master of the Lodge, the Grand Warden, and, at length, the Grand Master of all the Lodges, according to his merit" (Fourth Old Regulation; see first volume of Siynd, p. 199.) Now, we hold that every Mason should admit the necessity of the foregoing law, which excludes all candidates who can not masonically make a Square, Level, and Plumb, as also those who cannot fully exercise the three human senses, especially useful in the practice of our rites. This being admitted, we think every one will see the fitness of the ancient law above quoted.

 

There is nothing in it that carries the idea that it was designed, any more for Operative than Speculative Masonry; there is nothing ambiguous, or difficult to be understood, unless it may be the words, `' learning the Art," and which, we think, means no more nor leas than learning to practice our rites. The reason of this law is' given in the same article.

 

It contemplates bringing all men upon a level at the shrine of Masonry ; it contemplates the equal right of all to advancement, according to merit ; it guards against.the heart‑burnings which might result from the physical inability of some to become teachers and Masters of the Craft ; but there is not a word which requires a candidate to be perfect in body " as a man ought to be ;" but it does require that a man shall not be so maimed, or deformed, that he can not practice and teach the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

878 rituals of Masonry.

 

How would‑ the Master of a Lodge teach our rituals, who had but one foot or one hand?

 

How could a blind, or deaf man give instructions in Masonry ?

 

They can not practice our rituals, and, therefore, they can not properly be admitted.

 

But this is all.

 

A man is not excluded because he has a broken back, or a broken leg or arm, or because be nas but one eye.

 

A man is not excluded because he is deaf in one ear, or because he stammers in his speech.

 

In short, it matters not what his deformity or deficiency of body is, provided he can practice all our rites.

 

With the law above quoted (and it is the only one upon the subject), the Lodge to which our correspondent belongs can better determine than we, whether the gentleman spoken of can be initiated.

 

We hope no apology is necessary for the space we have occupied in answering the question propounded to us, for, if we are not mistaken, it is one of the highest importance, and, if we are incorrect in our views, we will most gladly be set right; but we sincerely believe that, in this case, as in most others, the main reason for the different opinions and want of uniformity in the action of the Grand Lodges, results from a misconception of what the ancient law is‑in other words, that some are governed by the spurious, instead of the true code.

 

LZSBLWARMNFHB IN CrY LODGES.

 

SHnEvuPoRT, LA;, Marcb 22, 185L BRO. MITCHRIJ ò.‑I always try to attend Lodges when I am in New Orleans, which is frequent.

 

I find one or two and scarcely ever a surplus after the offices are filled for A. P. Lodge.

 

When I find not enough to open, I sometimes saunter off to the theatre, to pass off a long evening.

 

There, it is not unfrequent to find Masons enough, even on Lodge nights, to form half a dozen legal Lodges.

 

Why does this lukewarmness exist!

 

You profess to be a watchman‑can you not sound the alarm and stir up the brethren to a sense of their duty.

 

I have never before solicited to hear directly through the Signd from you ; but I d) hops you will prepare and publish something on this important subject.

 

The foregoing is an extract from a letter, written by our zealous and untiring friend, Bro. Evans, of Shreveport, La., some time since, which was mislaid.

 

That his complaints are 874

 

‑

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE, well founded, we know from observation, and we sincerely wish it were in our power to suggest a remedy. The brother asks us why such lukewarmness exists among the Craft of certain localities?

 

That we can answer this question satisfactorily is by no means certain.

 

We have elsewhere attempted to show that religious and benevolent societies prosper less .in large commercial towns than elsewhere, and we have attributed this state of things to the peculiar habits which a city residence begets with all business men.

 

Man is an imitative being.

 

If ne sees his neighbor unceasingly occupied day and night in an effort to accumulate wealth, lie, too, will fall into the same habits, even to the :neglect of higher and more sacred duties. A city residence is an expensive one, and all become aware that business must be closely attended to, even to avoid loss and secure a living; but this only accounts for men's neglect of their religious and moral duties, on account of their business engagements; it does not satisfactorily show why men will retire from business, and spend their evenings at places of amusement, and that, too, at the cost of their pocket, to the neglect of their duties to the Church, or the Lodge.

 

And yet, we apprehend, it would not be difficult to show that the inordinate love of money making, except with the miser, begets a desire for money spending, and the desire of accumulating money is superinduced by a desire to command, through its influences, the transient pleasures of the world; the associations of the Church, or the Lodge room, are less in accordance with their daily habits of thinking and the desires of the heart, than those of the theatre.

 

If a man labors for money with which to make a gaudy show, his propensities are not feasted in the Lodge room.

 

The giving of alms to such an one is a homely, if not irksome business.

 

But whether we can account for the origin of the present state of things or not, it is, nevertheless, true, that in most, if not all the commercial cities, Masonry is too common to excite the interest of those who are fond of novelties or variety.

 

A brother can go to the Lodge every night in the week, and hence he can find an excuse for omitting to go there any night, by simply agreeing, in his own mind, to go some other night, when he can find nothing more attractive, forgetting that every eight he stays QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.'

 

875 away, he acquires a taste for almost any other place than the Lodge. To illustrate: before we located in St. Louis, we visited the city often, and never without going to see a good tragedy enacted, if we had the opportunity.

 

And now, after a residence of six or seven years, we have it to say, that we have not, in that time, been in a theatre.

 

We have, all the time, been putting it off to a more convenient season‑we have never had time.

 

And so with many of our brethren‑they never have time to go to the Lodge; and it is a singular fact, that the larger the income of the brother, the less time he has to spare to the Church or the Lodge.

 

What part of a man's soul 19 reached by prayer at night, who has spent the day in calculating the rich gains of a large estate ? Two of our little cousins were in a small canoe, and in great danger of being drifted, by the strong current, over a milldam. In great alarm, Zooly said to his brother, " pray, Sawney; pray."

 

Sawney commenced, " 0, Lord‑paddle, Zooly‑O Lord, have mer‑paddle, Zooly, paddle, I say."

 

So with our rich brethren‑they pray for the poor, if, perchance, they ever think of them‑but how do they pray?

 

" 0 Lord, relieve the poor, but not at my expense."

 

They only pray or act in such a manner as may hold in view their own aggrandizement. Such men may give liberally for the relief of the poor, but they never give alms‑they never give in secret.

 

Such men lose a taste for the Church, and are seldom if ever seen in a Lodge room. Another class stay away from the Lodge room, because the members do not live up to the Masonic duties; but these breth= ren fail to see the beam in their own eye.

 

Some one, or all of the above named causes, may operate to produce lukewarlaness in a Lodge, but we believe the officers of a Lodge are genor‑.

 

ally to blame for the inattention of the members.

 

We have known a fair proportion of the members to meet at, or near the usual hour, and wait until bed time, without seeing either of the three principal officers; and it is not to be expected that the same members will be punctual at the next meeting.

 

We know' a Lodge in Missouri that went down, and was almost total]% deserted, because of the negligence of its officers. Finally' they elected a brother Master, who caused the By‑Laws to bi QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAGE.

 

read, and gave notice that lie would enforce them.

 

At the next meeting, not finding a sufficient number present, he issued his summons, and punished all who disobeyed it. He was regarded as a tyrant, and had much trouble for six months, but. strange to say, the very members who, for a while, complained most loudly, made the discovery that the Master had only been doing his duty, and now that several years have passed, the Lodge room is crowded every night, and the same brother is still Master, notwithstanding his entreaties to be excused at every election.

 

Very few Lodge:: fail to prosper, if the officers do their duty, and vice. versa.

 

And now, if our age and experience has given us any claims to an influence with the Fraternity, we humbly ask to exercise it by an earnest appeal to the officers of Lodges.

 

Brethren, it is no light and trivial thing for you to take upon yourselves the control of a Lodge.

 

The well being, prosperity, and, it may be, the very existence of your Lodge, depend upon the manner in which you discharge the duties imposed.

 

As high minded and honorable men, as Craftsmen, good and true, as overseers of the work, as guardians of our sacred Institution, we charge you so to act, that you may be, an example to others to follow you.

 

NAVY NON‑APFILIATED MASONS A RIGHT TO VISIT?‑CAN A LODGE HAVE QUARTERLY MEMBERS? EosToN. TExAs, August 22, 1851.

 

Bao. MrrcnSLL:‑In the By‑Laws of Boston Lodge, No. 69, there is a clause prohibiting any Mason 1' in the jurisdiction of the Lodge, not a member, from visiting the Lodge more than three times in any one year, unless he affiliates," and becomes a contributing member.

 

This clause is objectionable to some of the members, as being antagonistical to the true spirit.of Masonry, and that every Mason has a right to enter the Lodge sii often as he pleases, provided he is in good standing, and the Lodge has no right to limit his visits.

 

this clause‑was inserted for the purpose of inducing, or causing tbose within the jurisdiction to affiliate, and thus openly advocate the glorious tenets of the Institution, instead of remaining drones in the hive, blemishes upon the Institution, snd stumbling‑stones in the way of others, who would, perhaps, become our brightest jewels.

 

Again, can a Lodge receive a member as a quarterly member (or, more pro perly, irregular member), upon his paying less than the regular quarterly duesf Your views are solicited in relation to these things.

 

Fraternally yours, QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

377 Il. We have repeatedly stated, that the ancient law made it the duty of every Mason to remain a member of his Lodge, and forbid his demitting, except for two causes ; first, in the event the members in his Lodge became too numerous, and he wished to join in forming a new Lodge; and, second, in the event he wished to travel beyond the jurisdiction of his Lodge, in which case it was made his duty to connect himself with a Lodge, as soon as he located in the neighborhood of one, and a failure to do this released the Craft from all obligations to give him work.

 

Every Mason should be a member of a Lodge, if his standing will gain him admission, and if he is not able to pay dues, they should be remitted.

 

Every Lodge has a right to determine who shall be admitted as members or visitors, and, most unquestionably, a Lodge has the right to say, the non‑affiliated shall not visit more than once.

 

It is preposterous to talk about the right of a Mason to visit a Lodge when he pleases.

 

As well might it be said that the landlord has no control over his tenement, and that every loafer has the right to visit a private family when he pleases without regard to the will of the head of that family.

 

The Lodge is a family in the discharge of its duty, and if an Albsalom has strayed away, and anon returns, they may receive him, but it must be upon their own terms.

 

2. Formerly it was very common for Lodges to have honor ary members, living at a distance in the country, who only paid half dues.

 

We think there is nothing unmasonic in this, but we doubt the policy of it.

 

If a brother lives at a distance from the L‑dge, and can not attend it often, he escapes a great amount af labor and responsibility, and it is as little as he should do to pay full dues, especially as he is permitted to sleep while his brethren are at work.

 

US A LODGE THE RIGHT TO BALLOT FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF A CANDIDATE WITHò OUT HIS CONSENT? HLNrsviLLz, RANDOLPH coon░rr, Mo., September 14, 1861. Bito. MrrcH$r L :‑Has a Lodge a right to ballot for the second degree In Masonry, without the consent or solicitation of the person balloted for ? and if W* 3,46 should ballot for an individual; without his consent, would that ballot be a legal on(!, should the person balloted for object ? I am, with much respect and esteem, Yours fraternally, McL.

 

The answer to the foregoing questions are so simple and plain, that we may be censured for permitting them to appear in this work; but we have seen so much haste in the action of some Lodges, in balloting for advancement of candidates, that we feel called upon to bring this subject before them.

 

There is no principle more firmly settled, or better understood, than that every candidate shall petition for initiation into the mysteries of Masonry. It is not only necessary that he shall apply of his own free will and accord, but that he shall ask before he can be received.

 

It is also a settled principle, and of universal practice, that any brother is at full liberty to stop at any degree, and decline going further.

 

These usages apply to all the degrees in Masonry, except so far as sending in a written petition is concerned. Some Lodges very properly require a written petition for advancement to each degree separately, but a loose method is much more common, viz,, that of taking the ballot at the suggestion, or upon. the motion of a member of the Lodge ; and this is sometimes done before it is known that the candidate desires it, although` it is improperly taken for granted that every brother wishes to advance.

 

We unhesitatingly say, that no Lodge_ has a right to ballot for the advancement of any brother, until he signifieg his desire, by petition, or otherwise.

 

Having thus answered the first question of our correspondent, it follows, of course, that any action taken key a Lodge for the advancement of a brother, without his consent, is a nullity.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC Ut WE.

 

Bao. Mrrcemr.I. :‑A circumstance has..occurred in the Fraternity of this city, which, my judgment suggests, ought to be generally known, and, if it be possible. some barrier placed to prevent its occurrence in the future. And, as your position enabips you to communicate, through your own and other Masonic periodicals, with the great family of Masons, I shall briefly state the facts, and leave you to make such comments on them.as your better judgment mF.y deem best. The faotia INrMTION OF 80JOIIRNMQ.

 

.

 

..

 

ST. Loves, Mo., November 8, 1851.

 

s QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

X370 are substantially these : A person, resident in this city, petitioned one of our Lodges for admission into the Fraternity.

 

A few days previous to the meeting of the Lodge to which he petitioned, he left the city for Steubenville, Ohio.

 

He was only absent about five months, and returned to this city fully equipped as a Valiant and Magnanimous Knight; and, in his zeal and ardor for the cause, forthwith petitioned the Encampment in this

 

city or membership.

 

The Comò mittee, to whom his petition was referred, learned that he had affiliated himself with an association in this city,' avowing and teaching doctrines directly in conflict with those held most sacred by every Valiant Knight of the Order.

 

I will name some of the doctrines avowed by the person referred to, that you may fully comprehend what is stated above, and I hope you will make such commeats on them as will show to our sister Encampments the great wrong they commit against the Order, when they illegally confer them on persons not residing in their jurisdictions.

 

The doctrines avowed were in a written form, over the signature of the person Above referred to, and were stated " to prevent misrepresentation," and are. as follows : ò` Our Book is Nature; our Jfaster is Reason; our Religion, love to

 

fan; our Progress, Devekprreent; our Path, Progression," etc.

 

I would state the entire creed, but my memory does not serve me as to the exact phraseology used, and I would not willingly misrepresent a single letter.

 

If you can find space in your excellent periodical to place the whole subject fully before our brethren, you will, in vty judgment, greatly serve the best interests of the Order. Yours fraternally, JosEYH FOSTER.

 

We would most gladly aid our correspondent in remedying the evil complained of, if we‑knew how to effect it. We have written much to dissuade all Lodges from making Masons of sojourners, and we are gratified in being able to say that the practice is confined to three or four districts or jurisdictions in the United States. There are comparatively but few Lodges so anxious for numbers, that they can not wait until an applicant has been twelve months a citizen.

 

But truth requires us to say, there are a few Lodges who are not willing to wait until a man becomes a citizen at all, but are in the habit of initiating any decent looking man who may chance to come along.

 

We know something of the case referred to by R. W. Bro. Foster, and, while we will not charge (for we do not know) that the Grand Lodge of Ohio takes the high ground assumed by the Grand Lodge of New York, that it has the right to make lliasons of men who are citizens of any part of the world, we feel called upon to say, that it is not a matter of wonder that Masons multiply so rapidly in Ohio, if the Lodges generally, in that jurisdiction, will take petitions from other jurisdictions; and 880

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

not cnly initiate, but run them up with lightning speed, even through the Christian degrees, without seeming to care whether they are Christians in principle or not. We speak thus plainly, because there can be no sufficient apology for the hasty action of the Lodge, Chapter, and Encampment here referred to.

 

If the candidate failed to notify the Lodge in Ohio, that he was at the time a petitioner in St. Louis, he failed to do his duty, and in proportion to his knowledge of his duty, in that respect, it, he censurable or not ; but this can be no apology for the Lodge, in entertaining his petition upon his temporary location in its vicinity.

 

We solemnly protest against the right of any Lodge to make Masons of men who do not reside within its jurisdiction a sufficient time to be well known, and we warn our brethren of Pennsylvania, New York, and Ohio, that if they persist in this wanton disregard of the rights of Western and Southern Masons, the Grand Lodges of the West and the South will be compelled to legislate upon the subject, and exclude all such illegally made Masons from a right to visit. We call them illegally made Masons, because the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodges in the United States have been so long defined and acknowledged, that it has become the common Masonic law of the land, for every Lodge to work up its own material, and let others alone. If a man can not be made a Mason at home, he is, most probably, unfit to be made a Mason anywhere; his neighbors are best qualified to judge of his claims upon the Fraternity, and it is an insult to the Lodge in his vicinity, for a foreign Lodge to take him up on a flying visit, and send him home clothed with the royal right to visit the Lodge which alone should have made or rejected him.

 

The extract made by our correspondent from a written com. munication of the Sir Knight alluded to, places him in a very unenviable position, as we think; for how he could take upon himself the high responsibilities of a Magnanimous Knight of the Order, entertaining the infidel opinions now avowed, is more than we can understand, and may become the subject of future inquiry, by order of the General Grand Encamp went.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

381, YU9T THE PRESIDING OFFICER HAVE THE PAST EASTER'S DEGREE? WASHINGTON, HEMPSTNAD COUNTY, AR%., December 30, 1851.

 

BRO. J. W. S. MITCHRLY. :‑Although personally a stranger to you, still I feel myself anthorized, as one of the readers of your most excellent periodical, for a year past, to address you this letter, and to propound a question or two, In which I, in common with several other brethren, feel a considerable interest.

 

At the last monthly communication of our Lodge, at this place, it so bappmeal that the Worshipful Master was absent, and that the Senior Warden took the Chair, in the presence of three Past Masters, known to him by reputation as such, myself being one of the number, and having served one term as Master of our Lodge (Mount Horeb, No. 24), without inviting anyone of us to preside. After the Lodge was openrd in the third degree, two of the Past Masters, under a sense of duty, retired, on account of the Senior Warden not being a Past Master. I, not viewing the matter as a violation of the Ancient Constitutions, remained and assisted in the business of the meeting.

 

Now, the question is, who did wrong? I In remaining after the other two brethren bad retired, or the Senior Warden in taking the Master's place, in our presence, without inviting either of us to do so? And while upon this subject, please inform me whether you deem it essential that the Worshipful Master of a Lodge, before entering upon his duties. should receive the degree of a Past Master to entitle him, constitutionally, to preside. It occurs to me that I have read, in the Signd, your views touching these questions, and have recently again perused all the numbers received by me, to ascertain them, without troubling you with a letter on the subject, but have been unable to find the article i hence, I must‑ask of you the favor, either to refer me to the page where your answer to these, or similar questions can be found, if, indeed, you have recently answered them through the press, and if not, to publish an article in the Signd, if you deem it of sufficient public importance, otherwise, give me your views in a private communication.

 

J. D. T.

 

The foregoing communication was received in less than a month after its date, but our press of business caused it to be laid aside for the time, and it was until now forgotten. We beg the brother to forgive this seeming inattention to his important interrogatories.

 

Shortly after the reorganization, or revival of Masonry in the South of England, or, rather, in London, a custom arose, which was sanctioned by the Grand 'Lodge, requiring the Senior Warden, in the absence of the Master, to yield the Chair to the oldest Past Master present, though it was, at the same time, contended that the Lodge could not be convened, except by order of the Senior Warden. This subject was brought up in Grand Lodge as early, we think, as 1723, when it was ordered that the Senior Warden should, in the absence of the Master, take cbarga 882

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

of the Lodge, and preside over it; and in his absence, the Junior Warden, in like manner. Now, it must be borne in mind that, at that period, so far as we have evidence, there was no such thing known as the Past Master's degree, or any title growing out of the installation ceremony of the Master.

 

A Past Master was one who had served as Master of a Lodge, and passed the Chair.

 

From the period above named, until 1772, we hear very little more about the rights of Past Masters.

 

In 1739, a few refractory brethren were suspended or expelled by the Grand Lodge, whereupon, they immediately did as all irreclaimable rebels do, denied the authority of the law, set at defiance and denounced the Grand Lodge, and claimed the right to throw themselves upon the original right of all Masons, before the establishment of a Grand Lodge, viz., to congregate when and where they chose, and open a Lodge, etc.

 

These men, and their newly made satellites; continued to act upon the above doctrine until 1753, when they prevailed on the Duke of Athol; then Grand Master of Scotland, to assume or accept the office of Grand Master over them also, and as they called themselves the exclusive followers of Ancient Craft Masonry in England, the Duke of Athol was led to suppose they were truly so, and thus was he made Grand Master of the so called Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons.

 

Shortly after the organization of this body, and, indeed, before it was organized, they commenced holding out inducements to the then existing Lodges,‑and contemplated Lodges, to come under their authority, and the most successful effort consisted in their making all Past Masters, under their jurisdiction, members of the Grand Lodge for life ; for, at that period, it was not only an honor, but a very high honor, to be a member of ttic Grand Lodge.

 

Well, this spurious Gran 3 Lodge, consisting of men not only under expulsion, but who had always denied the authority of a Grand Lodge, by their cunning and industry, created quite a sensation, and succeeded in deceiving the Grand Lodges of Scotland and Ireland, into the belief that they were the " true Ancient Masons," and that the Grand Lodge of England was composed of Modern Masons; hence, when the first charters in the United States were wanted, after 1753, this spurious Grand Lodgo was applied to and s QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

8$3' og& er with the warrant, a copy of the .Amman Rezon‑a garbled and mischievous republication of Anderson's Constitutions ‑was sent along, as containing the highest law known to Ilasonry. This book, the work of those incendiary Masons, has caused more trouble and discord in the United States, than all other causes combined, and, to this day, many intelligent and otherwise well informed Masons, believe the Alai‑man Rezon is the highest authority.

 

And what makes the trouble greater i~, that while the book contains many things subversive of the ancient law, it does contain much of the true law; and hence, when the holder of a copy of it happens to see a quotation from Anderson, exactly corresponding with the .Aeiman Rezon, lie takes it for granted, that the whole corresponds ; and thus we find one Grand Lodge giving us its views of ancient usage, taken from the Ahiman Rezon, and another, quite a different version, because derived from the original, the first ever printed ‑Anderson's Constitutions.

 

The Ahiman Rezon taught the Masons in the United States to believe that it was very essential for the pre,iding officer to be a Past Master, and Masonry is new so organized in this country, that it has become universal, we believe, to require the Master of a chartered Lodge to have the Past Master's degree. And here may be seen the fallacy of the rule, viz., that none of

 

the Grand Lodges require the Master of a Lodge under dispensation to be a Past Master, or take the degree, notwithstanding some of them contend that the Master of a Lodge can not know how to preside without it.

 

Now, we 0iould like to be informed whether Lodges under dispensation do not make Masons precisely as they are made in chartered Lodges, and whether all the work and lectures are not the Same, and, furthermore, whether the one is not as legally made as the other ? It is scarcely necessary to add, that we believe our corr,,:pondent and the Senior Warden acted right.

 

To the last question, we repeat what we have said above, that, as Masonry is organized its the United States, it is necessary that the Master of a chartered Lodge‑ should have the Past Master's degree, while the Master of a odge under 3ispensati:m is not required to have it; the one is installed, and SS2f~

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

the other is not.

 

By some, the degree is not so called, but is styled the installation ceremony. And we may add, that whether it be the one or the other, there is nothing in it of any sort of importance to a presiding officer.

 

It may be important to the Lodges, that the Master shall solemnly promise to do all that is required of him, as laid down in the chart, but in the degree there is nothing which the better enables him to preside over a, Lodge; in short, there is no Masonry in it, nor has it even the solemnity of a Masonic degree ; it is nothing more nor less than a batch of modern mummery, and we should like to see it dropped altogether, or at bast made, as it is in England, a side degree, where more levity might be tolerated than should be in the sacred Lodge room.

 

SHOULD A LODGE OP0IIN EACH DEGREE? KASKASKIA, ILL, January 5. 1852.

 

BRO. J. W. S. MITCRELL.‑Dear Sir:‑I have taken the liberty of troubling you. and to ask your opinion upon a question of Masonic usage. It is this: I sat in a Lodge, and it was opened in the firat degree ; it was dispensed with, and a Lodge In the swond degree opened ; after doing the work of the Lodge, the same was closed without resuming in the first degree.

 

Now does not the Lodge in the first degree etill stand open?

 

That is the question I would like to have your opinion on, if I am not giving you too much trouble.

 

Respectfully and frafernally yours,

 

F. M.

 

As there are many young Masons, and some old ones, who are not familiar with the history of Masonry, and the changes which have, from time to time, been made in what are called the non‑essentials of our ritual, we will briefly state some historical facts in connection with our opinion upon the subject, embraced in the inquiry of our correspondent.

 

Formerly, all the ordinary business of a Masonic Lodge was transacted in a Lodge of Entered Apprentices. Ballots for admission to membership, or for the mysteries of Masonry, were taken in the first degree, and, of course, all Entered Apprentices were privileged to vote; nay more, were required to vote. Applicants for the Fellow Craft's degree were balloted for in the Fellow Crafts' Lodge, and all Fellow Crafts voted. Applications for the Master's degree were at one time made to the Grand Lodge of England, or to the Grand Master, who QUzMSI'IONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

385 caused a Masters' Lodge to assemble, and ballot for the candidate; but as early as chartered Lodges were authorized to confer the third degree, the ballots took place in the degree applied for, and all the members voted. That this was the usage in England and the United States until recently, will not be questioned, and, we believe, such is now the usage in Eng land.

 

That such only is in accordance with the genius and intention of Masonry, we do not for a moment doubt.

 

A man petitions for membership with the Fraternity; such is the language laid down in all the old works, and still in use; and is it not mockery to grant the prayer of the petitioner, initiate him, and then tell him that he must take two more, degrees before he can become a member of the Lodge.

 

Now we hold, that an Entered Apprentice is a brother Mason, and, as such, has as much right to keep out, by his ballot, a bad man as a Master Mason has.

 

Deprive him of that right, and you may take in a man who will drive an older Entered Apprentice away from the Lodge, and from advancement!

 

Such is not the spirit of Masonry.

 

On the contrary, it seeks to protect and defend the brethren against all intruders and improper persons, whose entrance might disturb the harmony of the Lodge ; in short, Masonry prefers the ins‑the members‑the brethren.

 

So long as the foregoing usage remained in force, it was the general, if not universal practice, to open first a Lodge of Entered Apprentices, do the business or work, if any, of that degree, and pass from that by opening a Fellow Crafts' Lodge, and if a Masters' Lodge was required, then raise to the sublime degree of Master Mason, and when all the business and work was done, the Lodges were all closed in due form ; first the Masters', then the Fellow Crafts', and then the Entered Apprentices' Lodge, and all in peace and harmony, before nine o'clock in tt)e winter, or ten o'clock in the summer.

 

About the time of the rage of anti‑Masonry in the East and North, when thousands basely deserted their standard, or were known only to acknowledge themselves Masons in a whisper, various schemes and devices and non‑essential changes were proposed, among which it was gravely suggested, that all merebers of Lodges should be Master Masons, that the business of 25 $86

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE, the Lodge should be done in the third degree, which would require that all applicants to visit, should prove themselves to be Master Masons. In some jurisdictions this system was adopted; in others, the good old way was adhered to.

 

Such was the condition of things when the Baltimore Convention assembled in 1843, and undertook to produce uniformity in the work of Lodges, by lopping off all extraneous, or foreign matter, and restoring the ancient usage. Well, first and foremost, the "grave and reverend seigniors " decided that a Lodge of Entered Apprentices was no Lodge at all; that a Fellow Crafts' was no Lodge at all, but that a Masters' Lodge was a lodge.

 

And if they had done away with the necessity Masons nave ever been under, of requiring a stranger to satisfy every Lodge he might desire to visit, and every Mason with whom he might choose to hold Masonic communion, that he had been made in a just and legally const&`uted Lodge of Entered Apprentices, Fellow Crafts, or Master Masons, as the case might be, the Baltimore Convention might, at least, have enjoyed the reputa+. tion of being consistent.

 

But this they did not do, and now we are told by those who undertake to underwrite all the Baltimore Convention did, that an Entered Apprentices' Lodge should not be called a Lodge, but the Lodge (Masters' Lodge) working in the Entered Apprentice's degree, and the same thing in reference to a Fellow Crafts' Lodge. The editor of the Boston Magazine was made the mouthpiece of the Convention, to proclaim its great achievements, by publishing a book (The Trestle Board), claiming to reflect the views of the Convention. and the above named contradiction comes to us from his pen, and, as the members of the Convention remain silent, we take it for granted that he speaks " by the card."

 

The same distinguished brother tells us, that the Convention decided that a Lodge under dispensation was no Lodge at all ; that is, they were a certain number of Masons acting under the authohty of the Grand Lodge, with powers to open a Lodge in one sense, viz., to confer degrees, but that it is no Lodge, and, hence, they eonld not increase their number of members, having no power to permit any brother, not named in the dispensation, to become stta&od to the Lodge‑not the Lodge, but the thing of the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

887 Grand Lodge. Now, if the Convention so decided, for the sake of consistency, they should have gone further, and told us not to suffer any one made in a Lodge (thing) under dispensation, to visit a Lodge under charter, or hold any Masonic communion with brother Masons, for the rule is still in force which requires all who hail as Masons, to give incontestable proof that they were made in a just and legally constituted Lodge of Ancient, Free, and Accepted .Masons.

 

We come now to the answer due to the inquiries of our correspondent.

 

Previous to the meeting of the Baltimore Convention, nearly all the Lodges in the Western, Southwestern, and Middle States, opened first upon the Entered Apprentice's, then upon the Fellow Craft's, and then upon the Master's degree, and they were all closed down, viz., first the Master's, then the Fellow Craft's and, lastly, the Entered Apprentice's. But the Baltimore Convention decided that, as there was but one degree in which the Masons at work could be called a Lodge, the Lodge could be opened directly, and closed directly. That the Masters' Lodge, or Lodge of Master Masons, could be opened directly, and, when opened, it could dispense with that degree, and resume labor on the Entered Apprentice's or Fellow Craft's degree, for work only, and that the closing of that degree closed the Lodge. The Convention farther decided, that Lodges might, if they chose, open up, that is, all the degrees, and close down as formerly ; in other words, either would do.

 

Now, we have always been good‑natured, and disposed to follow in the footsteps of wise counsellors, and honing, with all the evils then known of the Baltimore Convention work, that a greater uniformity would spring up, we readily gave in to it, not dreaming, however, that an Entered Apprentices' Lodge was no Lodge at all, or that a Lodge under dispensation was no Lodgo. Since the report of our Delegates, the Lodges in this jurisdiction have been at full liberty to open directly on the Master's degree, and close the Lodge by closing the degree last working on.

 

The same liberty has been given to the Lodges under the Grand Lodge of Illinois; and, hence, the Lodge spoken of by our correspondent, had she right to close as stated.

 

888

 

QUESTIONS OF MkSONIC USAGB.

 

POWER OF GRAND MASTER To SUSPEND A BY‑LAW.‑CAN A MEYBM &XTER HM PROM ON RECORD?  KAsBAmA, ILL., January 24, 1863.

 

DEAR BRo. MrrcaxLL :‑The object of this letter is to get your opinion on some points, which may serve as a guide or precedent in future.

 

1. In obtaining a dispensation for an individual, is it not necessary to get the eoueozt of the Lodge first, so as we may be certain tot the candidate will not he blackballed when the ballot is taken, whether he shall receive the degneea or not?

 

Is it so understood by the Order, that adispensation does away with the right of petition?

 

I contend that the first, or initiatory steps must be taken before the candidate is admitted ; that is, the petition must lie over one lunar month, and then the dispensation will be carried out by giving the other degrees; but, until this is done, is it correct to confer the degrees, that is, going behind the petition?

 

The Laws of our Grand Lodge say that a petition must lie over one '‑mar month, or from one communication to another.

 

Now, can our Grand Master do away with this law, and grant a dispensation to confer degrees?

 

No doubt, when applications are made for such privileges, the Grand Master supposes that the ancient rules are adhered to, that is, the petition has been before the Lodge one month, so as the brethren may not be taken by surprise.

 

2. Another thing I wish to have your opinion on is this : Suppose the proceed ings contrary to usage, in your opinion, have you not the right. as a member of the Lodge, to protest‑ against the irregularity of the proceedings, and ask that your dissent or protest may be entered on record, by consent of the Lodge, or by order of the Worshipful Master ? Honest and conscientious differenees of opinion may arise in Lodges, and hence the right of a member to protest, or how shall he proceed? Let the matter rest, when he honestly believes that it is wrong? 't suppose there must be some means or way that he can justify bimaelf in sitting in Lodge, where a wrong has been committed against usage, and I suppose the only way is by protest against the proceedings.

 

I must here stop, as I may be the cause of giving you trouble and labor in answering my inquiries, for I know you are crowded with inquiries of this kind daily, and I will here cease to inflict trouble on you, for I could burthen you with inquiries.,‑perhaps very foolish ones.

 

But in council there is wisdom, and hence my writing to you. Respectfully and thaternally yours,

 

F. MAXWELL.

 

In answering the first question, we set out with the declaration that a Grand Master can do nothing which his Grand Lodge, by law, forbids him to do; but all things else, which, by long usage, Grand Masters have done, may be performed by him, though there be no law of his Grand Lodge granting him the rower. If the Grand Lodge of Illinois had, by edict, declared that its Grand Master should not ‑have the power to suspend or act independent of its By‑Laws, he could in no case grant a dispensation, authorizing degrees to be conferred in any other way than that laid down in the By‑Laws; in short, the ancient right QUESTIONS vr' MASONIC USAGE.

 

 13149 of the Grait1 Master to grant dispensations for emergent meetÇnge, and for conferring degrees, would be withheld. But, if we are not mistaken, the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge of Illinois are, in this respect, in the same condition, as other Grand Lodges, viz., they prescribe certain rules for the government of its subordinates, one of which is, that a petition must lie over one month, and, without the interference of competent authority, the Lodge can not go behind, or violate the law, but, as in other jurisdictions, here comes in the right of the Grand Master to set aside, or suspend, for the time being, the law of the Grand Lodge.

 

He could not grant a dispensation to confer degrees in any other way than that prescribed by the. By‑Laws, if he could not also grant power to receive and act on a petition in a less time than the law prescribes. We say, then, that the Grand Master, when he deems it for the good of the Craft, can, by dispensation, authorize a subordinate Lodge to receive and set on a petition forthwith, and to confer the three degrees on the same night.

 

We could give many instances where this hag been done, but we deem it unnecessary here.

 

Lest we should be misunderstood, we here repeat what we have before said, more than once, in the Signet, viz., that the Grand Master is, to She full extent, the creature, the officer; the instrument of the Grand Lodge, to see that its edicts are executed, but his power extends further, unless expressly withheld.

 

It is, also, his duty to see that the ancient‑usages and Landmarks of the‑Order are lived up to.

 

But there is no law, ancient or modern, giving the Grand Master the power to make, or permit a Mason to be made, without the unanimous vote of a regular Lodge.

 

To the second question, we answer that a subordinate Lodge is not a legislative body (the Grand Lodge is), and, therefore, has nothing,to do with parliamentary rules, and there being ito such thing as a protest known in the business, or work of a Lodge, it is improper for a member to ask, as it would be for the Master to order a protest to be entered on record. Every member has the right to express his opposition upon any p16posed measure, and, this being done, he should be satisfied with the action of his Lodge, at least until the meeting of the Grand Lodge, when he can complain by petition, or otherwise.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

INDW RSSTORE AN EXPELLED MASON?‑BY WHAT MAJORITY MAY HE BE RPSTOREDR_ WHAT NUMBER ARE INDISPENSABLE TO WORK IN CHAPTER?‑CAN A BALL(YI B: RECONSIDERED? ò CLARKSVILLE, TExAs, January 11, 185& BRo. MITcuzLL :‑Permit me to present a few questions of Masonic usage to you, with the request that you publish your views upon the same in the Sagnd, at your earliest convenience.

 

In the restoration of an expelled Master Mason, by a subordinate Lodge, please to indicate the proper course to be pursued, the members of that Lodge being disposed to the restoration.

 

The Grand Lodge of Texes, held at Henderson, Texas, January, 1851, has decided, by the adoption of the report of the Committee on Grievances and Appeals, that the Lodge expelling a member, is the only tribunal that can afterwards restore him.

 

I allude to the case of Mooring, in that report, which I pre eume you have seen.

 

It is inferred, by many, from the language of that report, that a ballot is necessary, but that the individual may be reinstated by less than a clear ballot ; and I have seen a member restored in consequence of this report, by less than a clear ballot.

 

This being so directly at variance with all my preconceived views of Masonry, I appeal to you.

 

An expelled Mason stands to the Fraternity as an alien; he is cut off from all claims and privileges, so far as Masonry is concerned, and the Brotherhood are absolved from all obligations to him as a Mason.

 

Now. although he has been expelled by a majority only, or by a two‑thirds vote of the Lodge, can he come back into the Lodge upon easier terms than a worthy man applying for admission by initiation? Such a doctrine, it seems to me, is incompatable with the true spirit of Masonry.

 

' Another case: In a Royal Arch Chapter, is there an indispensable number of ballots necessary to entitle an applicant to the Chapter degrees ; and, if so, what number? The number. of Companions necessary to form a Chapter I well know, but may not the Chapter excuse some of its member from voting, and thus the applicant be elected by a less number than nine white balls?

 

In the case eliciting this inquiry, the application had been before the Chapter for four months. At the expiration of the month, his application had been negatived by three blackballs, but that vote was reconsidered, and the application laid over for one month, and at the expiration of this time, only eleven members were present, and four of these were excused from voting.

 

The ballot was fair, and the can didate was declared elected.

 

Is, or is not the election a legal one?

 

The com munication was a regular stated meeting.

 

You now have the facts before you. I wish you to answer me with as little delay as possible, on this case, by letter, it you please.

 

The case is a novel one to me, and I confess myself embarrassed by the conflicting opinions with which I am surrounded on this subject.

 

Another question: Can a ballot, resulting in the election of a candidate, be reconsidered ? 4In the above case, assuming the election to be legal, by seven ballots. would ft be Masonic to give the Chapter degrees to one thus elected, when it is known that dissatisfaction would be produced among the existing Companions, by so doing? These are questions I have never seen, discussed in a journal like you‑s, and QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

391 believe the Craft generally are uninformed in regard to them, particularly fit Texas, and I think you might benefit the Fraternity much, by presenting then) properly through the Signd.

 

Fraternally yours,

 

A. K. ELLErx.

 

To the first question, we answer that an expelled Mason, who desires to be restored, should ask it by petition, or the motion of a member. The Master should fix a time, either the next regular meeting, or at a period sufficiently remote to afford a reasonable time for all the members to be apprised of the ap plication.

 

The Master should issue his summons to every member, believed to be within reach, and, when the time arrives, all. members present must ballot, and a single blackball rejects the applicant.

 

It is scarcely necessary for us to add a single remark in vindication of this position, as our correspondent has himself very ably defended it. We think the Grand Lodge of Texas decided correctly that the Lodge expelling is the proper body to reinstate, unless said Lodge should cease to exist, in which event the Grand Lodge should exercise its undoubted power; but surely the Grand Lodge of Texes, never contemplated the restoration of a suspended or expelled Mason, without the unanimous vote of the Lodge.

 

If there is one principle or end more sacred to Masonry than another, it is the harmony of the body, and how can harmony be preserved, if a man can be forced into the Lodge against the will of a single member 7

 

If, in a case as put, we felt compelled to deposit a blackball, we should most surely be compelled to refuse to fellowship the man, and thus we should be driven from the Lodge, if he was admitted. To guard against a contingency of this sort, it is wisely provided by every Grand Lodge, we believe, in the United States, except South Carolina, that one blackball shall reject a candidate for initiation or affiliation, and, surely, as our correspondent suggests, it will not be contended that an expelled Mason may claim higher privileges than either the one or the other.

 

The second question is more difficult to answer.

 

We have no hesitation in saying, that there is an indispensable number to constitute a Chapter, and that the number is the same required to open a Chapter, but for the convenience, not of young, but old Chapters, made up of lazy Masons, some Grand Chapters‑‑ 392

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Missouri in the number‑have, in their wisdom, said that fim shall be sufficient, and hence may our opinion be of but little value, in opposition to a precedent set by such high authority: But let us see how this new rule will compare with the estaulished usages of the Order. A Lodge of Entered Apprentices can not be opened by a less number than seven. After the Lodge is opened, no vote can be taken with a less number than seven; in short, it ceases to be a legal Lodge with a less number.

 

Five is the indispensable number of a Fellow Crafts' Lodge, and three of a Masters' Lodge.

 

Most of the Grand Lodges in the United States require at least seven to ballot in s Masters' Lodge, and, most certainly, no Lodge would undertake, in the absence of such requirement, to ballot with a less number than five in the Fellow Crafts' Lodge, or three in the Master's.

 

Now every R. A. Mason knows, that at least nine re.gukr R. A. Masons are necessary to constitute a Chapter, and, we ask, can a less number ballot?

 

Is the Chapter a regular one with a less number?

 

We think not, and we think the great principles and established usages of Masonry should never be made to yield to convenience.

 

If a Chapter can not command the attendance of nine members, it should suspend business until it can, or surrender its charter. But the case eliciting the inquiry by our correspondent, was all wrong.

 

A ballot may be taken once, twice, or thrice, if the presiding officer shall believe it at all probable that a mistake has occured, but, this being done, it is his imperative duty to announce the election, or rejection of the applicant, and thus ends the matter, until the time shall elapse when the candidate, if rejected, may petition again.

 

There is no such thing in Masonry as reconsidering a ballot; neither can the balloting be postponed after it has once been taken.

 

Another thing wrong in the case, as put, was the excusing of members from voting. In the ordinary business of a Lodge or Chapter, we can imagine cases where a member might properly ask, and the presiding officer excuse him from voting, but only in such cases as involved the interest of the member so asking; but in balloting on a petition for initiation or membership, every member should be required to rote, and this is necessary, in order to preserve the ‑harmony QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

343 of the body.

 

None should be admitted, with whom any one member can not fellowship. Any other course would be ruinous in its consequences, for it would drive away and render lukewarm the ins, in order to make room for the outs, which would be at war with every principle of the Fraternity.

 

We say, then, that the candidate referred to by our correspondent, was declared elected contrary to established usage, and, furthermore, that he was regularly and legally rejected, when three blackballs appeared against him; and the Grand Chapter of Texas will so declare, if the subject be brought before it ; for, beside the other illegal steps taken, the High Priest could not reasonably conclude that a mistake had been made.

 

A ballot rejecting an applicant for membership in a Chapter. in this iurisdiction, was reconsidered, and he was afterward balloted for and declared elected; but the Grand High Priest hearing of it, very properly visited, and caused the Chapter to rescind, jr annul the last vote, and to return the applicant as rejected, though we are confident he believed the applicant a good man and Mason.

 

The last question of our correspondent has been answered, by saying no ballot can be reconsidered. But the election of a candidate for initiation by no means precludes a member from the right to arrest his progress.

 

No High Priest of a Chapter, or Master of a Lodge, should attempt to confer a degree, if he is informed that any one member refuses to fellowship the candidate in that degree, and should an officer attempt to do so, the member aggrieved may rise and object to the proceedings, and we take it for granted this would be deemed sufficient anywhere, as we must protect the feelings, as well as the rights of those to whom we are bound by the strong ties of brotherhood, whatever may be the consequence to others Every applicant has it in his power to be informed of the rules by which candidates are received or rejected. They should know that they can not be received against the consent of a single member, and, knowing this, they must be content to abide the issue.

 

We trust the importance of the subjects embraced in the questions of our correspondent, will he considered an ample 894

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

apology for the space we have occupied in answering them. The glaring and dangerous errors in the action of the Chapter referred to, should admonish presiding officers to devote some time in acquiring a knowledge of the usages of our Order. We mean to cast no unnecessary censure upon that particular Chapter; indeed, we are not in a situation to do so, when truth requires us to acknowledge that the Chapter of which we are a member, is the one referred to above, where the Grand High Priest mildly, but firmly required us to respect the usages of the Order.

 

POSTPONING THE BALLOT 0TER IT COMMENCED. RECOMMTTTING A PETITION AFM A BALLOT.

 

HA.INmAL, Mo., February, 1852.

 

" 1. An unanimous vote shall be necessary to an election, provided that, if one or more blackballs appear, a second and third ballot may be had, to correct any supposed error; but no third ballot shall be taken at the same meeting.

 

112. After the petition shall be in possession of the Lodge, it can not be withdrawn, except upon a vote of three‑fourths of the members present.

 

113. All the members present at any first balloting, must be present at any second or third balloting; and no balloting can be taken in the absence of anv such member." CAsE‑Upon the favorable report of the Committee to whom the petition was referred, a ballot was ordered and taken, which resulted in two blackballs. On motion, a second ballot was taken, to detect a supposed error, which resulted as before ; when, on motion, the further balloting was postponed to the next regular meeting.

 

At the next, and several subsequent regular meetings, the balloting was further postponed to the next regular meeting thereafter, on account of the non‑attendance of members present as the first balloting.

 

The Lodge wishing to dispose of the matter. but unable to proceed, on account of the absence of members (under the rule marked 3, above), a motion was made to recommit the petition to the same Committee to whom it was originally referred, to report anew, which being duly seconded, the Worshipful Master decided that he could not put the motion, under the doctrine of the rule, marked above as 2 as is found ordained by the Grand Lodge, Article ‑, Section ‑.

 

QUESTION.‑Has the Lodge the lawful power, before or after a ballot has been ordered and taken, but not final, to recommit the petition, etc., report thereon (the report admitted to go with the petition), under the rule of the Grand Lodge, quoted, in substance, as the 2nd above, or would such recommitment be in derogar tion of the rule, or doctrine of the rule Y The Worshipful Muster holds the affirmative; others hold the negative, and appeal to those parliamentary rules which are available for all bodies, in the transaction of business; and also insist that, without the application to withdraw by thr, petitioner, or his authorized friend, that the three‑fourths vote has no applioatior, to the case.

 

Yours fraternally, QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

395 We have no difficulty in answering the foregoing interrog story, by the long established, and, we think, correct usages of the Order; but, if our correspondent quotes the first rule from the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, it raises a question of ancient Masonic law, which would have to be determined by the Grand Lodge. If the words " no third ballot shall be taken at the same meeting," etc., are to be found in the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge, then, we say, the Master was justified in entertaining the motion to postpone the further balloting to the next regular meeting ; but the doctrine and consequences involved, are so repugnant'to the usages of the Order‑and we can not find any such law‑we are inclined to think it does not exist, and yet the sixteenth Section of the fifth Article, seems to tolerate a similar course of proceeding in relation to a second ballot.

 

It is as follows : " No second ballot, upon the petition of any applicant for initiation or membership, shall be taken by any Lodge, unless all be present, who still remain members of the Lodge, that were present at the time of taking the previous ballot, or until the lapse of one year."

 

The first part of this rule is plain, and in accordance with correct practice, as a second ballot may be ordered, in order to ascertain whether a mistake was made in the tirst, and no member should be permitted to withdraw, and thus avoid depositing his ballot; but what is to be understood by the words, "who still remain members of the Lodge," we are at a loss to determine.

 

We can hardly suppose the Grand Lodge ever intended to permit a Lodge to postpone the balloting to another meeting, after the ballot had been once taken, and yet the language of the law is fairly susceptible of such a construction ; for it is not to be presumed that a member will be permitted to demit, while the Lodge is engaged in balloting.

 

We say, that if the Master in question had entertained a motion to postpone the second ballot to the next regular meeting, he would have been sustained by the law of the Grand Lodge we have quoted, but, certainly, not by any correct usage of the Order.

 

But unless it can be shown that the Grand Lodge does authorize a third ballot, and that it may be postponed, the Uas'.er not only acted in violation of usage, but without the 396

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

authority of his Grand Lodge.

 

The practice prevails, and, we think, correctly, to order a second ballot whenever the Master shall have reason to believe a mistake occurred in the first. In the case before us, a second ballot was ordered, in order to the correction of a supposed mistake, when it was hardly suppos‑, able that a mistake had been made, as there were two blackballs; but to this indulgence we do not object. But upon what principle, or for what object he entertained a motion for a third 'allot, and suffered its postponement to another meeting, we can not determine, unless his Lodge was disgraced with the presence of two members who were intoxicated, which is not a supposable case.

 

Aside from local laws, we think the usage and general practice are as follows: A petition can not be withdrawn after it is bled and referred. On the report of the Committee of Inquiry, if the ballot is ordered, no other business can be entered upon; no motion to withdraw the petition, or for any other disposition of it can be entertained.

 

If, upon the first ballot, the Master nas reason to believe that a mistake was made in balloting, he may order a second and even a third, provided he still believes there was a mistake, but all this must be done at the same meeting, and the candidate must be declared elected or rejected, as the case may be.* The very case under consideration shows, conclusively, that any other course would result in interminable. difficulties.

 

Suppose one of the members, who was present at the first balloting, chooses to absent himself; he may, it is true, be brought there by a summons, but suppose him to be absent from, and, if you please, removed beyond the jurisdiction, but still remains a member, owing no dues. How can you command his presence?

 

You can not act again on the petition without hie presence; you can not grant him a demit unless he asks for it; you can not suspend him, or erase his name for non‑payment of dues; nor can the Lodge dispose of the petition.

 

We are asked whether the Master is sustained by the rule quoted, .in refusing to entertain a motion to recommit the peticon.

 

We answer, we think he is most clearly, because the 0 We mean by a second or third ballot, the retaking of the ballot.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

897 effect of the motion goes behind the balloting, and by a redirection, defeats the action of the Lodge. If the petition be recommitted, it stands without a report, and without an order for a ballot, and, hence, subject to be withdrawn by a vote of threefourths ; and, surely, it will not be contended that a petition may be withdrawn, even by a unanimous vote, after the ballot has been once taken ; there would be but few rejections, if the friends of the petitioner could withdraw the petition after it was known he was blackballed.

 

One Committee of Investigation, and one report from that Committee, are all that is known in Masonry.

 

Nor can the result of a ballot be avoided by indirection.

 

It is the imperative duty of every member to be in full fellowship with every other member, and should any fail to live up to this duty, it is the duty of the Master to arraign them, that they may be required to live in harmony, and it is more especially the duty of the Master to see to it that no. one is admitted, who is likely to disturb the harmony of the Lodge We think, in the case as put, the candidate was regularl~ and liberally dealt by, and as regularly rejected; that the records of the Lodge should be made in conformity thereto, and the name reported, as the law requires, to the Grand Lodge.

 

In conclusion, we have to say, that the order of business in a subordinate Lodge, can not be determined by parliamentary rules. A subordinate Lodge is not a legislative body; they must be governed by the usages of Masonry, and the laws of the Grand Lodge, and we sincerely hope that some of the laws of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, and especially the sixteenth Section of the fifth Article, will be speedily amended, as it can not be expected that the Lodges will live up to the usages and Landmarks of the Order, while conflicting laws are in force.

 

WHAT ARE SIDE DEGRM IN THE CHAPTPTt? BATON ROUGE, LA., March, 185L Will Comp. Mitchell please give his opinion of the intentions of the General Grand Chapter, in the prohibition of the Royal Arch Masons from conferring any but constitutional degrees in Masonry. Does that prohibition include the side degrees called " Heroine of Jericho," " Good Samaritan," etc.

 

AN INQuws.

 

998 In answer to. the foregoing, we have to say, that we attended the General Grand Chapter, at Columbus, Ohio, in 1847, at which time a proposition was introduced, asking that General Grand body to prohibit Royal Arch Masons from conferring the so called Chapter side degrees, and the " Heroine of Jericho" was especially named. The presiding officer pronounced the proposition out of order, on the ground that the edict of the General Grand Chapter, prohibiting all except the constito tional degrees, was not only designed to, but did most clearly cover the ground last proposed. This decision was quietly acquiesced in, and, if there could have been doubts before as to the meaning of the law, most certainly there has been no room to doubt since 1847.

 

Every Royal Arch Mason does, or should know what are the constitutional degrees, as recognized by the General Grand Chapter.

 

We have known the " Heroine of Jericho" and the " Goqd Samaritan" conferred by Royal Arch Masons, since the plvhibition, and the ground taken, in justification, was, that these were not Masonic degrees, and, therefore, not prohibited by the law; but we regard this as the poorest of all poor excuses which could be offered, for disobedience to a direct mandate. Terms acquire force and meaning by their application to things. Now, we ask whether the "Heroine of Jericho" and the "Good Samaritan" are not generally called side degrees in Royal Arch Masonry? We know they are; and whenever the side degrees in Royal Arch Masonry are spoken of, every one knows these are referred to.

 

We have been among the foremost in saying there is no Masonry in them; but is that any reason we should attempt, by indirection, to evade the law ?

 

We say there is no Masonry in the Past Master's degree; but would this justify us in conferring the degree, contrary to the ac knowledged law?

 

We contend that there is no Masonry in any one of the Ineffable or Scotch Rite degrees, and yet we should be recreant to our duty, should we attempt to confer them in any other way than that pointed out by the recognized law‑making power.

 

Our position, in relation to all the so called side degrees, may be Qtated in a few words.

 

We do not believe they have QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

39.! done any harm; on the contrary, we have known good to resu_t from some of them, but, we fear, if they are encouraged, they will' finally be engrafted upon the ancient stock, and, surely, we have endugh of that mushroom growth already. Already do we hear propositions to take three or four of the most important side degrees, and constitute Lodges for their special use. But our opinion of the value of these, or any other degrees, has but little to do with the question of our correspondent.

 

Tile G. G. Chapter has prohibited R. A. Masons from conferring any degrees, called Masonic, except the constitutional degrees, and every one knows that the same G. Grand body has recognized only the Mark Master, Past Master, M. E. Master, Royal Arch, and the Royal and Select degrees, as being constitutional.

 

We say, then, that the side degrees usually given to R. A. Masons. their wives, etc., are clearly prohibited, and whether the law be good or bad, it is binding upon all who are under the jurijdiction of the G. G. Chapter.

 

In connection with this subject, it may be proper to say, tha: we have sometimes been asked whether the edict of the General Grand Chapter does not operate to prevent a R. A. Maso:i from receiving, or conferring those side degrees sometimes given to Master Masons, their wives, etc. We do not hesitate to repeat what we have always said, that the law in question is entitled to a fair construction, and all must agree that the G. G. Chapter never intended to interfere with any of the degrees, or supposed appendages to the degrees of Blue Lodge Masonry. As well might they undertake to prohibit side degrees in the Encampment, for the Grand Lodge and Grand Encampment are equally independent of the Grand Chapter, or the G. G. Chapter.

 

We look upon the side degrees of the Chapter as being more likely to be productive of good, than the sido degrees of the Blue Lodge, and yet we are forbid to give flee former, while we are at full liberty to confer the latter.

 

DAN A LODGE TRANSFER THE TRIAL OF A BROTHER TO ANOTHER IADGEt‑HAS A D. A G. MASTER THE RIGHT To INTERFERE WITH TRIALS?‑‑CAN A D. D. G. MASTER ARREPR A CHARTER? CASSVILLE, Mo., March 15, 1852.

 

Comp MITCHELL :‑As it is presumed that ar. ‑3u‑ knows all things, I bel 1fio QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

leave to propound to you certain interrogatories, which you will please anewn ,arouga the Sip&: 1. Where a brother has been guilty of grass unmasonic conduct, can a Lodge stfer the matter to a committee from other Lodges, and would tjie Lodge not be violating the twenty‑second Article of the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge, to do so t 3. Has the District Deputy Grand Master the right to interfere with the trial of a brother who has been guilty of unmasonic conduct, when the Lodge of which he is a member is attempting to bring him to trial ? 3. Has the District Deputy Grand Master the right, by any provision of the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge, to suspend a charter, until the next annual communication of the Grand Lodge? And, if he has that right, is it not in violation of hiq duty to do so, when he knows that charges and speciflcations have been flltd by the Committee of Grievances against a brother, for unmasouic conduct, and he cited for trial.

 

4. Has a brother the right to be present when the Committee report charges a.,ainst him.

 

You will confer a favor upon the Fraternity by answering the above laterrogatories.

 

I have the honor to be, Fraternally yours, J. W. Beamen.

 

Before answering the foregoing questions, as governed by the Grand Lodge of Missouri, it may not be amiss to state one or two general r1iles under which we suppose the By‑Laws of this Grand Lodge were made, touching the subjects referred 1.0 by our correspondent.

 

Each Lodge shall exercise a watchful care over all the ,Masons within its jurisdiction, whether members or not. I_ any brother be reran' red to be guilty of unmasonic conduct, is is the duty of every other brother, but especially of the Master of the Lodge, to in, charges and specifications against the accused, either with the Secretary or Committee of Grievance, if one existe.

 

It is then the duty of the Master to cause a citatirm to be served upon the accused, if he can be found, spr‑eifyinn the time set apart for his trial, to which time every member of the Lodge, within its jurisdiction, should be sum moned.

 

The accused has a right to be present, and be heard by himself or counsel.

 

It is agreed, generally, that a Mason ceases to be in good standing from the time charges of unò masonic conduct are filed against him, and, hence, in some jurisdictions he is not allowed to be present, in open Lodge, during his trial, but his trial is conducted before a Committee of the Lodge, upon the report of which Committee the Lodge acts.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

401 The Grand Lodge of Missouri has plainly set forth, in its By‑Laws, the manner in which trials shall be conducted, and, most certainly, the subordinate Lodge has no right to appoint arbitrators from other Lodges, to try the allegations filed against the accused. A subordinate Lodge can make no laws. even for its own government, except such as shall receive the sanction of the Grand Lodge, and, of course, it can make no rule for the trial of the accused, at variance with the rules laid down by the Grand Lodge.

 

To the second question, we have to say, that the District Deputy Grand Master is an officer created by the Grand Lodge. merely ; not under any ancient law or usage, but to subserve the purposes of Freemasonry, in certain localities, as the Grand Lodge shall direct, and, of course, he can exercise no powers not specifically delegated to him by the Grand Lodge.

 

The only clause in the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge of Missouri, which could be construed as giving power to the District Deputy Grand Master to interfere with trials, is that which gives him a general supervision over the Lodges in his district ; but, surely, it will not be contended that this gives him power to arrest, suspend, or throw obstacles in the way of a trial for unmasonic conduct, for the reason that the Grand Lodge has specifically charged the Lodges with this duty, and pointed ont the manner in which it shall be done. The law gives the District Deputy Grand Master the right to visit and preside over the Lodges of his district.

 

The law also declares that no one but the members of the Lodge, except counsel and witnesses, shall be present at a trial, and they, if not members, shall withdraw before the vote is taken ; from which, it would seem to be doubtful whether the District Deputy Grand Master would have a right to be present at a trial, if he was not a member ; but, certainly, the utmost he could claim would be to preside over the Lodge, and conduct the trial according to the laws of the Grand Lodge.

 

In answering the third question, we have to say, that we know of no power vested in the District Deputy Grand 112aster to arrest or suspend a dispensation, much less the Charter of a 26 402

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Lodge.

 

He has power given him by the Grand Lod(re to issue dispensations to form new Lodges, which dispensations are made returnable, not to him, but to the Grand Lodge ; and the Grand Master, alone, in the vacation of the Grand Lodge, can arrest a charter or dispensation, or suspend the business of a Lodge.

 

The arrest of the warrant of a Lodge, is one of the highest grades of punishment which can be inflicted upon a Lodge, and the Grand Lodge of Missouri has not, and, we sup pose, never will give such power to a D. D. Grand Master.

 

The fourth question is partly answered in our introductory remarks. The Grand Lodge of Missouri fully recognizes the right of the accused to be present and examine the witnesses, by himself or counsel, and the custom is to conduct the trial in open Lodge.

 

The members of the Lodge only can be present, except the counsel and witnesses should not be members; in which case, they are admitted, and remain until the testimony is all given, when the accused, together with all who are not members, are required to retire, when the vote of the members is taken, as laid down in the Twenty‑second Article.

 

PHYSICAL DISQUALIKOATIONS.

 

SCOTLAND COUNTY, Mo., April 15th, 1852 R. W. BRO. J. W. S. MrTCHEI.L.‑Dear Sir ~At a stated communication of Bloomington Lodge, No. 102, of Free and Accepted Masons, in November, 1851, the Rev. J. G. Swinney was initiated; he was then 11 upright in body, not deformed or dismembered." At the December communication, be was elected to the second degree, but before it was "passed," he lost his left foot, etc., by amputation above the knee.

 

Query.‑‑Can the degree be conferred without doing violence to the spirit of Resolution 3. recommended by the Committee on Foreign Correspondence, to the Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of the State of Missouri, and adopted by that body May 8th, 1851 (See proceedings, page 21).

 

2. Can the Lodge confer the third degree (to which he has not been elected) at any time?

 

Yours fraternally,

 

JUNIOR FRATER.

 

However much we may regret the consequences of the mis fortune to the brother referred to by our correspondent, we are compelled to say that the Lodge can not, in our opinion, permit him to advance further in Masonry. The mere edict of the G.‑and Lodge might be repealed, but no act of that body can   402    QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

403  repeal, set aside, or remove an Ancient Landmark: and the brother can not advance without a direct violation of a rule laid down in the Old Charges. We have attempted, heretofore, to explain the meaning and intent of the law, and we will only add here, that a Lodge should not give a degree to any one who, from physical inability, can not practice all the rituals of that tegree.

 

CAN ELECTED CANDIDATES BE ARRESTED! Qunvcr, ILL., April 6, 1852 DR. J. W. S. MTTCBELL‑Dear Sir ~I address you for information as regards the Ancient Usages of Freemasonry, in respect to uninitiated but dected candidates for the honors of the Order.

 

A peculiar case has occurred in our Lodge, upon which your opinion is very respectfully solicited.

 

An individual has petitioned our Lodge‑his petition been received and acted on in the usual manner‑ballot been taken, and he declared elected. Since this, it has been ascertained, that under another nanu, twelve months since, be petitioned our sister Lodge, and that the petition was returned without action ; because he had then been a citizen for a short time. and was a comparative stranger. Many think he should not be received under these circumstances, and yet are not satis fied whether a fair ballot may be reconsidered.

 

Will you please reply immediately by letter, and oblige Yours fraternally, The foregoing questions have been answered by private letter, but knowing, as we do, that quite a number of Lodges, elsewhere, have been at a loss how to proceed under similar circumstances,, we have thought it to be our duty to say a few words through the Signet.

 

"Masonry is designed to unite us together as a band of brothers," to make us feel and act toward each other as though we were brothers by birth. The members of the Fraternity are expected heartily and freely to extend the right hand of fellow ship to all, and all are expected as warmly and cordially to receive the friendly grip.

 

This state of things can not exist, if any may be admitted contrary to the will of any one of the members; and, hence, it becomes the duty of the Master to prevent the initiation of any one whose introduction would disturb the harmony of the Lodge.

 

We hold that any member tins the undoubted right to arrest a candidate, at any period t04

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

before lie is actually made a Mason.

 

If, after a candidate is elected, a member becomes convinced that he is unworthy, the most prudent course would be to apprise the Master of his , objections: and surely no Master of a Lodge would suffer a candidate to be initiated until the objections were removed. But it is a great mistake to suppose the Lodge can reconsider the ballot.

 

There is no such thing as reconsidering a ballot. If the candidate has been declared elected, it must so stand. If he has been declared rejected, it must so stand‑a new ballot can not be had. The right to reconsider a ballot, would presup. ", pose the right to recommit the petition, and then the right to '.' withdraw it; and thus an evasion of our usages would result. ~~ One Committee, one report, and one ballot must suffice. When we say one ballot, we do not mean that the Master may not order that ballot to be retaken, if he believes a mistake has occurred, but, after the result has been declared, it can not be reached again by indirection‑the elected candidate can not be a declared rejected.

 

But, so long as there is a member objecting to his initiation, it would be highly improper in the Lodge to .', suffer him to come in.

 

We must consult the feelings of our ;:l brethren, in preference to those who are not of our Order.

 

Of course, no brother should urge an objection under such circumstances, unless it be well founded, and of a serious character; nor do we apprehend danger on this ground, for it requires greatly more of moral courage to reject than to receive an applicant, and especially so, if the candidate has been elected.

 

We have before answered a question covering similar ground, but we think the subject has not received that attention which its importance demands.

 

MUST A HIGH PRIEST HAVE THE ORDER OF HIGH PRIESTHOOD? ST. Louis, Mo., May, 1862.

 

Comp. MITCHELL..‑Can a Companion Royal Arch Mason, who has not had the Order of High Priesthood, and who is not one of the three first officers of a Chapter, legally confer degrees in a Chapter?

 

S. .

 

The foregoing question, propounded by a Companion deeply read in Masonic lore, and unusually familiar with ancient usages, has, as far as we know, never been answered through any of QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

4051 the Masonic journals, nor do we know that the question has ever been mooted in the General Grand Chapter.

 

We have not yet examined the history of the origin of the Order of High Priesthood, but we do not hesitate to say, that it is a thing of modern invention ; indeed, so recently has this imposing Order been introduced, that, predisposed as the Craft everywhere seems to be to embrace every newly invented appendage to Freemasonry, this Order or degree has not yet become universally known throughout the United' States. Twenty years ago we had never heard of it. We were exalted in Lexington Chapter, No. 1, Kentucky, more than twenty‑five years ago, and we are constrained to admit, that, to this day, we have never seen this most sublime degree so well conferred, and yet the High Priest who then presided did not enjoy the benefits claimed to be derived through the Order of High Priesthood.

 

But we do not regard this as at all remarkable. knowing, as we do, that the degree has no sort of connection with Freemasonry, and, consequently, can shed no additional light upon the duties of the High Priest.

 

The hatched up tradition of this so called Order, clearly show it to have been the invention of some Masonic driveler, who was totally ignorant of the true history of Freemasonry; for they all run back to a period long anterior to the institution of Freemasonry.

 

It is true that this degree, like all others of modern date, whether introduced by Masons or Oddfellows, is founded on events recorded in the Bible; but, even admitting that all these newlyinvented degrees are calculated to teach useful moral lessons, it by no means follows that we should suffer them to become engrafted upon, and thus form an indissoluble link in the ancient Masonic chain.

 

Shall intelligent Masons be called on to admit, that because Sir William Wallace was a distinguished warrior and a benevolent man, he was, therefore, in possession of the degree of Sir Knight of Jericho ?

 

Shall we be told, that because Abraham was the rather of the Faithful, and the chosen of God, he therefore instituted the Order of High Priesthood in Masonry? We rejoice to say, that a new light begins to lawn upon the Craft, and that intelligent men are begirming to separate the chaff from the wheat.

 

Masons are becoming 406

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

readers of the history of our Institution ; our well‑authenticated traditions are being better understood, and a few bold spirits are starting up, resolved to divest Freemasonry of the modern innovations so extensively practiced. May this noble little band continue to grow in numbers and in zeal, until their moral influence shall drive from our midst every vestige of modern Masonry. If these modern degrees are of sufficient importance to be preserved and practiced, let them be formed into a distinct and separate organization. and by some other name than Masonry, that our time‑honored and divinely‑instituted Order may not be polluted or encumbered by these newly‑invonted gewgaws.

 

The Order of High Priesthood gives to the recipient no additional qualifications to preside over a Chapter. It is, if possible, of less importance to the presiding officer than is the Past Master's degree; and as there is no usage even, claimed to 11 be ancient, requiring the High Priest of a Chapter to have this Order, and as the General Grand Chapter has wisely avoided an attempt to control this degree, we say, unhesitatingly, that it is not necessary to the presiding officer. For many years, we have been occasionally in the habit of assisting in conferring this Order upon elected High Priests, but certainly not as a pre. requisite to the right to preside.

 

An elected High Priest ynay apply to a Council of High Priests for the Order, but the Council may, of right, reject the candidate ; and, hence, it will be seen, that so far from the elected High Priest being required to have the Order conferred upon him by any law in Masonry, it is in the power of the Council, to which he applies, to refuse his request; in short, the elected High Priest is eligible to be a candidate for the Order, but the obligation nowhere exists to confer it.

 

From the foregoing, it will be seen that we answer the gnes tion of our correspondent affirmatively.

 

HALL(YrING FOR EACH DWAF$ WATT& Px.Atxs, ALA., March 22, 1853.

 

Bao. J. W. S. MrrcuXLL.‑Dear Stir.‑While writing to you on businesse, peg mtt me to trouble you with a few questions, which I will be pleased to have euswered in the Styrw, or by a private communication, via.: QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

407 1. After a candidate has been received, and taken one or two degrees, is it proper to prevent his farther progress without a substantial reason! 2. Has a brother, who voted for him in the first degree, a right to vote against his progress? 8. After a candidate has been admitted to one or two degrees, should he then be stopped, what is the proper course to be pursued by the Lodge ? I am fraternally yours, J. B. H.

 

To the first question, we answer that the progress of a candidate should never be arrested without a very sufficient reason ‑indeed all good Masons must admit this; but, presuming our \ correspondent means to inquire whether the objector is not bound to make his objections known to the Lodge or the Master, we feel that it becomes an important question, one which has been mooted in various quarters of the country since the introduction of Oddfellowship. Until recently. we supposed there was no Grand Lodge in the United States that did not carefully guard the ballot‑bog from invasion, and protect the harmony of the Craft, by requiring a unanimous ballot to receive: but we have been astounded to learn, through Bro. Mackey, that in South Carolina the Lodges are governed by the same rules which obtain with the Oddfellows, where one blackball does not reject, unless the reasons given by the objector are deemed by the Lodge sufficient‑‑and we were equally surprised to learn, through the same source, that the rule in South Carolina is not borrowed from the Oddfellows, but is one of the oldest Regulations of that Grand Lodge‑and, until lately, Bro. Mackey believed the same custom prevailed throughout the United States. That South Carolina stands alone upon this subject, we hope and believe; for how can harmony be preserved in the Lodge, if a member can be introduced against the direct will of a member? Few men would be willing to fellowship a man against whom they had deposited a blackball; and, hence, their only remedy would be to demit, or absent themselves from the Lodge‑and, surely, no one will contend that we are under greater obligations to an applicant than to a member.

 

If the word Brotherhood means anything in our Institution, we dare not introduce discord, or mar the harmony of its counuctions.

 

We can not receive a member, or !OH

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

initiate a candidate, without the unanimous consent of the Lodge. And to preserve this harmony and good feeling. a secret ballot is resorted to ; but where would be the use of a secret ballot, if the secret vote of a member may be exposed? We may have learned, under a promise of secrecy, that the candidate is a base man. We can not and will not divulge this to any one; and yet, as a good and true Mason we could not fellowship him in tha Lodge; and if, after we had deposited a blackball, that man was forced into the Lodge, we should be driven out. We say, then, that no one should be received without a unanimous vote: and so far from its being the duty of a brother to expose his negative vote, and give a reason for so doing, it is his duty not to do so‑because, while he may know the man to be unworthy, not being at liberty to give the facts, the friends of the candidate might suspect his honesty, and thus bad feelings would be engendered in the Lodge.

 

And we hold that all we have said should apply also to the advancement of a candidate.

 

No degree should be given without the unanimous vote of the Lodge.

 

We may believe a man to be worthy when he applies for the first degree, and know him to be unworthy when he applies for the second; and it is not enough to say we have the privilege of preferring charges, for we may not be at liberty to do so, or we may not be able to establish charges, though we know him guilty of. immoral conduct.

 

We have before mentioned a case, in this jurisdiction, where a man was received upon the good character of his brother‑through mistake, of course; and when the truth came out, it was found that the initiate had the character of being a petty thief, though, perhaps, it could not be clearly proven that he had ever stolen anything.

 

Now, would any' brother say that the Lodge would have acted correctly in conferring the other two degrees upon that man?

 

We grant that it was the duty of the Lodge to apprise the man of the rumor against his character, and give him an opportunity to remove the stain; but most certainly he should not be permitted to place us under new and stronger ties until he had removed the imputation.

 

The second question is, in effect, answered above. Any QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

409 Drotller may vote for the Candidate on his first application, and against him on a second or third.

 

To the third question, we answer that the general and, wA think, correct rule, is to ballot for each degree. The ballot in all respects should be conducted in the same manner; and, if a blackball appears, it is proper for the Master to order the ballot to be retaken, to avoid a mistake; should a blackball be again deposited, the candidate is rejected. This does not affect his standing as a Mason, but he can not advance until he again petitions.

 

As to the lapse of time before he can again petition, we know of no direct rule, but we think twelve months should elapse, as in cases of rejection on the first application, unless his rejection was caused by want of qualifications.

 

By general usage, a candidate is required to petition in writing only for the first degree. On the verbal application of a member, the Lodge may proceed to ballot for the applicant's advancement to the next degree.

 

WHAT CONSITrUTFS A DEMrr P‑CAN A DEMITTED MASON BE A REPRESENTATIVE IN GRAND LODGEf ST. Loves, Mo.

 

Can a Master Mason, who bas demitted, and whose dismission is recorded in the proceedings of the Lodge, but who has not been furnished with a certificate Vi that effect by the Secretary, legally represent such Lodge in Grand Lodge? S.

 

In some jurisdictions proxies can. be made of brethren who are not members of the same Lodge, and it may be that, in some cases, even non‑affiliated Masons might thus obtain seats in the Grand Lodge; but, understanding the above question as referring specially to the Grand Lodge of Missouri, we should feel surprise at the question being put to us, as it is, by a well informed Mason, did we not know that, at the late session of our Grand Lodge, that body directly violated its own By‑Law, which declares that a Lodge can only be represented by one of its own members.

 

But our correspondent refers to a case where a demit was asked for and granted, but the Secretary's certificate to that effect was never delivered. But what difference could that 410

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

make? The Secretary can not grant a demit; he can only certify that the Lodge has done so ; and, certainly, no one cal doubt that the act of the Lodge is binding, whether the Secretary performs his duty or not. A rule is said not to be good that will not work both ways; and we know that a Lodge can not consider a brother a member, or charge him dues, after it has granted him a demit.

 

And what matters it, even if no record be made of a demit having been granted ?

 

The only question is, as to the fact: Did the Lodge release the brother from membership ?

 

If it did, he is not to suffer because the Secretary failed to perform his duty.

 

And, on the other hand, suppose the brother fails to call on the Secretary for a certificate of his demit, can he, should it suit his interest, come forward and claim membership?

 

Certainly not; he can only again become a member by petition, as prescribed by the usages of Masonry, and the By‑Laws of the Lodge.

 

Any other view of the subject would snake the Secretary, and not the Lodge, the proper authority to grant demits.

 

In the case referred to, in the Grand Lodge of Missouri, the brother's name is returned as a demitted member, and is so published to the world; and it is also published to the world, that this demitted member, this non‑affiliated Mason, is now a member of the Grand Lodge, as a proxy, notwithstanding the By‑Law prohibiting it.

 

With such an example, this Grand Lodge can not consistently censure subordinates for setting at naught their own, or the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge.

 

CAN ONE LODGE WORK UP THE REJECTED MATERIAL OF ANOTHER LODGE?‑EVASION Of THE LAW CENSUREABLL DECATUR, DE KALB couN'TY, GA., May 20. 1852.

 

.

 

BRo. J. W. $. MiTcamLL. Dear Sir:‑I have taken the liberty of troubling you, to ask your opinion upon a question of Masonic jurisprudence. It is this: Atlanta Lodge, No. 59, in the city of Atlanta, De Kalb county, six miles diotaut from Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41, Decatur, De Kalb county, initiated Mr. ‑. From a personal difficulty between him and two members of Atlanta Lodge, that !prang up between them after he was initiated, when he was balloted for in the Fellow Craft's degree, they blackballed him.

 

The majority, and, in fact, all of QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

411 the rest of the members of said Lodge being anxious that ‑ should be Passed and Raised, concluded that they would send him to Pythagoras Lodge to be Passed and Raised; consequently, took action upon the matter, and passed the following resolution, and sent it to our Lodge, accompanied with the fees: "ATLANTA LODGz, No. 59, Atlanta, April 22, 1852 "At a regular meeting of this Lodge, held this evening, it was I‑'Resolawd, That we recommend Bra ‑ to Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41, to be Passed and Raised.' "A true copy of the minutes.

 

"T. L. Taox&s, Secretary." [With the seal of Lodge.] Would Pythagoras Lodge not have done right in conferring those degrees for the Atlanta Lodge on Bro. ‑, without balloting for him in Pythagoras Lodge; as Bro. ‑ would not have been a member of Pythagoras Lodge after we had done the work, but would have virtually been a member of Atlanta Lodge, as we were doing the work for Atlanta Lodge, and he living immediately in the vicinity of Atlanta Lodge, and the material, undoubtedly, of said Lodge? I informed our Lodge that, if they agreed to do the work for Atlanta Lodge, I should rule that they had no right to ballot for Bro. ‑, but should proceed to the work presuming that all things are right in Atlanta Lodge; judging from the resolution entirely, as that was the only ground we had to act on, that was before us mmonically.

 

Please give me your opinion on the position of Atlanta Lodge in the premises, though I am satisfied myself that they were acting unmasonically. My main object is to get your opinion fully as to our doing work for other Lodges, when it comes up to us regularly (as in the case of ‑).

 

How can our Lodge ballot for material that is unknown to us, and who does not petition us to become a member of our Lodge, but is sent up to us from a sister Lodge, asking us to do work for them?

 

Ought we not to presume that all things are right in our sister Lodge, or they would not ask us to do work for her?

 

I mention these things so as to direct your attention more fully to the subject. You can answer my inquiries through the Signet, or privately, as you think best; if I am not giving you too much trouble, I would like for you to answer me fully.

 

Respectfully and fraternally yours, P. F. Hoymc, W. M., Pythagoras Lodge, No. 41.

 

That one Lodge has the right to do work for another Lodge when so requested, there can be no doubt; but the question arises, upon what sort of recommendation will a Lodge under take to Initiate, Pass, or Raise a candidate? We will endeavor to make the case plain.

 

Lodge A rejects a candidate. Can that Lodge Initiate, Pass, or Raise a rejected candidate? All must say, No. Well, can Lodge A authorize Lodge B to do what it has no power to do itself? We unhesitatingly say, No. A rejected candidate can legally apply to no other Lodge, unless his residence 412

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

be removed, and even then he must wait twelve months.

 

It ie the duty of every subordinate Lodge to report to its Grand Lodge the name of every rejected candidate; and how would it look for Lodge A to return, as rejected, the same individual that Lodge B returns as a member, or as being Passed or Raised? Some Grand Lodges publish (properly, we think) the names of all rejected candidates, and, also, the names of all the members of Lodges‑then, if one Lodge could reject, and another work up the rejected material, the same individual would appear as rejected, and, also, as a member in good standing. No Lodge can confer a degree without the unanimous vote of the members; and, most certainly, they can not recommend another Lodge to do work for them without a unanimous vote.

 

Our correspondent speaks of a quarrel as being the cause of two blackballs, but we ask how it is ascertained that this is the case? Do the members tell how they vote in that Lodge? We suppose not, and we suppose the opinion expressed is only the result of conjecture. But, granting it to be true, it does not alter the case, as every member has the right to use the secret oallot; no one has the right to know or question his ballot; nor, if known, by any imprudence of his own, has any one the right to impugn his motives‑one blackball rejects, and there is an end of the matter for twelve months.

 

Our correspondent asks whether Pythagoras Lodge shov'.d not do the work, as requested by Atlanta Lodge, without a ballot?

 

We say, certainly not.

 

No Lodge can Initiate, Pass, or Raise any candidate without a unanimous ballot.

 

A ieason given for the opposite opinion is, that the candidate could not become a member of that Lodge; but this does not change the case. The candidate asks to become a member of the Fraternity; and the responsibility is greater upon the Lodge than is ordinary applications for affiliation.

 

We say, then, that Atlanta Lodge had no right to recommend a rejected candidate to any other Lodge, without the unanimous consent of all who were present when he was rejected; and that Pythagoras Lodge should have promptly declined acting on any other conditions.

 

We are pained to see so many efforts to evade the plait old QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

413 laws of Masonry.

 

One brother writes us to know‑ whether the brother who deposits a single blackball should not be called upon to give his reasons, and if not deemed sufficient, initiate any how. Another wishes to know whether his motion to reconsider the ballot rejecting his friend, was not consistent with our rules.

 

In the first case, there is a desire to protect the feelings of the man outside more than the one inside. In the second case, there is an effort to evade our rules by indirection, and thus do away with all rejections; for if you reconsider the ballot, then you can move to withdraw the petition, and so unwilling are the members generally to reject any one, that they would be glad to get clear of the petition : but who does not see that the laws of the Order should be lived up to according to their meaning and intent? And here we have a third, and somewhat new method suggested for setting aside the laws. The brother has been legally rejected, and a majority undertake to destroy the rights of the minority, by shuffling off the responsibility of working up rejected material on to another Lodge, where, it may be, the candidate is not known, and, therefore, not likely to be rejected ; the result of which would be to force upon the Fraternity the fellowship of a man legally pronounced unworthy. We have said a great deal, through the Signet, with the view of impressing it upon the minds of our brethren, that we are under stronger ties to each other than we are to those who are not Masons; that we are under stronger ties to each other, as Master Masons, than we are to those of the degrees below; and we have no right, nor should we desire to introduce any one, against the consent of a member: and we now beg to say that, if our age, experience, and observation have given us any influence, we urge the Lodges to live in obedience to our laws.

 

MASTER'S RIGIIT TO ORDER A BALLOT.‑DONS AN UNFAVORABLE REPORT REJWrt ST. Louis, M0. To ‑TnE EDITOR OF THE MASONIC "SIGNET L Has the Worthy Master the right to order a ballot on the application of a candidate for advancement, when three members object, there being, at tho MW time, not more than nine members present? 414 QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

2. When a Committee has been appointed to ascertain the proficiency of a canO . date for advancement, the report thereon being adverse to his proficiency, nas tha Lodge the right to advance the candidate Y i had presumed that the regulations governing the above, or similar caam were well understood, but, to my utter astonishment, I have recently seen a Masonic body act contrary to them. I, therefore, will be pleased by your giving your views on the above, through your valuable work, so that the wayfaring man may not err therein. C. L We say, in answer to the first question, that the Master of a Lodge has the right to order a ballot, whenever the preliminary requirements, set forth by the usages of Masonry and the ByLaws of the Lodge, have been performed, and not otherwise. Should the Master order a ballot, knowing that a single memo objects to the advancement of the candidate, on the ground of an unwillingness to fellowship him in that degree, we think t is the duty of the Master to deposit a blackball; for no member should be willing to disturb the harmony of the Lodge, by introducing discordant materials :' and, it being especially the duty of the Master to guard the Lodge against such disturbances,he should not encourage or tolerate the making or advancement of a candidate, against whom a serious objection is urged; but the rules of the Lodge having been complied with, the Master may, very properly, judge of the expediency as to the time of taking the ballot‑for example, the members may deem the hour too late to ballot and do the work, but if the Master thinks otherwise, he may so order.

 

To the second question, we answer, the Lodge has the right to dispose of the report of the Committee as it may think proper, viz., by agreeing or disagreeing to it. A Lodge, having a By‑Law requiring candidates to undergo an examination touching their proficiency, generally appoints a Committee of Examination, and are usually satisfied with the report of that Committee; but we can suppose it might happen that satisfac ' tory proof could be brought forward, showing the candidate to be sufficiently proficient for advancement, notwithstanding his embarrassment at the time prevented his giving the Committee satisfaction; and, in that case, we think the Lodge might very properly disagree to the report of the Committee, and suffer the candidate to advance‑‑but in this the Lodge, and QUES'T'IONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

415 not the Master, have the right to decide.

 

But, in the absence of some such reason, ‑we think the Lodge would be trifling with its Committee. and setting at naught the By‑Laws of the 1mdge, to order the candidate to be advanced; nor should the lfaster suffer it to be done, for, if he has been regularly installed, a moment's reflection will satisfy his mind that he dare not violate the By‑Laws, or permit others to do so; and, most certainly, the Master will not attempt the high‑handed measure of ordering the Lodge to violate its own By‑Laws.

 

If the Master believes the By‑Laws of his Lodge are defective, there is a legal and appropriate way of amending them; but, though he possess more wisdom than any or all the members, still, so long as the Lodge thinks proper to restrict his action to certain written rules, he must be governed by them, or be held amenable to his Grand Lodge.

 

The Masters of Lodges enjoy some arbitrary powers, guaranteed by the ancient usages ; but the right to say who shall, and who shall not be Initiated, Passed, or Raised, has ever been sacredly held as belonging to the Lodges ; and the Master who would attempt to assume the power, mugt be too ignorant, or too bigoted to preside over a Lodge.

 

We know nothing of the case referred to by our correspondent, but it furnishes evidence that we have in our midst some brethren who are too much inclined to trample under foot the sacred laws of our Order, and substitute, in lieu thereof, their own will.

 

Is a Comparion Il. A. Mason (an active member of a Chapter) responsible to a Blue Lodge, of which be is not a member, for unmasonic conduct ? When a difficulty occurs between two Companions of the same Chapter, and one a member of a Blue Lodge, where Is the jurisdiction ? Yours fraternally , In answering the first question put by our correspondent. it is pr;:per to say, that it is the bounden duty of every Lodge to, ',ake notice of, and bring to trial every Mason within its jurisdiction, who is known to be guilty of unmasonic conduct; and this is equally true, whether the Mason so charged be affiliated or i.on‑affiliated. Where a personal difficulty takes place 416

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USA0F.

 

between two brothers, it is the duty of the Lodge to use%all lawful means to reconcile the parties ; and, failing in this. to summon them before the Lodge for trial ; and it is of no consequence whether one, or both, or neither of them are memborR of the Lodge.

 

And precisely the same rule applies to a Chap ter, in case R. A. Masons fall out.

 

A Lodge is not released from this duty because the offenders are R. A. Masons, and belong to a Chapter. The Lodge knows nothing of the Chapter. or any degrees above that of M. Mason. The Chapter may try and expel a Companion from all the privileges of R. A. Masonry; but this is all it can do : which by no means relieves the Lodge of the duty of investigating the same matter; for expulsion from the Chapter or Encampment, or both, does not operate even as a suspension from Blue Lodge Masonry.

 

It is true, that no Mason can hold Masonic communion with a suspended or expelled Mason, knowing him to be such; but the M.',fason, merely, can not masonically know that the Chapter has expelled, or has the right to expel, from the privileges of Masonry.

 

On the contrary, we say that an Encampment can only expel from the privileges of the Orders of Knighthood. The expelled Knight may retain his standing as a R. A. Mason; and so of the Chapter, it can only expel from R. A. Masonry. On the other hand, expulsion from the Chapter suspends from the privileges of the Encampment; and expulsion from the Blue Lodge suspends throughout all the degrees above, even to 'he Thirty‑third Scotch Rite; because all who have the upi or ;egrees, so called, have taken the degree of Master Mason; 'and _o Master Mason can hold Masonic communion with an expelled or suspended Mason, knowing him to be such; and, of cour*e, all who have the upper degrees may legally know who are tus cut off by a Lodge of M. Masons.

 

We say, then, that while a R. A. Mason may be an active member of a Chapter, and riot a member of any Lodge, he is to the full amenable to the nearest Lodge for unmasonic conduct. It is true, he is also amenable to his Chapter; and so he would be to the nearest Chapter, if he was not a member at all.

 

We think, however, that where there is a personal misunderstanding between two Companions, belonging to the same QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

417 Chapter, and both not being members of the same Lodge, the Chapter should first attempt amicably to settle the difficulty. But the right of the Lodge to arraign one or both for unmasonic conduct clearly exists. We think that, in the case as put, both the Lodge and Chapter have jurisdiction.

 

In ordinary cases of unmasonic conduct, by Companions belonging to the same Lodge, and amenable to a Chapter, we would recommend that the trial first take place before the Lodge;. because, if the Lodge suspend or expel, it releases the Chapter from the necessity of a trial.

 

CAN A GRAND LODGE CONFER DEGREES? At a regular communication of the Grand Lodge of WiscOL`sin, a few years since, a candidate for the mysteries of Masonry was Initiated, Passed, and Raised in that Grand body. This action called forth the opinions, and, in some cases, the animad versions of other Grand Lodges.

 

The Grand Lodge of Iowa assumed the high ground of condemning it as improper and unmasonic, in so glaring a degree as not to call for the promul. gation of a single reason for pronouncing said judgment.

 

We believe that the Grand Lodge of England, whose rule& of action were derived from the Grand Lodge at York, haft ever been regarded as the highest authority for Masonic usage and Masonic law in the United States, and we have not known the right of a Grand Lodge to confer the three first degrees, . to be called in question until now. From 1717 to 1725, no one received, in England, the Master's degree, except in Grand Lodge, or in a Lodge convened by the special order of the Grand Master.

 

Nor is it clear that this rule was departed from, as early as 1737.

 

We are told that an occasional Lodge was that year called, over which a Past Grand Master presided, to Initiate, Pass, and Raise Frederick, afterward Emperor of, Germany, but we are not informed whether this was done by order of the Grand Master or not.

 

It is very evident, however, that a short time before, it had been the custom to clothe subordinate Lodges with the power to confer only the first degree, tie Grand Lodge reserving to itself the right to say who ff 418

 

QurSTlovs of MASONIC USAGE.

 

should be entitled to the second and third.

 

And, as it was xtated b3 the Correspondence Committee of the Grand Lodgeof Wisconsin, it would seem strange, indeed, if the Grand Lodge could not legally do what it can legally authorize its agents or subordinate Lodges to do.

 

We, therefore, do not hesitate to give it as our opinion, that every Grand Lodge has the right to confer degrees, while, at the same time, we are as clearly of opinion that, owing to the condition of things in the United. States, it would be unwise and impolitic to exercise that right. But we are very far from agreeing with the Grand Lodge of Wisconsin, as to the right of the Grand Master to make Masons at sight, or even convene a special Lodge for that purpose. That the Grand Master anciently held and exercised that authority may be true, but never since the present system of Grand Lodges has been established.

 

At a meeting of the Grand Assembly of England, Henry Jermyn, Earl of St. Albans, Grand Master, on the 27th Decem her, 1663, the following new Regulation was passed That no person, of what degree soever be made or accepted a Freemason; unless in a regular Lodge, whereof one to be Master or a warden in the circuit or division where such Lodge is kept, and another to be a Craftsman in the trade of Freemasonry (_Anderson's Edition of 1756, p. 133).

 

We hold that the Grand Master, at the present day, is the creature of the Grand Lodge, made so by a mutual compact be. tween all the constituent parts of the Grand Lodge, and though lie enjoys all the rights which anciently belonged to the Grand Master of Masons, except that which is taken from him by the compact, he can not do that which the Grand Lodge has assigned to be done by another. The Grand Lodges in the United States have all delegated the power of making Masons to subordinate Lodges, and though by that means they have not deprived themselves of the right to resume the exercise of that power as Grand Lodges, they have clearly taken the power from the Grand Master.

 

We would not say that a Grand Lodge could rot delegate that power to the Grand Master, but as a constiluent part of, and as the instrument or creature of the Grand Lodge, he loses the right of the ancient Grand Master to make Masons, that power having, by law. been specifically assigned to QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAGE.

 

419 'others.

 

We, therefore, believe that under no circumstance has a Grand Master the right to make Masons, or authorize it to be done, in any other way than is provided by the Grand Lodge over which he presides.

 

Nor should any Grand Lodge, under ordinary circumstances, Initiate, Pass, or Raise in its own body.

 

'i PHYSICAL DISQUALIFICATION OF CANDIDATES.

 

This subject has of late excited much attention, and some warm discussion in some of the Grand Lodges. Those who contend for the right to disregard the ancient law, contend that this regulation was originally instituted to prevent the Lodges from taking in those who were not able of body to perform manual labor, and to guard against receiving those who might become a burden to the Society; and that, inasmuch as lliasonry is now Speculative only, a different rule will answer the ends of the Institution, it being only necessary that the candidate shall be able to make a reasonable living, and be capable of learning the art of Masonry.

 

We are not prepared to say what were the motives or ends intended to be accomplished by those who may have originally instituted this law, any more than we are to say why God required of old that none should enter the priesthood who were not without spot or blemish. We only know that we find this law laid down as one of the Ancient Landmarks, and we know of no vested power authorizing its removal.

 

If it is competent for a Grand Lodge to remove this and make a new rule, then has the Grand Lodge the same power to remove any other; and it were idle to censure the Grand Lodge of England for striking out the word "born," and inserting the word " man," so that liberated slaves might be received.

 

But suppose it were in the power of Grand Lodges to remove this Ancient Landmark, to what extent might it be modified in favor of the unfortunate candidate, without doing manifest injury to the Institution?

 

The Grand Lodge of Kentucky set a precedent by making the Hon. John Pope, who had lost an arm near to his shoulder; and this innovation has been improved upon, from time to time, until recently a Lodge in Mississippi made a blind man a Mason.

 

If a man can be 420

 

QUWrIONS OF MASONIC UBAO& made

 

11 1

 

no legs 1

 

:'

 

1

 

.1

 

1' 1 1 11 1:11

 

'1 :1 111

 

1' 1 1'

 

1

 

11 .11' 1 understand Masonry,

 

hand and

 

foot has A i

 

1 perform in Masonry; and we can not say what would 1'

 

11 1

 

i' 'ò

 

1

 

1 1' . 1‑

 

1

 

1' these members.

 

man can ò ' made without

 

1

 

; 1 can a man

 

ò

 

hearing;

 

1

 

11

 

1 S may 1

 

dispensed

 

and

 

would

 

what becomes yet we

 

ask

 

1 t

 

1

 

senses

 

wanting?

 

11 '

 

the 1 1

 

S 1 appeal

 

1 1

 

sympathies

 

1 behalf 1 those who 1 nature are deformed, 1

 

who

 

1 the glorious battle field are 11 .

 

11 ' 1

 

1

 

: 1 1

 

' 1

 

1

 

1 ‑

 

1 1

 

1 e

 

' 11 1 S 11 1_o1

 

1

 

sympathies, 1

 

Ancient Landmark 1

 

not 1 removed 1 1 any

 

1 '

 

1 ' 1

 

1 11

 

_

 

1

 

laws 1

 

1

 

1

 

may deprive

 

5 1

 

1 property, ò 1

 

paid

 

11'

 

supposing 1: title 5 1

 

'1 1' '1`

 

good‑, S11

 

presents I 1~ 1 ò

 

1%

 

1

 

'Y 1 11 1:

 

1 1 1 1

 

1

 

1 1

 

1 1 1 1 greatest amount 1 good 1

 

number. r. There are, doubtless, many t'

 

1';

 

1

 

Southern

 

1' elsewhere, who, though not, born free, are now free men of much merit

 

1 respectability, 1

 

does. not

 

‑

 

1 49 power to any man, 1

 

body 1

 

men,

 

1 make innovations

 

1'o 11' 1

 

11.

 

requiring

 

11%1 to be free.

 

born,

 

order

 

1 1 : made 5 Mason, must forever stand, or auy and all 1

 

Ancient Landmarks 1

 

removed;

 

1 t1." I

 

1 :

 

1

 

1 reference

 

1 maimed men.

 

The Graul F. T.

 

' 1

 

1

 

1

 

5 ' S '

 

1 1 1

 

1 ' plain

 

1 simple.

 

say y they, " an applicant is so II' 11' '1

 

1 'tò'

 

tl 1 .òSI : 1 1' 1 11

 

Iltl 1

 

11

 

1'

 

Masonic labor,

 

1 f course, could 1 1

 

1 '

 

ò 1

 

11 ò

 

1 1 ò ‑

 

: 1 Y

 

1 1 tucky thought the same, and that this could be done with one 1

 

5 1 1

 

1 1 1

 

11 `

 

‑ 1 1

 

1 1

 

1

 

1 e 1

 

1' opt .. 1

 

1

 

i

 

1

 

'

 

1

 

: 11101001:4

 

‑11,', 1

 

1

 

1 .

 

' 1 1 r UJIMB QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAGM.

 

421 The law reads Only candidates may know that no Master should take an Apprentice, unless he has sufficient employment for him, and unless he be a perfect youth, having go maim or defect in his body, that may render him iioapable of learning the Art‑of serving his Master's Lord, and of being made a brother, and then a Fellow Craft, in due time, even after he has served a term of years, as the custom of the country iitects; and that he should be descended of honest parents, that so, when otherwise qualified, he may arrive to the honor of being the Warden, and then the Master of the Lodge, the Grand Warden, and at length, the Grand Master of all 'the Lodges, according to his merit.

 

Thus clearly showing that only such persons can be made as may be placed on a level with all others, by being eligible for all the offices‑because all who can not learn, practice and teach the rituals, can not be made, but this is all; the true law does not require a man to be " upright in body, as a man ought to be." THE RIGHT OF GRAND LODGES TO RF$TORE EXPELLED MEKBQW.

 

The Grand Lodge of Soath Csrolins reversed the decision of a subordinate Lodge, who had expelled two of its members, and ordered them to be restored to membership; this the subordinate Lodge refused to do, and surrendered its charter. That a Grand Lodge can reverse the decision of a subordinate Lodge, expelling a Mason from all the privileges of Masonry, will not be denied anywhere, but we are of opinion that each Lodge is to be the sole judge as to who shall, and who shall not be associated with them as members of the Lodge. We, therefore, think the Lodge referred to, acted within the pale of its rights, in refusing to carry out the unauthorized and tyrannical edict of the Grand Lodge, and that the Grand Lodge of South Carolina owes it to the cause of justice and its own dignity, to reinstate the Master and Wardens of the Lodge, whom they expelled for disobedience to their unauthorized edict.

 

THE PAST MASTQt's DWRSE We have heretofore expressed the opinion, that the Past Master's degree is not, and never was any. part of "Ancient Craft 422

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC IISAGS.

 

Masonry, and we would not now bring the subject up, were it not that the Grand Lodge of Alabama, and some others, have determined, by resolution, that, in the absence of the Master, no one except the Wardens can preside over a Lodge, who is not a Past Master. Now, we think, to be consistent, the Wardene should be required, as in Virginia, to be Past Masters, or they, too, prohibited from presiding over a Lodge in the absence of the Master.

 

We are at a loss to say whence originated the degree of Past Master, but we have every reason to believe it is of modern invention, for we find no allusion to it in Anderson's History and Constitutions of Masonry. We believe the degree has no Masonic history of a traditional character attached to it. We believe it does not exemplify or elucidate a single principle in Masonry, or add a single qualification to its reci pient, to preside over a Lodge.

 

We believe it wants even the dignity and solemnity of a degree in Ancient Craft Masonry. And while., under existing rules, we are willing to see it given to every one who is elected to preside over a Lodge, we fail to find in it anything which enables its recipient to preside any better than one who has never received it.

 

The business of the Lodges is done in the Master's degree, and it is vain to suppose the knowledge of a higher degree could, by any magic or Masonic art, enable the Master to bring that knowledge, even did he acquire any, to make him more capable of exemplifying the Master's degree.

 

If a fund of knowledge is acquired in the Past Master's degree, no part of it can be used in a degree below.

 

But, in addition to all this, how inconsistent does it seem for a Master's Lodge to legislate about a degree above. Did the Grand Lodge of Alabama open a Past Master's Lodge before passing a resolution, saying, that in the absence of tho Master and Wardens none but a Past Master should preside? We suppose not, and yet we could hardly suppose Master Masons would undertake to legislate for a degree above, did we not know that the same thing has been done by other Grand Lodges.

 

The Grand Lodge of North Carolina says:" That it. (the . Past Masters degree) is an actual, bona fore degree, essential,0o QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

423 every presiding officer of a Lodge, there can be no doubt. The H aster who is unacquainted with it, is unacquainted with the elementary knowledge of his office, and must so continue." As we can not, of course, in this place, exemplify the degree, in order to show the error into which that Grand Lodge has fallen, we can only say, that we entertain a widely different. opinion, but, in either event, we must insist that a Grand Lodge; sitting in the Master's degree, has no right to legislate about it: A GENERAL GRAND LODGE The great and growing evils, resulting from a want of power somewhere, to settle difficulties and differences between StatA Grand Lodges, has been, and still is too severely felt not to alarm our fears for the result. The late condition of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, the condition of Masonry in Nerd York for the last twelve years, and the still more startling events of 1849, must, it would seem to us, arouse every good and true Mason to an active vigilance, in order to devise some means to allay heart‑burnings, settle honest differ= ences of opinion, and put down rebellion against the laws and' rules of our Order.

 

We do not deem it proper to elicit a dirtcussion of the merits of the question here, for we do not see any probability of a speedy formation of a General Grand Lodge, but we say, that while we could not approve of either of the plans proposed, we sincerely believe, that a general head,' or court of appeals, with limited and well defined powers,' would tend greatly to promote harmony and preserve order with and between the several Grand Lodges of the United States.

 

NEW TEM.

 

We believe it is now so generally admitted that no other' religious test than a belief in one only living and true God, is admissible as a prerequisite to initiation ; that it is only necessary to say here, that we believe every Grand Lodge who has heretofore occupied different ground has receded, and is now prepared to contend for the doctrine once delivered to our fathers.

 

" "' 424

 

QIIESTIO" OF MASONIC‑USAGE.

 

NON‑AFFn1ATED MASONS.

 

This subject has excited much interest, especially since the Grand Lodge of Missouri imposed a tax on this class of Masons. We have been astonished at the manner in which some Grand Lodges have reviewed the action of that Grand body. They tell us that it is the duty, aye, imperious duty of every Mason to belong to some Lodge, and contribute to the Charity Fund, that a demitted Mason enjoys all the benefits of Masonry, and it is a dereliction of duty, on his part, not to bear a proportion of its burdens; and yet, in the next breath, they tell us that the Grand Lodge has no right to compel a demitted Mason to nay dues, or contribute to the Charity Fund, for such contribuò xious should be voluntary.

 

Such is the doctrine held by the Grand Lodge of Tennessee, and one or two others.

 

Now, it does seem to us, that if the Grand Lodge has not the power to compel every brother to perform his known duty, then is the Grand Lodge wholly incapacitated for self‑government.

 

If an association can not compel its members to do their duty, or punish them for a failure, then is the government of that association so defective, that its adhesive principles are liable to be dissolved at all times, and, surely, it will not be contended that Masonry is in that deplorable condition. No one pretends 0 deny that, for the failure to perform other duties, the Grand Lodge has a right to punish the offender by the infliction of any one of the penalties known to our Institution.

 

If the great body of Masons were released from all obligations to demitted Masons, then would there be some consistency in the doctrine that demitted Masons are beyond the pale of penal laws, but every one knows that, so far from this being the case, the demitted Masons enjoy singular advantages over the members of the Lodge; they are released from the operation of the ByLaw requiring a regular attendance upon the meetings of the Lodge; they are released from the heavy burden of spending night after night in doing the work of the Lodge; they are exempt from the most unpleasant of all Masonic duties, viz., that of trying and punishing disorderly members; they cans: visit when it is for their interest or pleasure; they can retire when they please, and call nn the members, as individual4.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

425 to do them acts of fraternal favor, and administer to their wants. The members of the Lodge have no advantage over them, except the delightful privilege of doing the drudgery of Masonry. In short, non‑affiliated Masons are the independent, honored, and privileged members of the great family ot Masons.

 

In most instances, they are the most able, and least willing to contribute to the Charity Fund; and, we regret to say that. in very many instances, they honor the Lodge;; a h ? visit only when they have some ulterior object to accomplish. We know there are many honorable exceptions, but we entertain the opinion that the great majority of non‑affiliated Masons are drones in the Masonic hive.

 

We feel called upon to bring forward a single witness in support of the position here taken. Bro. Crane, of St. Louis, acted as Chairman of the Board of Relief several years, and he has assured us that four‑fifths of the applicants for alms have been, by their own statements, men who were made Masons when they were in good circumstances, and so engaged in business, that they bad not time to devote to Masonry, that they had not been in a Lodge, some say for five, some ten, and others twenty years‑which reasons were given to account for their being rusty. But we deem the subject of sufficient importance to inquire into the cause of all, or nearly all the difficulties complained of, and in this we believe there is, or should be no difference of opinion.

 

Anciently, all Masons were required to keep their names enrolled as members of some Lodge, and if this fundamental law had not been violated, we should not now be called upon to allude to non‑affiliated Masons.

 

We make the following extract from Anderson's Constitutions: No set or number of brethren shall withdraw or separate themselves from the Lodge in which they were made, or were afterward admitted members, unless the Lodge become too numerous, nor even then, without a dispensation from the Grand Master or Deputy, and when thus separated, they must either immediately join themselves to such other Lodge that they shall like best, or else obtain the Grand Master's warrant to join in forming a new Lodge to be regularly constituted in good time.

 

(Old Regulations, Art 9.) See edition of Auderson's Constitutions of 1756, p 313, and Xasonic Signet, p. 144, vol. ii.

 

426

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

We also make the following extract, in order to show that, if any disregarded the foregoing rule, the Fraternity was roleased from Masonic obligations to them At the Grand Lodge. December 3, 1741, Morton, Grand Master, it was resolved that before the brethren proceeded to business in any Committee of Charity, all the laws relating to the disposal of the General Charity of this Society, be first read ; and that, for the future, no petition shall be received, unless every brother %hall, at the time of his signing the same, be a member of some regular Lodge, and the name of such, his Lodge, be always specified See same edition of Anderson, p. 303, also Masonic Signet, p. 136, vol. ii.

 

In addition to the above, we distinctly recollect to have read a rule, recorded in Anderson's Constitutions and History of Masonry, which declares that a Mason can only demit to travel beyond the jurisdiction of his Lodge, or to assist in forming a new Lodge; and, should he travel, and come into the vicinity of a Lodge, he should have his name enrolled as a member, under pain of releasing his brethren from obligation to give him work; but we can not now refer to the page, nor do we deem it important to do so, for the reason that the extracts here given, the first of which is one of the old or original rules, fully sustain the Grand Lodge of Missouri, in the action had is reference to non‑affiliated Masons in that jurisdiction.

 

In concluding this subject, we say, that we believe the present system of By‑Laws, in general use by the Lodges, is, in reference to the manner of demitting, radically wrong. No member should be‑allowed to demit, if the interests of the Craft are to suffer by it.

 

Every Mason should be required to continue a member of some Lodge, and if he is not able to pay dues, none should be required of him.

 

We have no written authentic account of an assembly or Grand Lodge of Masons, at ati earlier period than that which met at York, in England, in 926. At this Assembly, Prince Edwin, Grand Master, the old records and manuscripts were collected, and the Constitutions and Charges carefully collated, dy which means they were preserved and handed down.

 

To QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

4`37 these records are we indebted, through Anderson's Constitutions, as published by order of the Grand Lodge of England, for all the authentic history of Freemasonry now extant. We are lef, to suppose that at the formation of the Grand Lodge at York, the present system of Grand Lodges was unknown, so far as its component parts are concerned.

 

It is quite probable that Masons indiscriminately met and formed that Assembly, and it is, therefore, equally probable that the Past Master's degree was unknown.

 

And when centuries had passed, the Grand Lodge of England was formed in 1717, modeled after the Grand Lodge at York, which had evidently introduced the subordinate Lodge system, for the Grand Lodge of England was made up of subordinate Lodges, holding charters under the Grand Lodge at York, except the Lodge of Antiquity, and no mention is made of Past Masters having any legal or just claim, as such, to a seat in the Grand Ledge.

 

The Grand Lodge of England was originally composed of the same materials which coustitu ,ted the Grand Lodge at York, viz., the Grand Master, Senioand Junior Grand Wardens, and the Masters and Wardens of particular Lodges.

 

The Grand Lodge, soon after its organization, passed a resolution explanatory of its rights, in which it is declared that it posseses the power, at all times, to amend its Constitutions, and make new Regulations for the well‑being of the Craft, provided, however, that in no case could any one of the Ancient Landmarks be removed. In obedience to this reserved right, the Grand Lodge did, from time to time, amend and change its Constitutions and add new Regulations, among which we find one which made the Deputy Grand Master, Grand Treasurer, Grand Secretary, Past Grand Masters, Past Grand Wardens, and twelve of the members of the Stewards' Lodge, members of the Grand Lodge, but as yet nothing is said about Past Masters, nor are they named as members of the Grand Lodge for fifty years after.

 

Those who now claim that Past Masters have an inalienable and inherent right to Aembership in Grand Lodges, contend that they must have assisted in forming the Grand Lodge of England, and, if so, were members of that body. Whether they 428

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Were present and assisted in establishing that Grand Lodge or not, is not stated ; but it is not important, for that Grand Lodge fully declared who were members of that body, and Past Masters are not named among them. Past Masters were first admitted to occupy seats in the Athol Grand Lodge, in 1765, and in the Grand Lodge of England (by compromise), at the union of 1813.

 

It is, therefore, evident that Past Masters have no well grounded claims to a seat in a Grand Lodge, by any ancient usage, or even precedent.

 

It is proper to say, that some Masons, who claim to be teachers and Masonic guides, call a usage ancient if it has but fifty years to date back to; and, if this rule obtain, we think that it can be ascertained that, in some instances, Past Masters were admitted to seats in regular Grand Lodges, by courtesy, about seventy years since. In the United States, Past Masters have never been regarded as having any right to seats in the Grand Lodge.

 

All who hold seats have acquired that right by Grand Lodge enactment, in mere courtesy.

 

Some of our Grand Lodges do not allow them seats at all.

 

CAN SCOTCH RITE MASONS OUTRANK FREE AND ACCEPTED MASONS? ST. Lourg, No.

 

Some years since, having taken the Royal and select degrees, I was informs by the presiding officer that I had received all the degrees in Ancient Freemr sonry, since that time I have taken the Christian Templars' degrees.

 

.Now, sir, I wish to know if on occasions of public processions I would, as a Knight Templar, be outranked by a Mason who had never taken more than the three degrees of Ancient Craft or 11 Solomonian " Masonry, but who had beau made a Prince of Jerusalem, or Kadosh, in some of the Lodges of Perfection, or Consistories, that are springing up so rapidly through the country Y Again, if one of those high dignataries. should visit our Lodges, or Chapters, bow should we receive him? what honors should we pay him ! As you boo taken all those Prussian degrees, I would be much pleased if you would aumw through the Sid. S.

 

The custom, the usage has ever been to rank and file Ma. sonic processions, not by the hight of the body, but by the hight or dignity of degrees; but, most certainly, it must be understood, that by the dignity of degrees we mean Masonic degrees, and not any and every gewgaw that may be so called by their inventors. We understand Freemasonry to consW QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

129 of the degrees of Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason, including the Holy Royal Arch. We say there were originally only three degrees ; and that the third was unfinished and incomplete until the Master had passed under the LIVING ARCH.

 

In other words, the Royal Arch ever was, and ever will be part and parcel of the sublime degree of Master Mason.

 

If we take Masonry in England as the standard, we shall have no difficulty in arriving at the truth; for no one will question the fact, that there, until the days of Dermott. there were but three degrees; since which time, the Royal Arch degree was connected with, and belonged to the Blue Lodges; and, hence, the Grand Lodge controlled and directed to whom it should be given‑and to this ancient usage Pennsylvania long adhered. It follows, then, that Royal Arch Masonry is, and ever was, part and parcel of Ancient Craft Masonry. In other words, the Royal Arch was (and is of right) the acme, the terminus of Freemasonry.

 

There never was, and we hold there never can be, any Freemasonry above the Royal Arch. By this, we do not mean to say that the Royal and Select degrees, so called, do not contain a part of Freemasonry ; on the, contrary, we say they do teach some things altogether important, and indispensable. to the full development of Freemasonry, as a great system of ethics.

 

But who does not know that, in modern times, the Royal Arch has been wantonly robbed. of some of its most important features, in order to the mane, fcture of these so called degrees in Masonry ?

 

The Mark degree, so called, was at a much earlier day stolen from the Fellow Craft.

 

And though, by these subdivisions, the degrees are now given under different authorities, they are all none the less component parts of Freemasonry, alias Ancient Craft Masonry.

 

It will be understood by the foregoing, that we deny that anything is Freemasonry other than that stated above.

 

Will any man say that there is any Freemasonry in the Knight Templar's degree, or in any of the Orders of Knighthood, except so far as the history of the Red Cross degree is made to look like a continuation of the Royal Arch? The Orders of Knighthood do not teach Freemasonry.

 

Freemasonry is universal‑that is, it is prohibited to none except the atheist, 430

 

QUESTIONS OF MASO‑TIC USAGE.

 

while the Orders of Knighthood are sectarian in their teaching. They not only require that a man shall believe in the one only living and true God, but they demand, as a prerequisite, that the applicant shall believe in the Christian religion. The present organization, and the very existence of these degree's are of modern date; but they are evidently modeled upon the principles held, and the doctrines taught by the Hospitalers, in the days of the Crusades to the Holy Land.

 

These Orders of Knighthood are a part and parcel of the Ineffable degrees, concocted first by Chevalier Ramsey, which were soon after made to unite the Catholics, by a solemn oath, never to change their religion, and to do all they could to restore that religion in England.

 

What was the number of degrees instituted bJ Ramsey, we have no means of knowing, but when they were resuscitated, and, perhaps, remodeled by De Bonnville, there were twenty‑five, and, in 1802, eight more were added in Charleston. South Carolina, U. S.

 

Before the close of the last century, the Supreme Grand Council of France, and the Grand Orient (Grand Lodge) of France, took charge of the Ineffable degrees, and, in 1810, the Grand Orient also assumed control of the eight new degrees from Charleston, and now issues warrants for the working of Ancient Craft Masonry, Scotch Rite, Ancient and Accepted, and Modern, or French Rite Masonry.

 

Since the days of Ramsey (1740) about one hundred and fifty degrees have been invented, and about eighty different rites established, all called Masonry, and teaching as many theories as there are rites.

 

A few Lodges, working the Modern, or French Rite, have been planted in this country, but the Scotch Rite alone measures arms with Ancient Craft Masonry in the United States.

 

The Scotch Rite claims to hold the original right to control all of Ancient Craft Alasonry, and declares that she only waives that right, for the present, in the United States.

 

Now, the question of our correspondent resolves itself into this: Are the Scotch Rite degrees Masonic degrees? and is Ancient Craft Masonry amenable to, and dependent upon the Council of the 33rd and last degree? If all these thirty‑three degrees are Masonic degrees, and Ancient Craft Masonry exists only by permission of the 33rd, QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

431 then, most certainly. all the bodies below should cheerfully do honor to all the members of their puissant head. But, as before intimated, believing, as we do, that there are no two kinds of Masonry, and believing Masonry consists in the ,degrees first named in this article, we deny that anything else is Masonry, and, of course, deny that Masons are under any sort of obligations to do honor to, or recognize any man, by any implied act, as having a knowledge of any higher Masonry. We say, then, as Masons; we have no right to know or recognize in others any degree above the Royal Arch and its appendages, the Royal and Select.

 

Knights Templar have no right to outrank Royal Arch ?Masons in processions, nor do we suppose they would be permitted to do so among the followers of the Hebrew Church ; but, in Christendom, where Christianity is revered by nearly all Freemasons, we take pleasure in showing our approval of a Christian Association, though a modern appendage to Freema. sonry, by regarding them as invited guests, and giving them precedence in our processions. This much we do to ministers of the Gospel, and for similar reasons. We may suffer Knights Templar to outrank us as Masons, without admitting that the Orders of Knighthood are Masonry.

 

But, surely, it will not be expected by any brother, who has taken the Scotch Rite degrees, that we shall, for that reason alone, permit him to outrank all others. As Masons, we know nothing of these Scotch Rite degrees; and quite as well might we give a distinguished position to a brother Master Mason, because he is Grand Master of the Oddfellows, and, we think, with much greater propriety, because we are of opinion that Oddfellowship is much nearer akin to Freemasonry than are the degrees of the Scotch Rite.

 

The second question of our correspondent is answered above. Neither a Lodge, Chapter, nor Encampment has any right to receive with honor any brother they do not know to be entitled to Honor. A Grand Lodge is not called upon to honor the Grand High Priest of a Grand Chapter; and, certainly, a Grand Inspector General of the 33rd can, as such, lay no claims to be honored in either of the bodies of Freemasonry.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE".

 

CATHOLIC CHURCH vs. EtSNWRY.

 

NEw MADRID, Mo., August t, 1842.

 

DR. J. w. S. MrTORELL.‑‑Dear Sir ;‑Considering your arduous duties, I would feel that an apology was due for intruding a private epistle on your considers‑. tion; but knowing the concern you feel in any matter touching the interest of our Order, I take the privilege of' submitting the following statement: Some mor.t:rs ago one of the members of our Lodge joined the Catholic Church in this place, and, from his own statement, the priest told him that, before he could be receives in the Church, it was absolutely necessary for him to renounce Masonry, that is, ne must not visit the Lodge, nor participate in any way is public demonstratruns by the Order. Since joining tae Church, he has Deter visited the Lodge, ea9, in fact, complied with the regairtments of the Church is every particular, but has made himself known as a It ttson, and asked' and received benefits, as such. frora members of the Fraternity.

 

I feel perfectly satistied this is unmasonic, and a case wbi,lr the Lodge should not let pass unobserved.

 

i have conversed with several of the brethren on the subject, and they all concur with me in opinion; but all adi:e know not what course to pursue, having ntoer known a similar case.

 

b'eeliig desirous to do only justice to the member, and not anything that could injure our Order, in the absence of a precedent to which we can refer for our guidance, we hill defer any action in the matter until we can have the opinion of some petsoa of more experience than ourselves; for which, we know of no one that we can app:y to better than yourself.

 

The gentleman has been informed that his priest has been representing him as one who has renounced Masonry, in the broadest sense of the term, ana uas been using it, so far as he can, to the prejudice of our Order; which, judging from his course, he is not willing to contradict or counteract in any way‑only says be still considers himself a Mason, when speaking to Masons, and still conforming to all the ceremonies of a Church that says none of its members can be Mason& I hope to hear from you at your earliest convenience.

 

I am, dear sir, fraternally yours, In answering the foregoing, we feel called upon to say, that we regard Freemasonry as having claims upon its recipients, second to the claims of Christianity. If, then, it can be made appear that Masonry in any way interferes with the duties of Christianity, the Mason is at full liberty, yea, it is his duty to prefer Christianity.

 

We know, however‑every Mason knows ‑that this necessity can never exist; for Masonry teaches no principle or practice opposed to, or inconsistent with religious duties. If the Church and the Lodge call for the personal attendance of a brother, who belongs to each, on the same evening, Masonry teaches that brother to prefer his Church. It is quite common for a Lodge to fix its regular meetings on QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

488 such nights as will enable the members to attend without interfering with their Church meetings. In short, every Lodge in Christendom is a friend to religious worship. It follows, therefore, that every Mason knows that Freemasonry can not interfere with his religious duties, and, as a general thing, it can not be his duty to withdraw from the Lodge, in order to the full discharge of his duty as a Church member.

 

But we r~.

 

hold there are a few extreme cases where it becomes the duty of a Mason to absent himself from the meetings of his Lodge.

 

We will name one or two.

 

Some thirty years ago, the Baptist Church (old side) of this country, was bitterly opposed to Masonry. Many of the members religiously believed that Masons had dealings with the devil. and many Churches were perpetually in turmoil and trouble if any one of their members were known to be in the habit of meeting with the wicked Masons.

 

Now, we hold that, although the brother Mason knew the charge to be false, and that the very reverse was true, still was it his duty to withdraw from the Lodge, and thus gratify the bigoted and superstitious views of the members of his Church, if, in doing so, he could restore harmony and Christian love in the Church. In like manner, we think it to be the duty of every Mason, who wishes to connect himself with the Catholic Church, to withdraw from his Lodge, for he knows it to be useless to present proofs to the priest that Masonry is no inconsistent with Christianity, for the simple reason that the priest is not free to act, even should he be convinced. The head of the Church, the spiritual king and temporal ruler, having issued an edict by which the priest must be governed, whatever may be his opinion of its justice

 

We say, further, that no Catholic ought ever to petition a Lodge of Freemasons, knowing be can not comply with the rules of his Church and hold Masonic communion. But, having admitted thus much, we think more should not be required, nor can more be tolerated.

 

If there is to be found, on this broad earth, a Mason of common sense, who can be induced by priest, king, or potentate, to admit, even by indirection, that Masonry is inconsistent with the Christian religion‑that man is a liar, and the truth is not ss 434

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

in him; aye, and he is methodically base in his lying, for he to defying God; whose essence is truth, to please a poor worm of the dust, in the shape of a priest, whose sentence of condemnation he is more afraid of, than he is of the wrath of God against those who bear false witness. Such a man should not only be expelled from all the privileges of Masonry, but lie should be denied the privilege of entering the threshold of the families of Masons; for such a man can not be trusted alone with a sleep. ing babe.

 

We say, then, that if the brothel referred to by our correspondent felt it to be his duty to connect himself with the Catholic Church, we should justify him in abstaining from Lodge associations ; but if it can be made appear that he has represented, or permitted another to represent for him, Freemasonry as opposed to, or inconsistent with the Christian relig. ion, he should sign an article stating that representation to be false, or, refusing to do this, the Lodge should at once expel him as a contemptible instrument in the hands of the " father of lies," to bear false testimony against the innocent and unoffending.

 

We do not believe the brother is guilty as charged‑we do not believe he ever denounced Masonry.

 

We believe the lie is with the priest, if either ; for we have yet to know or be authentically informed of any Roman Catholic Mason ever hav. ing denounced Freemasonry.

 

During the anti‑Masonic times, very many members of Protestant Churches, not having the fear of God before their eyes, did meanly and basely denounce the Institution, knowing their statements to be false. But we repeat, we have heard of no Catholic Mason thus defying the vengeance of the God of truth.

 

To our correspondent we say, try the brother charged, bring him to the test, and you will find that although he will avoid making out the priest a liar; he will not admit that he ever denounced Freemasonry as opposed to Christianity.

 

CAN MASONS AND OTHERS JOINTLY BURY THE DEAD? Bno. J. w. S. MITCHEi.L.‑Dear Sir:‑Enclosed, please find the resolutions odopted by our Lodge, occasioned ‑by the death of Bro. Warfield; late Junior QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

43S Deacon of our Lodge, which should have been sent before this but for the fact that I have had but little time to write to any one, and then only at night. I also send you for the first time land I hope you will excuse me for doing so, as I see you are often troubled in that way), some questions of Masonic usage, and request your opinion in the Signet.

 

I will state the matter as it occurred in the Lodge as near as I can.

 

Bro. warfield died some three miles in the country, and was a member of the Division of the Sons of Temperance; and made the request before his death that both Orders should bury him.

 

The Division sent a Committee. consisting of Masons belonging to the Order, to make suitable arrangements fur the burial jointly.

 

They bad appointed four pall bearers, intending that these should act in concert with four that the Lodge would appoint, and together go to the place where Bro. warfield bad died, and escort the corpse into town; the Lodge and Division meeting them, and still acting in concert, the pall bearers of both Orders walking by the side of the corpse.

 

Thence to the grave, the Lodge to go through their ceremony first, and then give way and let the Sons perform theirs.

 

This was objected to by some as unmasonic; that the pall bearers could not act in concert, and the burial be truly a Masonic one.

 

The question was asked by a brother, if any one knew of a precedent of this kind.

 

And I was particularly requested to ask of you, if you ever knew of one with any Order.

 

Your opinion is respectfully requested through your paper, the Signet: 1. Do you know of a precedent of this kind.

 

2. Is it unmasonic and wrong, and is tbere any breach of Masonic usage in our Lodge attending to the funeral jointly.

 

3. Is it proper and right for the Marshal of the Day, on such occasions as this, at the time the public Grand honors are given, to announce to the brethren in an audible voice, to attend to giving the public Grand honors.

 

These are all the questions I have now to ask, and will be pleased to see your opinions of them in the Signet, and oblige Yours respectfully,

 

P B. GRANT. At the first view of the subject, we were inclined to say, as our feelings prompted, that there could be no impropriety in participating with the Sons in the funeral service, but one single law in reference to Masonic burials settles the question once and forever. Every Mason knows that, according to ancient usage and the Ancient Constitutions of Masonry, neither an Entered Apprentice nor Fellow Craft is permitted to join in a procession, or in any way participate in the ceremonies of a Masonic burial; and, surely, no one will contend that the Sons or Oddfellows have higher claims upon the colartesy of a Lodge of Master Masons than our own brethren of the inferior degrees. The Masonic burial ceremony is peculiar to our Order; it is not understood by any others; and no one should participate with, or attempt to assist us in a ceremony which 436

 

QUf;STION3 OF MASONIC USAGN.

 

they can not understand.

 

The same may be said of laying a corner‑stone; no other Order understands our ceremony; they do not even know why we strike the stone with the gavel three times: and, hence, they can not participate with us.

 

We are told that in the burial service each Society performs its cere. mony separately; but our ceremony knows of no such division of duty. We are instructed first to perform the secret ceremony in the Lodge room; then repair to the house where the corpse is lying; take possession of it, convey it to the grave, and perform the public ceremony, which is not completed until the grave is closed.

 

We say, then, that according to our usages, we can not join any other Society in funeral honors.

 

But, most certainly, if any are permitted, the other must precede ours; and, even then, the coffin must not by them be let down into the grave; and, hence, it seems to us that in no case can there be joint action.

 

As to permitting others than Masons to be pall bearers, we can see no absolute impropriety, save that it brings into the procession those who are not Masons; while, as before stated, we are taught to admit none but Master Masons.

 

We are asked if we know of a precedent, and in answer we have to say, we do not; though we have heard of such things But what matters it whether we have a precedent or not? We must be governed by a higher order of law than that here and there we may find a precedent. If we were to be thus governed, we might be justified in some of the most glaring innovations; for example, we could point to a case of recent occurrence, where the Junior Warden took the responsibility of calling his Lodge together for the purpose of forming a procession, though the Master was then at home in the same town.

 

We are asked whether the Marshal should order the giving of the Grand honors at the grave. We say, certainly not. No words should be used at the grave, except such as are indicated in the ceremony as laid down, unless a eulogy or sermon be delivered.

 

CAN GRAND LODGES CONTROL NON‑AFBII.IATCD MASONS, LTO t ‑

 

ST. MART's PAR7su, LA. BRo. MrmezLL :‑I wish you to answer the following questions through the Ikma, without giving my name QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

487 1. Can a Grand Lodge, acting within the pale of Masonic usage, exclude a Master Mason in good standing, but non‑affiliated, from the right of a burial with Masonic honors? Our Grand Lodge has passed such a law; and there are many, yes, very many, interested in knowing whether in this the Grand Lodge has not attempted to remove a Landmark. Your views, at length, will be read with great interest.

 

2. Can a Chapter suspend or expel a Companion, who has already been sus. pended or expelled from a Blue Lodge _, The first question is one of very great, if not vital impoò trance. Upon its final decision, by the various Grand Lodges, may depend the well‑being and prosperity, if not the very existence of the Order. If the Grand Lodges have no right to exercise control over non‑affiliated Masons, then may the time come, when local Lodges may be broken up, and Masonry brought into disrepute, by the withdrawal of members.. In modern times, a great and radical error has crept into our Lodges, and been so generally practiced, as to cause all the difficulties now experienced on the subject of non‑affiliated Masons. We allude to the custom of permitting members to demit at will from their Lodges.

 

The oldest Regulation on the subject, of which we have an account, permitted Masons to demit but for two causes: first, in order to travel beyond the jurisdiction of the Lodge; and, secondly, for the purpose of forming a new Lodge.

 

And in all cases where brethren traveled, they were commanded, whenever they located or stopped for work, to have their names registered, etc.; and a failure to comply with this injunction released the craft from obligations to give them work.

 

The next recorded testimony, having, a direct bearing upon the subject, is an edict adopted under the following circumstances: On the restoration of Charles II., of England, who had been long in exile, and learned the great value of Masonry, be, by proclamation, called a Convention of all the Masons, on the 27th of December, 1663, for the purpose of reviving and animating the brethren to renewed zeal in the cause of the Order. At this Convention, among others, the following edict was passed 4. That every person, who is now a Freemason, shall bring to the Master a sate of the time of his acceptation, to the end that the same may be enrolled io 43$

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

such priority of place as the brother deserves; and that the whole Company and Fellows may the better know each other. (See Signet, vol. ii., p. 489.) Now, it is not to be presumed that this law was meaningless; on the contrary, we suppose that no man was afterward recognized as being entitled to the privileges, who refused or neg, lected to have his name enrolled as a member of the Order, subject to the edicts of the particular Lodge or division, and of the Assembly or Convention of Masons.

 

But if any doubt still exists, the following, which we find in Anderson's Constitutions, the highest authority in the world, must remove it. Under the head, " Of the Duties of Members," the Sixth Article reads as follows ART. VI.‑No set or number of brethren shall withdraw or separate themselves from the Lodge in which they were made, or were afterward admitted members, unless the Lodge become too numerous; nor even then without a dl*pensation from the Grand Master or Deputy. And, when thus separated, they must either immediately join themselves to such other Lodges that they shall like best, or else obtain the Grand Master's warrant to join in forming a new Lodge, to be regularly constituted in good time. (See Signet, vol. ii., p. 144.) As early as May, 1729, the Grand Lodge of England matur ed a system for collecting and disbursing charity, by the appointment of a Committee of Charity. In the Constitution, for the government of said Committee, we find the following ART. XXIX.‑At the Grand Lodge on December 3rd, 1741 (Morton, Grand Master), it was " Resolved, That, before the brethren proceed to business in any Committee of Charity, all the laws relating to the disposal of the General Charity of this Society be first read ; and that, for the future, no petition shall be received, unleaa wag brother shall, at the time of his signing the sane, be a member of some regular Lodge, and the name of such his Lodge be always apecifmd." (See Signet, vol. ii., p. 136).

 

We do not remember, nor have we the leisure to look up all the acts of the Grand Lodge of England, in relation to this subject; but from the creation of the Grand Lodge down to the present day, that Grand body has, from time to time, not only asserted, but exercised the right to require all resident Masons to become contributing members, under pains and penalties. At this day, an Englishman can not draw assistance from the Charity Fund, unless he has been a member of a contributing Lodge for twelve months next preceding.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

439 The Grand Lodge asserted the same principle when it required the subordinates to pay a tax for the erection of a hall, or for a Masonic school. It is known that quite a number of the Lodges set themselves up as the judges of what was and what was not ancient usage, and resolved that the Grand Lodge had no right to compel them to contribute. even for charitable purposes ; whereupon the Grand Lodge arrested their charters, and struck their names from the registry. There is, indeed, no power of the Grand Lodge more clearly settled than that of exercising control over all the Masons within its jurisdiction.

 

The Grand Lodge may, of right, prohibit subordinate Lodges from granting demits, except for the two reasons mentioned above. The Grand Lodge may not interfere with the local rules of particular Lodges: and yet inflict a punishment upon the brethren who demit and remain non‑affiliated. Nor is it restricted in the extent of this punishment, for those who do not obey the edicts of tye Grand Lodge commit a high offense: and for failing to affiliate, or contribute to the Charity Fund, the Grand Lodge may prohibit the giving of relief, the right to join in processions, the right to visit, and of Masonic burial; or it may suspend or expel.

 

And now let us see the reason of the thing.

 

What are the rights and privileges (as now generally understood in this country) of the non‑affiliated Mason ?

 

Why, he is exempt from Lodge dues, from Grand Lodge dues, and no law can compel him to contribute relief. Charity, Masonic Charity, must be a freewill offering, say they.

 

And so it should be, but " the bird that can sing, and won't sing, should be made to sing." We grant that money which is forced from one of these drones in the Masonic hive, and given to,the poor, does not constitute his charity; he gives no alms, but the body making the law by which the money is thus raised and disbursed is the almsgiver.

 

Again, the non‑affiliated Mason claims the right to visit, the right to demand Masonic favors, the right to join in processions, the right to be protected and assisted in business; in short, av the rights and privileges which are claimed by the members, except the right to vote in a particular Lodge.

 

And what 440

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGl9.

 

great privilege is it to vote in a Lodge?

 

The members aro obliged to obey the summons of the Lodge; they are ob:iged to make personal sacrifices to meet in Lodge once a month and as much oftener as the Master shall think proper.

 

They must contribute as much money as will provide a hall, fit it up, pal contingent expenses, and relieve all who may apply, if found wortl.y.

 

They must sit up night after night making Masons, who are to be so many additional friends to the non‑affiliated as well as to themselves.

 

In short, they are doing all the drudgery, and sacrificing their rest and the society of their families; and if benefit is to result to them, the same benefit results to the non‑affiliated. who folds his arms in retirement and ease.

 

The non‑affiliated is truly a privileged Mason: and in eight cases out of ten, any law of the Grand Lodge intended to reach his purse, is pronounced by him a high‑handed, arbitrary, and unconstitutional measure : and what is most remarkable, these very outsiders, these men who are so tall that they stand above law, have more influence in law‑making bodies than the members themselves.

 

They are honored, too, it would seem, because of their contempt for Lodge membership.

 

In a large number of cases, if a Lodge wishes some one to deliver a publie address, the selection will, if possible, be made out of those who seldom, if ever visit a Lodge room, unless to make a display.

 

Now, against all this we solemnly protest.

 

A fair and the plain construction of the law places all Masons on a level.

 

All should contribute, in money, and time, and labor, about the same.

 

The law contemplates the perpetual membership, contribution and service of every Mason: and he who skulks or attempts to hide behind a demit, should be cut off as a decayed and unprofitable appendage of the Masonic tree.

 

The Grand Lodge of Louisiana has, we think, acted wisely and well, to draw a line of distinction between the faithful, working, and contributing Mason, and he who claims all the benefits, all the honors, and refuses to do his share of the work.

 

That the Grand Lodge had the right to exclude non‑affiliated Masons from the right to visit, and of funeral honors, there can be no doubt.

 

We have some hope that even we may live to see the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

44A day when u majority of the Grand Lodges, in the United States, will prohibit their subordinates from granting demits, except for the two reasons mentioned. When our report to the Grand Lodge of Missouri, in 1847, upon this subject, was acted on and sent forth to the world, not a single Grand Lodge, we believe, sanctioned the course pursued by Missouri. We were told again and again, that "although you are right in all you say about the duty of Masons; although we grant it is the solemn duty of every Mason to belong to a Lodge, and contribute to the Charity Fund; yet we have no right to make them con tribute."

 

Which was saying just this, that the Grand Lodges have no right to make Masons do their duty as Masons.

 

But we rejoice to find that a different feeling is now growing tc be very general ; everywhere are the working Masons looking into the subject, and seeking to find a remedy for an alarming evil.

 

It is supposed that, in the city of St. Louis, not two Masons in every ten belong to Lodges; not three in every ten contribute a dollar to the Charity Fund; and it is a fact, susceptible of proof, that nineteen out of every twenty dollars drawn from the Charity Fund for the relief of Masons, are paid over to non‑affiliated Masons. Why, when the Chairman of the Board of Relief is called upon to visit a sick brother, out of money, he expects to be told that he must be as lenient as possible in the examination, because, says the distressed brother, " I have not been in a Lodge for many years, and I am very rusty." We ask if this state of things shall be permitted to continue?

 

Shall the "children's bread be taken and given to the dogs?"

 

Shall the treasury of the zealous working Masons be kept drained, so that nothing be left for their own families should they fall into distress ? But we leave this subject, appealing to the good Masons of Louisiana to stand by and sustain their Grand Lodge, in the noble effort to bring all Masons upon a level. We grant that it will not do to require a Mason to become a member of a Lodge, because this would suppose the right of the Grand lodge to compel its subordinates to receive all applicants, but 442

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

all Masons should be required to become members, or to pay the same dues that members pay.

 

In answer to the second question of our correspondent, we say that expulsion in a Blue Lodge expels from every degree, or Masonic body; and although we suppose the Chapter has the undoubted right to expel the same individual, we think it is generally unnecessary to do so. It may, however, be deemed important to make the expulsion known to other Chapters as speedily as possible, and the Companions may prefer expelling themselves, to that of making a report of his expulsion in a Blue Lodge.

 

A suspension in a Blue Lodge suspends in all the degrees above, but it will be seen that the Chapter may, very properly, if they deem it necessary, expel the same individual. The suspended Mason may be tried and expelled anywhere‑that is, in the Lodge that suspended, or in either of the Masonic bodies above.

 

Of course the Mason who is expelled, or suspended in the degrees above, retains his standing below until he is there tried.

 

The Lodge can know nothing of the action above; bub in all the degrees above, the Masons do know the action of a Lodge.

 

BALIATING FOR CANDMATFB CORALRSVILLS, GrLas couNTY, TsNN., June 15, 1858. Da. J. W. S. MITCHBLL.‑Dear Bro‑I visited one of our neighboring Lodges recently, and I there saw two actions taken that I have been taught to believe were in violation of the Ancient Landmarks and Charges of Masonry.

 

I shoule be pleased to know your opinion in the matter.

 

1. The Lodge proceeded to ballot, without any report having been made by the Committee appointed to inquire into the character of the petitioner. The Committee not being present, the members were called upon to say as to the character of the applicant.

 

Several of the members stated that the petitioner was worthy to be made a Mason.

 

A ballot was then taken, which resulted In there being one blackball in the box.

 

While a second ballot was going on, one of the Committee came in‑was called upon by the Master for a report: made sue‑and then the candidate was elected.

 

2. Two ballots were taken, and both having one dark Eli !he candidate wa. declared rejected, after which, one of the members got up, w r' made a speech, the object of which was to draw out the brother casting the blackball.

 

Finding be could not do that, he moved a reconsideration of the ballot.

 

The W. Meaoe QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

"dsd the move not in order‑an appeal was taken‑the W. Master was not sustained‑a third ballot was taken, and the candidate elected.

 

Respectfully, I remain yours, in the mystic tie, E. P. MANNY.

 

To the first question, we say that ancient usage does not require the appointment of a Committee of Investigation; and, hence, some Lodges, even at the present day, make no provision of the kind, but require the petition to lay over one month, during which period it is equally the duty of all to inquire into the claims of the candidate. But the more convenient and efficient rule is, to refer the petition to a Committee of three members, whose especial duty it is to make strict inquiry, and report at the next regular meeting; and this rule is so nearly universal in the United States, that it has become a law of the Fraternity.

 

In the case referred to by our correspondent, the Lodge clearly acted in violation of its own rules; for it had a Committee of Investigation, the petition was referred to that Committee, and, hence, it was not really in possession of the Lodge. It is true, that a Committee can not prevent the action of the Lodge, by withholding a report, but, most certainly, the Lodge can not ballot on the petition until after a report is made; and, hence, if a Committee fail or refuse to make a report, the Lodge may discharge them and reappoint. If we understand the case, the member of the Committee who entered the Lodge during the balloting, did not undertake to report for a majority of the Committee, and, hence, his statement could not be received as a report.

 

We say, then, that the action of the Lodge was all wrong; and we are greatly mistaken if the Grand Lodge of Tennessee does not censure them, should the subject be carried before them.

 

The second case stated by our correspondent is too bad even to be suffered. We have ever been disposed to be indulgent to Lodges in the violation of the laws of Masonry, because, until recently, very few were able to say what was, and what was not ancient law; but when the universally admitted rights of members are assailed, it is time to interpose the strong arm of 444

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

power, and enforce obedience.

 

In the name of common sense what use could there be in having a secret ballot, if he who deposits a blackball may be called upon, directly or indirectly, to expose his ballot?

 

If a candidate is balloted for according to the rule laid down, and a single blackball appears, he must be declared rejected ; and no one has the right to inquire or surmise who it was that so voted.

 

It is true that the Master may suspend his announcement of rejection until a second, or even third ballot is had; provided he believes a mistake has been made‑but this being done, the matter must be at an end. There is no such thing as reconsidering a ballot.

 

Let us look at the matter a moment, and. see to what this doctrine would lead.

 

A candidate is declared rejected, and you move to reconsider; the motion is adopted.

 

Well, now the question ib upon the reception of the petition, and if you can reconsider the vote, you can, by the same parity of reasoning, move to withdraw the petition; and thus, by indirection, the laws and customs of the Order are set at naught, and no man need ever ne reported as rejected, for when the deed is done, all that the friends of the candidate have to do is to take the back track, and undo all the Lodge had done.

 

We repeat what we have before said: there must be a report from the Committee, the petition can not then be withdrawn; there must be a, secret ballot, and, upon the appearance of one blackball, the Master must declare the candidate rejected: and that mug terminate the matter, until a sufficient time has elapsed to allow the candidate to petition de now.

 

Of course, we say the Master of the Lodge was right in pro nouncing the motion to reconsider out of order; but he was wrong in suffering an appeal to be taken from his decision. .rlt is now generally conceded, that there is no appeal from the decision of the Worshipful Master, where the laws of the Order are involved. The question of the right of appeal from the decision of the Most Worshipful Grand Master, is quite a dif ferent thing.

 

The Grand Lodge is a legislative body, and may be governed by legislative rules; but the subordinate is a working Lodge, and must be governed by the rules of Mas ?!‑ ~ ‑ alone.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

445 RIGHT.', AND POWERS OF DISTRICT DEPUTY GRAND MASTERS.

 

Can a District Deputy Grand Master be tried by the Lodge of which he L A member for unmasonic conduct ? In your answer please define, according to your knowledge, the powers and prerogatives of such officers.

 

Yours fraternally,

 

S.

 

District Deputy Grand Masters are amenable to, and must be tried by their Lodges for any unmasonic conduct, except that which grows out of their official acts as agents of the Grand Lodge. Malfeasance in office must be inquired into by the power controlling the office.

 

We are asked to define the powers and prerogatives of the District Deputy Grand Master?

 

And can it be possible that there are opposite opinions upon this subject?

 

We say, with great confidence, that his powers are precisely those which the Grand Lodge clothes him with, and no more.

 

Who and what is a ‑District Deputy Grand Master?

 

Do, we hear of such an officer in the Ancient Charges, or in any of the Ancient Grand Lodge Regulations? Certainly not. Have we any account of such an officer, in any part of the world, until recently ?

 

Not at all.

 

Whence, then, can he derive powers not expressly delegated?

 

District Deputy Grand Masters are nothing more nor less than Grand Visitors‑Grand Lecturers.

 

In the Grand Lodge of Missouri, we personally know these officers w‑‑re brought into being for that special purpose.

 

The old system of employing a Grand Lecturer to visit and instruct the Lodges, was found to be expensive, and objectionable otherwise; he could not visit and instruct all the Lodges in the State; and, at the adoption of a new Constitution and By‑Laws in 1844, this new system of furnishing instruction was brought forward by Bro. Carnegy, Chairman of that Committee, and we advocated its adoption.

 

But most certainly, no one then in the Grand Lodge dreamed of creating a batch of new dignitaries. clothed with the powers and prerogatives of the Grand Master.

 

The law creating, gave them power to issue dispensations to form new Lodges within their respective districts; and this much they can legally do.

 

But, because they can do this, will any one say they can issue dispensations to set aside the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge, and allow Lodgee 446

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

to make Masons on the same day they are presented ?

 

Certainly not.

 

And yet we hear there are some who contend that they can do anything in the absence of the Grand Master, which he could do, if present.

 

This we hold to be preposterous.

 

The mere title given to these officers does not confer powers.

 

They neither have, nor was it ever intended that they should exercise the duties, and enjoy the privileges of the Deputy Grand Master ; on the contrary, they rank below the Past Grand Officers and the Grand Lecturer, in the Grand Lodge of Missouri. And at the formation of the new Constitution, the office of, Grand Lecturer was intended to be, and was made a mere sine cure: conferring honors, but furnishing no employment.

 

And, inasmuch as the District Deputy Grand Masters were intended to do his duties, the Grand Lecturer was forbid, by law, the privilege of visiting and instructing the Lodges, unless specially requested by said Lodges.

 

It was understood or believed, in 1844, that brethren could be found who were competent and willng to visit and instruct six, eight; or ten Lodges during the year, making no charge above their traveling expenses; and we distinctly remember that this was a reason given by Bro. Carnegy for giving these newly‑created officers the respectable, if not imposing title they now bear.

 

The system has worked well. Many of these officers have well and nobly discharged their whole duty, and richly merit the thanks of the Fraternity of the State ; but all this does not justify them in assuming powers not delegated ; for they can, in no event, be considered more than agents of the particular Grand Lodge, to carry out the purposes plainly expressed by that Grand body; and we trust they will not be permitted to transcend their powers, and there. by encroach upon the prerogatives of the Grand Master.

 

We are asked, also, to define the prerogatives of a District Deputy Grand Master. We say he has none. Prerogatives are peculiar or exclusive privileges. The king has prerogatives, or exclusive privileges, by right of his regal dignity. Before there was a written law, defining and restricting the powers of Grand Masters of Grand Lodges, the Grand Master of MasofiE. enjoyed exclusive privileges, by right of the office, made so >sy immemorial usage.

 

But District Deputy Grand Masters have QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

447 no exclusive privileges, by reason of their office.

 

The Grand Lodge of Missouri has seven Grand Chaplains, brought into being at the same, time District Deputy Grand Masters were. The office of Grand Chaplain was known long before a District Deputy Grand Master was heard of, and yet, no one contends that a Grand Chaplain has any prerogatives growing out of the office.

 

Last year, a District Deputy Grand Master, in Missouri, arrested the charter of a Lodge, and in so doing clearly transcendc,d his powers, and set a precedent dangerous in its conatsquonces; for, when Grand Lecturers assume the powers and prerogatives of the Grand Master, we may reasonably fear that the ancient usages and Landmarks are in danger. The arrest o!' a charter is the highest indignity that can be offered to, a Lodge ; and the right to do so has never been conceded but to on% officer.

 

That power is one of the high prerogatives of the Grand Master.

 

Even the Deputy Grand Master can not do it by right of his office.

 

He can do so, if the Grand Master be absent from the State, because, in that event, he is ex‑ofcio Grand Master. But, suppose the Grand Master and the Deputy Grand Master are both absent from the State, will it be contended that we then have in Missouri fifteen or sixteen Grand Masters, each enjoying the prerogatives of that officer? Verily, this would be progressive .Masonry.

 

But we all know that in the absence of the Grand and Deputy Grand Masters, the Senior Grand Warden becomes the acting Grand Master; so that it will be seen, in no event can a District Deputy Grand Master claim these high powers: and yet, until next June, until the next communication of the Grand Lodge, every District Deputy Grand Master in Missouri can arrest charters ; for, at the last session, the Grand Lodge sanctioned the arrest above spoken of, thereby admitting his power to do so.

 

It is aot contended that there was any law of the Grand Lodge. authorizing that officer to make the arrest.

 

The high‑handed act was not justified, on the ground that there was an absolute necessity for the officer to transcend his powers for the good of Masonry.

 

It is not contended that the Grand Master was out of the .State, or so far off that his decision could not have bear 44R

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

had in ample time; nor are we told on what pretext the act was justified and confirmed. Not having been present at the last communication, we know personally nothing of the influ. ences which were brought to bear ; but we hope and believe that, in looking to the conduct of the offending Lodge, the powers of the District Deputy Grand Master were lost sight of. The Grand Lodge of Missouri has been among the foremost in preserving the Ancient Landmarks, and avoiding innovations, and we sincerely hope its position will be set right next June.

 

WITHDRAWLNG A BLACKBALL.

 

* MAYsYILLE, ALL.

 

BRo. MITCHELL :‑A man petitions to be made a Mason.

 

The Committee reports favorably, but a brother casts a blackball : finally, he withdraws his ballot, and the candidate is elected.

 

Of course, this brother can not meet him as a brother ought to do.

 

Now, the question comes up, was it right for the Lodge to have elected him under the circumstances? and is it in keeping with Masonic law so to do?

 

G. W. L.

 

If the member voluntarily withdrew his opposition to the candidate, the Lodge acted correctly in initiating him, and the said member is bound to fellowship him. The blackball was the only evidence that a single member was opposed to the introduction of the candidate; and the withdrawal of that, amounted to a withdrawal of all objections; and knowing the rules of Masonry, he, at the same time, impliedly agreed to fellowship the applicant when a Mason.

 

If, on the other hand, the blackball was withdrawn upon the express condition that he would not fellowship the candidate, the Master should not have suffered the applicant to be initiated. We must preserve harmony within; we must prefer those who are in: and, hence, in no case should the presiding officer suffer the initiation or advancement of a brother, knowing there is a member who will not fellowship him.

 

u"n.IATIGV, SUSPENSIONS, Ere.

 

RODNSY, Miss., December 8, 1858.

 

DR. J. W. S. MrrcHELL.‑Dear Sir.‑Can a single vote defeat a motion to reinstate a Master Mason who has been suspended? What number of votes ere necessary to reject an application for membership of a Master Mason? and what number is required to suspend a Master Mason? I find some difference of oplalar.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

440 among our brethren upon these questions, and various rules prevailing in dit. out Lodges. There should be, among Masons, but one rule upon these points, and that should be regulated by the common law.

 

Give us your views of the lam, and your authority.

 

I have my own notions, but your views, expressed through the Siynd, will doubtless be attended with much good. Pardon me for thus trespassing upon your kindness, but, really, I like very much to see in the SigiS your decisions of mooted constitutional questions; and permit due to any that, in my opinion, your labors in this respect contribute no little interest to your very .valuable journal.

 

Fraternally,

 

N.

 

In relation to the first question, we give it as our opinion that no expelled, or indefinitely suspended Mason, should bei reInstated, except with the unanimous consent of all the members present. First, because the fraternal ties, formerly existing, have been severed, and they are thrown back on a level with the uninitiated; and, second, because every member is bound to Fellowship every other member, and to suffer one to come. in against the will of any member, would produce discord,.and lead, perhaps, to the withdrawal of the discontented member, and we should never lose sight of the fact that we are bound to respect the feelings of those within, in preference to those without.

 

We have no doubt of the correctness of the above views, and we are satisfied that the general practice is in conformity therewith, but we are aware that in a few localities a different practice prevails.

 

The answer to the second question admits of no doubt.

 

N~ candidate can be initiated, or a member admitted, except by a unanimous ballot.

 

This law is in force throughout the United States, South Carolina excepted, and we sincerely hope tide exception will not long exist.

 

Unanimity is the oldest, as well as the safest rule. True, it was departed from for a short period in England; but the ancient rule has been reenacted there, and we know not how any Grand or subordinate Lodge can tolerate any other course. We know, there are a few nominal Masons,, thorough‑going Oddfellows, who have sought to introduce the Oddfellows' rule upon this subject into Masonry.

 

From Anderson's Constitutions, under the head.of "Duties. of Members," we make the following extract: ART. I.‑No man can be accepted a member of a particular Lodge without previous notice, one month before given to the Lodge, in order to make dva 450

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Inquiry into the reputation and capacity of the candidate, unless by a dispetow Lion.

 

(Old Regulations, Art. 5.) ART. II.‑But no man can be entered a brother in any particular Lodge, er admitted a member thereof, without the unanimous consent of all the members of that Lodge, there present, when the candidate is proposed, and when their crmsent is formally asked by the Master.

 

They are to give their consent in tueie aAu prudent way, either virtually or in form. but with unanimity.

 

Nor is this Inherent privilege subject to a dispensation, because the members of a particulir Lodge are the beet judges of it; and because, if a turbulent member should beimposed on them, it might spoil their harmony, or hinder the freedom of the:r communisation, or even break and disperse the Lodge, which ought to be avoided by all true and faithful.

 

But it was found inconvenient to insist upon unanimity in several cases; a* therefore, the Grand Masters have allowed the Lodges to admit a member, if trill ;▒ above three ballots are against him; though some Lodges desire no such allow ance.

 

(New Regulations, Art. 6.

 

See Signet, vol. ii., p. 143.) We know brother N. admits that there should be a unanimous vote to entitle a candidate to initiation, and he will see from the extract above, that affiliation must be governed by the same rule.

 

.n answering the third and last question, we are bound to admit, that we know of no Ancient Regulation having a direct bearing on the subject, but the general practice in this country is, to require a majority of two‑thirds to suspend or expel. This, we think, is the safest rule; but we agree with brother N., in saying it is to be deeply regretted that a uniform prae. tice does not prevail. At one time we had reason to hope that a General Grand Lodge would be instituted, with power to, enforce uniformity of action upon these and kindred subjects; but the prospect now is, that, for a long time to come, we are to be left to no other regulating power than the common usage of our Grand Lodges, which might fully answer, were it not that new questions are constantly springing up, and Grand Lodges are proverbially slow in acting upon them.

 

THE INALIENABLE RIGHT OF MFXBERQ TO BALLOT.

 

 MISSOIIRI, December 28, 11352.

 

Ban. Mrrcasw.:‑We have a case at the present time before our Lodge that we would be pleased to have your opinion on, by private letter, or, if you no proper, through the Siynel.

 

A Master Mason made application for membership, by petition, in the urual farm.

 

The Worshipful Master appo'nted.a Committee of three to report on said.

 

Q1;ESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

451 petition.

 

At the next regular communication of the Lodge, two of said CoVW mittee, after hearing the objections urged against said petitioner by the third, reported favorable.

 

The objector comes forward and, in open Lodge, states that he will blackball said petitioner if the ballot should be taken.

 

The question then arises, has he the right toò blackball a petitioner when his objections have been heard by the Committee, and not considered by them sufficient grounds to report unfavorable.

 

Fraternally,

 

d. MaM.

 

In balloting for candidates for initiation or affiliation, each member of the Lodge has an inalienable right to judge for himbelf as to the propriety or impropriety of admitting the applicant, and no one has the right to know or impugn his motives. The secret ballot is a sacred privilege which can not be interfered with, and, most certainly, the brother who has the magnanimity to express his objections openly can not be deprived of nis right to ballot precisely as his sense of duty dictates. There is no such thing in Masonry as overruling the objections which a member may have to the applicant. Of course, it is proper to use persuasive means to remove the objection, if it is not apparently well founded, but, after all, he must be left at liberty to vote as he pleases.

 

The Oddfellows' practice of overruling the objections of a member, can not be admitted in Masonry, though we are sorry to be compelled to admit that the Grancl Lodge of South Carolina tolerates, if, indeed, it does not encourage, this innovation. We say, then, that the member alluded to by our correspondent, would certainly have the right to vote" in conformity with his declaration.

 

We have taken the liberty of suppressing the name of our correspondent, and his residence, least it might prejudice the claims of the candidate, to publish more than we have.

 

VV It DUTY TO FfPELLED MASONS.

 

W Aw9Aw, SUMTES couNTY, ALA., December 27, t852.

 

Bite. Urrcmt‑Dear .air.‑‑if it is not asking too much, please answer a question through the Siynd.

 

if charges have been regularly preferred. and a brother suspended or expelled from all the rights of Masonry, is it unmasonic for a member of the Lodge, or any Mason, when asked by one not a Mason, if be, A. B., is expelled or suspended, to answer in the aMrmative! or, in other words, is it unmasonic for one of the Frattrnity to speak of the persons being expelled, except it be to a broth! Some of our brethren contend that it is not proper; and others contend that, as 452

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGB: enpulsions are frequently published in Masonic journals and otherwise, we bail a perfect right to speak oú them, as such.

 

I am fraternally yours.

 

J. J. L.'' This question presents more difficulties. than at first view we were inclined to attach to it. A Mason, expelled or suspended, is cut off from all the privileges and benefits of Masonry, and, consequently, we are released from all Masonic obligations to him, and, therefore, have the right to speak of him as any other man who is not a Mason. That we have the legal right to speak of his expulsion to any one, we do not doubt, and, in some cases, the good standing of the Lodge requires that it should be known to the surrounding community, that a certain member has been cut off.

 

But, on the other hand, suppose the suspended or expelled Mason has availed himself of the right of appeal to his Grand Lodge, which body has the power to reinstate him to all the general privileges of Masonry, it then :becomes doubtful whether it would be proper to give publicity .to the action of the Lodge. Some Grand Lodges will nqt ':j permit the subordinates to publish in newspapers and periodicals, suspended or expelled Masons. for the reason that their 'character should not be thus publicly branded with infamy, while they are actually engaged in its legal defense; and there seems to be a just propriety in this.

 

We say, then, that each Lodge should be at liberty to exercise a sound discretion upon this subject, and, in cases where there is no necessity of making the matter public, and where appeals have been taken, it would be proper, by resolution, to prohibit the members from speaking of the action of the Lodge, except to brother Masons.

 

CLAIMS OF R. A. MASONS TO PRESIDE.

 

PARACLIFTA, ARK., November, 1&52.

 

Hbrroa MA90me "SIONsT" :‑re a Master Mason fully competent to preside . over a Lodge under dispensation, when Royal Arch Masons are present? W. s.:, Bro. W. S., of Paraclifta, asks us whether the Master of t Lodge II. D., who is only a Master Mason, can preside over his Lodge, while there are other members of the Lodge, who are Royal Arch Masons, present? We answer, that he not oidy has the right, but it is clearly his duty to preside over his QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE..

 

453, Lodge, under the circumstances alluded to.

 

We say that the. Past Master's degree furnishes no qualifications to preside over, a Lodge.

 

We have again and again said that we could find no: Masonry in it, but the Grand Lodges in the United States do not thus regard it; at least, it would seem they do not, for they require all Masters, presiding over chartered Lodges, to have. the degree, or, V some call it, the installation ceremony; but _none of them, we believe, require it as a prerequisite to preside: over a Lodge under dispensation.

 

Now, that this is a distinction without a difference, we sincerely believe, for we never could imagine that more light and knowledge was required to. preside over a chartered Lodge than one under dispensation, or, a limited charter.

 

We know that the impression, that only a Past Master can preside over a Lodge, is derived from the Ahiman Rezon, but, even that spurious book does not allude to a Chapter Past Master‑no such thing was then thought of iw England, even by the clandestine Grand Lodge. The Past Master there spoken of was one who had actually presided a legal term over a Lodge. But, not wishing to pursue this subject further in this connection, we beg to suggest to our cor respondent, whether it would not be ridiculous to expect

 

he, legally appointed Master of a Lodge, who has only taken the Master's degree, to decline his occupancy of the Chair to a Royal Arch Mason, or a Chapter Past Master?

 

How is he to know. who has either of these degrees?

 

He might know. who was a Past. Master, in the Grand Lodge acceptation of the term; that is,..he. might know who had regularly presided twelve months over a Lodge, but, most certainly, he has no means of knowing.a degree Past Master. , We say, then, that a Master Mason is fully competent to preside over a Lodge under dispensation, and he is under no obligations to yield the Chair, even to the Grand Inspector General of the 33rd, or any other power, except he be an officer of the Grand Lodge.

 

CAN A GRAND LODGE REMRE TO MEMBERSHIP IN A SUBORDINATE LODGE? A distinguished Mason, in one of the northern cities, whose as‑_e we are reouaatert to withhold., asks us whether the 454

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

restoration of an expelled Mason by a Grand Lodge restoreb thU brother to his membership in a subordinate Lodge, under the following circumstances: The Grand Lodge expels one of its Grand Officers, who is at the time a member in good standing in a subordinate Lodge. At a subsequent. session, the Grand Lodge restores that brother to all the privileges of Masonry.

 

In reply we have to say, that it is admitted on all hands, south Carolina, perhaps, excepted, that while the Grand Lodge has the power to restore to fellowship with the Craft any brother, expelled by a subordinate Lodge, it has_ no power tc restore to membership in that Lodge. The case, as put by our correspondent, is, however, somewhat different, for here the subordinate took no action against the brother, but the Grand Lodge both expelled and restored him.

 

Still we d0 not think his relative position to his subordinate Lodge is materially different.

 

The Grand Lodge had the right. to expel, and, in doing so, it effectually and completely severed his. connection with the subordinate. It could not charge him with dues from the date of his expulsion. for the simple reason that. he had been deprived of membership.

 

How, then, is his. membership to be restored? The Grand Lodge can not force s brother upon a Lodge against its consent, for each Lodge it as a separate family circle, having the power to say who shag, and who shall not be admitted to membership.

 

Hence, the is no difference whether he was expelled by the subordinate, or the Grand Lodge, for in neither case can the. Grand Lodge compel the subordinate to receive him as a member.

 

We think, in all cases of restoration by a Grand Lodge, membership can only be obtained in a subordinate Lodge, by petition.

 

IDDGES UNDER DISPENSATION.

 

JAoIa░To, Mrsa., November, 18R..

 

Bao. Mrmasi.L.‑Will you please give me your opinion, ei'her privately a! through the Signd, on the following question, as there are differa.:,t opinions L my Lodge When a brother who is a member of a Lodge petitions the Gra‑3 Lo'" for ,& dispensation, and the same is granted, is it necessary for said brother t. ret P dewit from the Lodge in which he was a member, before signing the petition Fraternally,

 

W. W. BOOM QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAGE.

 

458 We take it as granted, that it is not necessary to quote any authorities, for the purpose of showing that no brother can properly belong to more than one Lodge at the same time, for we suppose all are prepared to admit this fact. If, then, a Lodge under dispensation is in truth and in fact a Lodge‑‑4% regular Ledge‑it is composed and made up of members, and hence these members must not at the time be members of. any other Lodge.

 

Under this view of the subject, it follows, as a consequence, that when a member of an old Lodge petitions for a new one, he must demit, or be discharged from the old, before he can sit as a member in the new Lodge. On the contrary, if a Lodge under dispensation is a something without form or being, having the name of a Lodge improperly applied, or if it is merely a Lodge " in abeyance, and not in fact a Lodge," then there is nothing requiring a brother to demit from a Lodge,.iu order to attach himself to, and act with this nondescript.

 

We have more than once expressed, briefly, our views upon this subject, through the Signet. We have taken the ground, that a Lodge under dispensation is truly a regular Lodge, acting under a limited charter or warrant‑‑that the substitution of the word dispensation in place of charter does not change or limit the powers conferred by that instrument.

 

We know that the term warrant was used in the English Constitutions, and we further know that the term charter is used hi the United States to convey the same meaning, and we hold, that a warrant or charter, issued for a limited time, would confer no more power than is conferred by a dispensation, so called. In short, we have held that a dispensation is a warrant or charter for a limited time, conferring all the powers, for the time specified, that are or can be conferred by a perpetual charter or warrant. We do not mean to say, that the membere of a Lodge under dispensation in the United States, are permitted to enjoy all the privileges claimed and exercised by the members or officers of a chartered Lodge ; but we do mean to say, that the distinction now made is a modern regulation, not sanctioned by the Ancient Constitutions, or the Ancient Regulations.

 

Tt.e distinction we allude to is that of depriving the 456

 

QVESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

officers of Lodges under dispensation of the privilege of instal lation and membership in the Grand Lodge.

 

We have thought, and still think, that the foregoing views sib is strict accordance with the old and long established usages of Masonry, but as opposite opinions have been promulgated by Bro. Moore, of.Boston, and as these views have bVen reiter= ated, indorsed, and enlarged upon by Past Grand. Mastet Gedae, of Louisiana, and some others, we feel it to be our duty to go back, and inquire into the origin of the term dispensation; as applied'to new Lodges, and learn, if possible, what were the powers and privileges of Lodges so established. In this invesi tigation we shall consult the oldest and highest authoritlee known to Masonry; and here it may be proper to say,.that Anderson and Preston are the only old English writers, so fair as we know, who are entitled to full credit.

 

Our readers know, we presume, that Anderson's Constitutions; published by order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1723, is the oldest book upon Masonry now extant. This work contains not only the Ancient Constitutions, or Old Charges, a9 then collated, and for the first time published, and the Regular tiobs, or rules for the government of the Grand Lodge, but also a very learned, and, in most respects, accurate history of Free masonry in England.

 

We have carefully examined this book (edition of 1756), and we are not able to find a word aboui dirpensations to form new Lodges, either in the Regulations of history of the Order.

 

In every instance where the authority to` form a new Lodge is spoken of, that authority is called a warrant, or patent, and whether Lodges were established under the one or the other, their powers were the same‑all were con' sidered and called constituted Lodges, and the Masters and Wardens were members of the Grand Lodge.

 

In Anderson'e Constitutions, under the head of " The Ancient Manner of Con' stituting a Lodge," we find the following . ,,A new Ludgg, for avoiding many irregularities, should be solemnly coned. tuted by the Grand Master, with his Deputy and Wardens; or, in the Grand Master's absence; the Deputy acts for his Worship, the Senior Grand Warden '7W Deputy the Junior Grand Warden as Senior, and a present Master of a Lodge si t1ljunior: QUEST1014S OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

457 The above is all we are able to find in Anderson, having any direct bearing upon the subject under consideration. From this it will be seen, that aY new Lodges were required to be constituted; and this, too, without undergoing a probation or trial, but as soon after the warrant was issued as practicable, as will hereafter appear.

 

And, certainly, there is 'good reason for an early constitution, if that was necessary " for avoiding many irregularities," as all will'admit that new Lodges are more liable to irregularities than old ones, and, therefore, stand most in need of instructions.

 

A contrary course would have the effect of permitting new Lodges to blindly commit irregularities, for a time (in this country twelve months), and then to qualify them for work.

 

We further extract from Anderson, as follows The Lodge being opened, and the candidates, or new Master and Wardens being yet among the Fellow Crafts, the Grand Master shall ask his Deputy if he Das examined them, and finds the candidate Maater well skilled in the noble Science and the Royal Art, and duly instructed in our mysteries, etc.

 

Who can avoid seeing that the ceremony above contemplates the constitution of the Lodge, before it does any work, for the brother named in the warrant as the Master of the new Lodge, is called the candidate Master, and, hence, up to this time, without power to preside‑the Lodge must be first constituted. And what was then considered as constituting a Lodge? Why, simply installing the officers; for nowhere is anything said about constituting a Lodge in any other way than that of installing the officers.

 

The Deputy Grand Master, having satisfactorily answered the questions propounded, as stated in the extract, the Regulations go on to say Then the Grand Master, placing the candidate on his left hand, having asked . and obtained the unanimous consent of the brethren, shall say, I constitute and form these good brethren into a new Lodge, and appoint you, brother A. B., the Master of it, not doubting your capacity, etc.

 

The reader is requested to notice that the above is the ceremony for constituting a new Lodge, and in that ceremony of constituting, the Grand Master appoints the Master of it, and not a word is said about the necessity of electing the Master 458

 

QUESTIONS OF MASM''IC USAGE.

 

before lie can be installed. The ceremony from which the above is extracted, goes on to say, that the Grand Master then installs the Master, presents him with the Constitutions, instruments of his office, etc., after which the Wardens are installed, the Charges read to each, and the Grand Master orders the new Lodge to be enrolled on the Registry.

 

On the 25th of November, 1723, the Grand Lodge decreed that " no new Lodge is owned, nor its officers admitted into the Grand Lodge, unless it be regularly constituted and regis. tered." And, at the same session, the reason of the above was made plain by the passage of another edict disowning all who should form themselves into a Lodge, " without the Grand Master's warrant." The foregoing extracts are made from Entick's edition of Anderson, published by order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1756. We have not seen a later edition of the English Constitutions, and, therefore, can not say at what time, if at all, it became the custom to issue dispensations to run forty days, but are led to suppose, that at some period subsequent to 1756, a Regulation to that effect was adopted by the Grand Lodge of England, because Preston speaks of the existence of such usage or law, and plainly describes the manner of proceeding under it. We have before us two editions of Preston, the one, the. first American, from the tenth London edition, published in 1804, and the other, the London edition of 1822. In both these editions, we find dispensations, and the manner of constituting Lodges under them, very plainly described. He says Any number of Master Masons. not under seven, resolved to form a new Lodge, must apply, by petition, to the Grand Master, setting forth that they are regular Masons. and are, or have been members of a regular Lodge ; that, having the prosperity of the Fraternity at heart, they are willing to exert their beet endeavors to promote and diffuse the genuine principles of Masonry; that, for the convenience of their respective dwellings, and other good reasons, they bays . agreed to form a new Lodge, to be named ‑; that, in consequence of this resolution, they pray for a warrant of constitution to empower them to assemble as.a regular Lodge on the ‑ of every month, at ‑. and then and there to discharge the duties of Masonry in a regular and constitutional manner, according to the original forms of the Order, and the laws of the Grand Lodge; that they have nominated, and do recommend A. B. to be the first Master, and C. D. to he the Qrat Senior Warden, and E. F. to be the first Junior Warden of the said Lod#% QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

469 That, the prayer of the petitioners being granted, they promise strict conformity to every regular edict and command of the Grand Master, and to all the constitutional laws and Regulations of the Grand Lodge.

 

Upon this petition being signed by at least seven Master Masons, and recommended by the Masters of three regular Lodges, Preston says the Grand, Or Deputy Grand Master may issue a " dispensation, authorizing the brethren specified in the petition, to assemble as Masons for forty days, and until such time as the Constitution can be obtained." Now let us examine somewhat the wording and probable intent of the petition.

 

And first, the petitioners must be regular Masons.

 

Who are regular Masons?

 

Preston, in a note, tells us.

 

He says: "By regular Masons is to be understood persons initiated into Masonry in a regular Lodge, agreeably to the Constitution of the Order."

 

We fully indorse this definition, and suggest, that if, as Bro. Moore says, a Lodge under dispensation, so far from being a regular Lodge is not in fact a Lodge, then no one made therein can ever legally sign a petition for a new Lodge.

 

2. The petitioners must be, or have been members of a regw lar Lodge. What then is a regular Lodge? Preston says: " A Lodge regularly constituted or legally warranted to act." If Preston is good authority (and we think he is sound, at least upon this subject), a Lodge is regular if it be constituted, or if it be legally authorized to act. And here we would inquire whether, even in the United States, where Lodges are permitted to work twelve months without being constituted in the manner provided in the.old law, they are not, by their dis~ pensations, legally authorized to act. But these petitioners do not ask to be appointed "agents of the Grand Master or of the Grand Lodge," as Bro. Moore would have us believe they were bound to do.

 

They do not even ask for a dispensation, but they ask for a warrant of constitution.

 

And for what purpose is this warrant asked?

 

To form'& Lodge in abeyance?

 

No.

 

To form a Lodge that "is not a Lodge in fact?"

 

No.

 

But they ask a warrant to empower them to assemble as a regular Lodge. And to work how? ".9fter the manner of Masons," as Bro. Moore triumpbantly tell us all petitioners are bound to do? 460

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAG$.

 

No.

 

They ask to form a "regular Lodge, in conformity with the original forms of the Order." And Bro. Preston Uronounces them, when formed under their dispensation, to be a regular Lodge.

 

From all we have seen, we think we are borne out in saying, that the use of the term dispensation, as applied to authority for forming new Lodges, is of modern date, there being no account of any such thing until after 1756; and we think it would not be far‑fetched to suppose that Preston himself, in speaking of a dispensation in this connection, attached the same meaning, to it that lie did to the term warrant ; at any rate, he requires the petitioners not to pray for a dispensation, but for a warrant of constitution, upon which prayer, he says a dispensation was granted for forty days, evidently contemplating the constitution or installation as speedily as practicable. And it may be further seen that, down to 1822, when Preston's last edition.was issued in London, it was clearly understood that a dispensation conlerred all the powers, for the time it was allowed to run; that was, or could be conferred by a warrant, save and except,‑that ny the Regulation of 1 i 23, the Lodgc so working under dispeneation, if not crnstituted, could not be entered upon the reams ter. nor could the officers of it take their seats in Grand Lodgei; send as it was not contemplated to encourage the formation of Lodges not so registered, forty days only were given to a new Lodge to have its officers installed. Will not everyone conclude that the Grand Lodge of England would never have appointed "agents" to confer degrees, and put those agents in "abed ante"‑on trial, and then limit the time of trial to forty days. But, above all, how ridiculous to suppose that Grand body would authorize these agents in abeyance‑not Lodges‑to con` fer degrees at all, while upon their statute book they retainsd the very Regulation which, of all others, assisted most to brig about and establish the present system of Grand Lodges.

 

Of course, we allude to that solemn edict which prohibited the making of Masons in any other place than in regular and cot stituted Lodges, and denounced as clandestine all who might be otherwise made. This law has never been repealed; bdt by universal usage has become the settled law of Masonij QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAG$.

 

461 throughout the world.

 

How, then, can regular Masons be made in Lodges under dispensation, at the present day, if they are not regular Lodges ? We now proceed to notice some of the positions assuaned by Bro. Moore, in relation to the power of Lodges under dispensation, and to inquire into the character of the authority upon Which he relies, in vindication thereof.

 

In answer to a question propounded by Bro. Jacoba, of Clarksvilie, Mo., dated August 31, 1847, and answered in the following December number of the Magazine, Bro. Moore says "They (dispensations) authorize the petitioners to form' and open a Lodge after the manner of Ancient, Free, and Accepted Masons." .

 

The foregoing is marked as quoted by Bro. Moore, and where, reader, do you suppose it is quoted from? It is not in the Book of Constitutions, that is, if we know what the Book of Constitutions is.

 

It is not to be found in the Regulations of the Granfl Lodge of England‑certainly not prior to 1756, nor do we believe the language is to be. found in any edition of Anderson's Constitutions. The language is not to be met with in Preston ; nay, more, it can not be found as a Regulation even in that delectable book, Smith's Ahiman Rezon, from which the extract is made.

 

We hope and trust our readers know something of the history of that spurious body of clandestine and expelled Masons, who formed themselves into a so called Grand Lodge, and called it the Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons of London; and we trust the character of the author of the Ahiman Rezon, of 1771, is also known, for in an abridged copy of that book, edited by Rev. Dr. Smith, of Pennsylvania, and published by order of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, in 1783, the language quoted by Bro. Moore is to be found, not as a part of the Regulations of the Athol Grand Lodge, nor of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania, but in a letter written by Laurence Dermott, in 1772, in answer to questions propounded by the Master of a Lodge in Philadelphia, and inserted by Dr. Smith, as he says, to aid in elucidating some of the Regulations *See 4fagazine, vol. vii., p. 33.

 

t62

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

in the .ghiman Rezon.

 

It is known that the .ghiman Rezos differs, in many particulars, from the English Constitutions, an contained in Anderson.

 

But the ceremony laid down. in each, for constituting a Lodge, is almost identical. The ghiman Rezon commences as follows: "A new Lodge, for avoiding many irregularities," etc., precisely the language used by Anderson, or rather by the Grand Lodge of England. In both, the Grand Master is made to use the same language, as follows: " I constitute and form these good brethren into a new regular Lodge, and appoint you, Bro. A. B.," etc. There is not a word about authorizing the petitioners to " form and open a Lodge after the manner of Free and Accepted Masons," and therein to admit and make Freemasons.

 

We speak by the card, having before us not only Smith's ghiman Rezon, of 1783, but a London edition of that book, of 1801. But, as before stated, Bro. Moore extracts from a letter of Lawrence Dermott's. Now, in all seriousness, what authority is this?

 

Suppose Lawrence Dermott had been a gentleman and reliable man, and suppose him to have been at the time really and truly " Deputy Grand Master of Masons in London," what more weight should attach to his isolated opinions, unsupported by any known authority, than to the opinions of Bro. Moore, or even those of the editor of the Signet?. But how much less importance should be attached to Dermott's opinions, in reference to the nature and powers of a dispensation, when we find those opinions were not sustained by his own Grand Lodge, for, as stated, nothing of the sort can be found in the Regulations of the London. edition of 1801, or Smith's edition of 1783.

 

Bro. Moore says a Lodge under dispensation "is a Lodge is abeyance, and not in fact a Lodge." Here we confess ourselves at fault, for by what process it can be made appear that a thins can be, and yet not be in fact, we have not discovered.

 

We think that if this thing under dispensation is a Lodge at all, it is a Lodge in fact.

 

It can not be a Lodge in the process of being formed, for we have seen that it must be formed, and remdarly formed, before Masons can Le legally made therein, and we know that Masons are made in said Lodges, and that they are admitted by Bro. Moore to be regularly n)ade.

 

But QUESTIONS OF MASONIC IISAM

 

463 the argument of Bro. Moore is, that a Lodge under dispensation ia a thing formed for the single purpose of making Masons, or, it' you please, an imperfect, half‑formed Lodge. !Tat even this will not do, for, as before stated, Masons can only be made in a regular Lodge.

 

And again, if we consult the old records, we shall find there is no such thing as a half‑formed, imperfect Lodge, with powers limited alone to making Masons.

 

On the contrary, all Masonic Lodges, of the same degree, are spoken of as possessing the same powers, and are amenable to the same immemorial laws, privileged to exercise the same functions, and restricted by the same ancient rules.

 

In answer to a correspondent of Ohio, vol. vii., page 226, Bro. Moore presents this subject in a light which, upon its face, seems to be in itself conclusive, for lie sets out by stating correctly what is contained in Anderson's Constitutions, as the action of the Grand Lodge of England, and then extracts a parcel of stuff from Dermott's celebrated letter, leaving the reader to suppose the whole is from the English Constitutions. He first tells us, truly, that at the organization of the Grand Lodge of England, it was decreed that all Lodges, to be considered regular, should obtain a warrant or charter from the Grand Master, with the consent of the Grand Lodge. " This," says Bro. 11oore, " was found to be inconvenient, and, sometimes, detrimental to the prosperity and growth of the Institution. To obviate this difficulty, power was vested in the Grand Master to grant on petition."

 

All the foregoing we believe to be correct enou li, and which may be found, in substance, in the history of the Grand Lodge of England; but that which follows, in uninterrupted proximity, is nowhere to be found in Anderson or Preston, but is, verbatim, the language used by Dermott, in his celebrated letter. After the word '` petition," as above, Bro. Moore quotes, as a contixm.iation, the allowing from Dermott : " A dispensation authorizing and empowering any regular and trusty Master Mason to congreLate (by proper invitation) a sufficient number of worthy brethren, at some certain place, to form and open a Lodge aster the mcnner of (`not as,' says Bro. Moore) Ancient Masons; and, in the ‑aid Lodge, while thus open, to admit, enter, and 464

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

make Freemasons, according to the true ancient custom; and not otherwise; with the sole intent and view that the brethren so congregated, admitted, entered. and made, when they become of sufficient number, may, in good order and time, be duly war ranted and constituted, for being and holding a regular Lodge, for the further promoting the Craft, and increasing the number of worthy brethren." And here is the whole sum and ‑rhstanee of authority fot .establishing the present system in the United States, of putting Lodges to work under dispensation ; ò%rid hurt,, too, we opine, is the origin of the idea that the Grand .%htster is authorized to summon any number of brethren, when arid where lie pleases, and make '14asons at sight. We hold tlrn! it would be illiberal and unjust, to suppose the Grand Lodge of England ever did, or ever will authorize any brother to superintend the making of a Mason, until a Lodge be first regularly formed in which to make Masons, so long as that Grand body retains the law requiring .

 

all Masons to be made in regular Lodges.

 

Dermott makes the foregoing extract as being by him quoted, thereby creating grounds for the impression that lie takes it from the Old Regulations of the Grand Lodge of England; and in this lie has succeeded, at least, in satisfying Bro. Moore, for he says of it But in 1772, Laurence Dermott, Esq., at the time Deputy Grand Master of Masons in Lond‑n, speaks of it, and quotes it as an old institution. It is un. doubtedly (adds Bro. Moore), the original form.

 

Now, one would think, if tl.is is the original form, and an old institution, it could certainly be found among the old records, and most certainly would be met with in the Regulations of the Grand Lodge of England. But, alas! for our want of acumen, we can not find it anywhere, either in Anderson or Preston. Nay, we have not yet been able to meet with it in Dermott'% Grand Lodge Regulations. Certainly, it is not among the Regulations in Smith's Ahiman Rezon, of 1783, nor is it in the London edition of that work, of 1801.

 

But suppose it could be found as the very oldest Regulation of the Grand Lodge of Racient .Masons‑the Athol Grand Lodge, what other impresr %ion should it make upon the mind of any true and trusty QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE

 

466 orather, than to excite his derision and scorn?

 

Who that has IP.arned the history of that spurious Grand Lodge, originally made up of seceding, suspended, and expelled Masons, illegally formed and corruptly administered for many years, would turn to it for ancient law? On the other hand, suppose, as we believe to be true, that this extract originated in the brain of Lawrence Derrnott, who that has learned his history, does not know that his most prominent qualification as a writer, fitted him to do the dirty work of his spurious Grand Lodge, and to villify, abuse, and misrepresent those noble‑hearted brethren who threw themselves in the breach in 1717, and rescued Masonry from threatened oblivion.

 

And yet this driveler, this slanderer, who wrote letters to Scotland and Ireland, falsely charging that the Grand Lodge of England was composed of modern innovators, and, more falsely still, claimed that the Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons, so called, was alone the keeper of the true Ancient York Masonry; this man, we say, is made to appear in the pages of the .Magazine, indorsed by the editor, as the "Deputy Grand Master of Masons in London." And this appears the more wonderful in Bro. :More, when we remember that, a few months after, he published to the world a statement to the effect, that neither the Ahiman Rezon, nor .its author Lawrence Dermott, was entitled to credit.

 

In September, 1849, in speaking of the Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons, Bro. Moore says That Grand Lodge was composed of weders and expelled Masons from the Grand Lodge of England, by which body it was held to be spurious and clandew tine. With it originated the Ahiman Rewn‑a republication of the Book of C,on+tihdions, under a new name, with such omissions, alterationo, and additions, as suited the views of its compiler.' Now, how to reconcile all this with his answer to a corrospondent in Ohio, in 1849, we are at a loss to determine. In. 1848, he represents Dermott as having been "Deputy Grand Master of Masons in London," aye, and be claims to triumph, over his correspondent, by claiming Dermott to be the highest authority, and calls him "one of the experienced and intelligent.

 

Magasiat, vol. viii., p. 522.

 

466

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

European brethren of the last century."

 

And yet, in 1840,.h# tells us that this learned author of the Ahiman Rezon, thin "Deputy Grand Master of Masons of London," belonged to a clandestine Grand Lodge, composed of seceders and expelled; Masons.

 

In 1848, Bro. Moors quotes from the Ahiman Rezone. as being the English Book of Constitutions; and, in 1849, he tells us that the Ahiman Rezon is a republication of the Book of Constitutions, with such omissions, alterations, and additions as suited the views of its compiler.

 

Can it be possible that: Bro. Moore can expect his readers to regard his author as high, authority, when he tells us that he was guilty of the high crime of omitting, altering,.and adding to the Boole of Constitutions? Bro. Moore further says of Dermott; in 1848 Such were the opinions of a learned and accomplished brother of the la* century, in respect to the powers of Lodges working under dispensation; and, is, his opinion, predicated on the practice then universally acknowledged.

 

We can not say that the practice spoken of was not them, (1772) universally acknowledged, because we have no copy of, the English Constitutions of a later date than 1756, nor have we Dermott's first edition of his Ahiman Rezon, of 1756, but~granting, for the sake of argument, that such a rule was then irs force, even in the Athol Grand Lodge, it was certainly not long retained there, for it does not appear as a regulation in Smith's % Ahiman Rezon, of 1783, nor in the London edition of that book, in 1801 ; and, as before stated, we have ample reasons ford_ believing that no such language ever appeared, either in the Regulations or proceedings of the Grand Lodge of England,,:, or Preston would have given it.

 

Bro. Moore further quotes from Dermott's celebrated letter; to " a learned Master of a Lodge in Philadelphia.." Bro. M: gays: " Speaking of the: brethren made in such Lodges (U. D.), tie (Dermott) says: `Masons made under a dispensation, have a right to visit warranted (constituted) Lodges, while such dis pensation is in force, but no longer, until they belong to sonutr warranted Lodges themselves;' thus showing," adds! Bralt Moore, " that they are not considered as belonging to any., Lodge." Really, we think this is too bad.

 

Here is the editor of the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

467' oldest Masonic journal in the United States; one whom the" Masons have delighted to honor, and who has been looked up to for many years as being the highest authority in expounding and teaching the ancient law, taking the isolated opinion of a man who, from Bro. Moore's own showing, is not entitled to respect, in ordfr to bolster up and sustain the quixotic views of the editor, that a Lodge under dispensation, though having the power to make Masons, is not in fact a Lodge‑that said' Lodge can not receive members, nor the initiates even visit a chartered Lodge, after the termination of the dispensation, until they become members. For ourselves, we must be excused for declining to give in our adhesion to this contradictory, doctrine, until higher and more respectable authority than Lawrence Dermott can be quoted in its support.

 

In the answers to Bro. Jacoba and the Ohio correspondent, Bro. Moore calls special attention to the wording of Dermott's' dispensation, viz., that the petitioners are authorized to work after the manner of Masons, and not, as Masons. We grant, that it has' been said there are no two words in the English' language of precisely the same meaning, but we confess that, in this instance, we are scarcely able to draw the line of distinction, and we have no reason to believe that Dermott intended' anything more or less, than that the brethren were assembled as Masons, for the purpose of making Masons after the manner, in the manner, or by the rules of Masonry.

 

But, Bro. Moore tells us, they were not assembled as Masons. Then, in the nameof common sense, in what capacity were they assembled ? Could' they make Masons, if they were not working as Masons ? We owe it to the high character which Bro. Moore sustains, as an intelligent Masonic writer, to express the opinion that, in' 1848, he did in reality believe that the Ahiman Rezon was truly the Book of Constitutions‑that Lawrence Dermott. instead of being Deputy Grand Master of the spurious Grand Lodge,' in 1772, was the Deputy Grand Master of Masons in Londonthat the opinions of this Deputy were the highest authority which could be resorted to, and, hence, that the opinions of that dignitary, expressed in his letter to Philadelphia, were to be regarded as binding upon us at this day; but having seen the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

true law published in the Signet, in December, 1848, thereupon changed his views.

 

No other view will enable us to reconcile Bro. Moore of 1848, with Bro. Moore oú 1849.

 

Having shown, as we think, that there is no ancient authority for saying that Lodges under dispensation are not, for the, time being, Lodges clothed with all the authority and powers of Lodges under warrant, we proceed to add a few remarks upon the origin and character of the law which now govorng Lodges under dispensation, in the United States.

 

It is proper to state that but few copies of Anderson's Constitutions ever found their way into .his country; first, because the . work was of high cost, say thirty dollars, and second,. because the name‑Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons‑won upon the American Masons, and that spurious body sent a number, of charters to this country, accompanied by the Ahiman Rexon, purporting to be the ancient law, which book was, in some form or other, reprinted by most, if not all, the Grand Lodges. Smith's Ahiman Rezon, being the oldest American edition, was extensively quoted from and referred to as the highest authority, and, as a matter of course, all who believed the Athol Grand Lodge to be the true Grand Lodge of England, regarded; Dermott as the Deputy Grand Master of Masons in England, and were prepared to give to his opinions, as published by. Smith, the force and importance of instructions from the Grand. Lodge of England. 'Thus was the enormous system of establishing Lodges without installing the officers. introduced here.; It is true, the custom was not long confined to the term of forty: days, as stated by Preston,..‑or forty days once renewed, as stated by Dermott.

 

Nor could this rule have been beneficially adhered to.

 

There can be no doubt that, if this was ever a, regulation of the Grand Lodge of England, or of the Athol, Grand Lodge, it was adopted solely for the city of London, the forty days being given in order to afford time to prepare for. installation.

 

But this could not be adapted to America, where Lodges were being established in very remote situations, and hence, when the system was adopted; the time was extended., While the Grand Lodges continue to refuse the installation of officers workin& under dispensation, which we regard as an QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

469 innovation, those officers can not occupy seats in Grand Lodge, because the ancient law requires them to be first installed, and we think the Masters and Wardens of all Lodges in the world, except in America, are installed as soon after a warrant or dispensation is issued, as can be made convenient to the parties. Even the authority quoted by Bro. Moore, required almost immediate installation‑the rule laid down by Preston requires it, and, hence, we are forced to the conclusion that the American, system of suffering such Lodges to work twelve months before being constituted, is all wrong, and certainly without any adequate good results. We would not willingly authorize every subordinate officer, who may be authorized to issue dispensatious in vacation of the Grand Lodge, to constitute such Lodges; but, upon report being immediately made by him to the Grand Master, we think the latter officer should, in person or by appointment, have the Lodges constituted without delay. The ancient law required all Lodges to be constituted before doing any work, and we might well ask whether, by our secret rituals, we can, to this day, hold Masonic communication with any one who does not, in our peculiar way, satisfy us that lie has been made in a "just and regularly constituted Lodge." But did any Grand Lodge in. the United States ever intend to authotize seven or more brethren to congregate and make Masons in any other place than a regular Lodge?

 

We think not.

 

We suppose that no Grand Lodge, not even Dermott's bantling, ever intended that the rule established on this Subject, in 1663, the Earl of St. Albans Grand Master, and reenacted in 1717, at the organisation of the Grand Lodge of England, and which still remains in force, should be set at naught, or wantonly trampled under foot, by permitting Masons to be made anywhere but in regular Lodges ? No man,, made in any other way, can be received into a regular Lodge, in any part of the worldall must be regularly Initiated, Passed, and Raised in a just and legally constituted Lodge, or they can not be recognized as regular Masons.

 

We were Initiated, Passed, and Raised in " Owen Lodge," working under a dispensation. from the Grand Lodge of Kentucky.

 

We will suppose our iews of its powers and attributes are moulded by Bro. Moore, and we will further !TO

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

elucidate the subject by applying to the brother's Lodge,, in Boston, for admission as a visitor, supposing himself at the head of the Examining Committee, where something like the following dialogue would likely ensue Bro. Moore.‑Sir, do you claim to be a Mason ? Bro. Mitchell. ‑I do.

 

Bro. Moore.‑‑What Lodge were you made in? Bro. Mitchell.‑I was not made in a Lodge at all.

 

Bro. Moore.‑What claims have you, then, to be considered u Mason ? Bro. .Mitchell.‑I am a regular Mason, brother.

 

Bro. Moore.‑‑How can that be, when the ancient law declares that a regular Mason can only be made in a just and legally constituted Lodge ? Bro. Mitchell.‑That is true, but I was made in a Lod under dispensation, which you have proven to possess the power to make regular Masons, and you have clearly proven that it is not in fact, a Lodge.

 

L

 

Bro. Moore.‑That is all true, but you know that in the examination you must say, in that peculiar way known only.to Masons, that you have been regularly made in a just and legally ,constituted Lodge.

 

Bro. Mitchell.‑Masonry teaches me not to utter a falsehood, and I can not, in that solemn manner, say I was made in a regulm Lodge, when you have satisfied me that it was not in fact A Lodge.

 

Bro. Moore.‑Were you not regularly made? Bro. Mitchell.‑0h, I am a regular Mason, because I was made as you say regular Masons may be made; but I was not regularly made, because you have clearly proven that the brethren there assembled were only agents of the Grand Lodge or Grand Master, and not authorized to form a Lodge, ng even to work as Masons, but only after the manner of Masons, consequently, they not being regularly formed into a Lodge, I could not be regularly made.

 

Bro. Moore.‑Excuse me, if you please, I will ask the Lodge to send out another committee.

 

We conclude this lengthy article, by saying to Bro. Bond, QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

471 that we consider Lodges under dispensation regular Lodges, and we believe their officers should be immediately installed; but while we do not presume to ask the Grand Lodges in this country to depart from their established usage, though founded in error, we do ask that no attempt will ever be made to authorize initiations into Masonry, except in regular Lodges. We hold that Lodges under dispensation are not only legally, but regularly formed, and, therefore, possess, for the time being, all the powers and enjoy all the privileges of Lodges under charter, save and except the right of representation in Grand Lodge and being regularly formed, by order of the highest authority‑a Grand Lodge‑we say they can receive members, levy and collect dues, try and suspend or expel their own members, or non‑affiliated Masons residing within their jurisdiction. Yea, that it is as much their duty to do all these things as it would be if they were working under a perpetual charter.

 

It follows, therefore, that a brother who petitions for a dispensation to form a new Lodge, must not belong to any other Lodge when he takes his seat in the new one.

 

RFJECM CANDIDATFB FOR ADVAxcOC.,ax.

 

Mzkram, Tam., November, 1852.

 

Ban. Mrreuar r. .‑If a brother, from a personal pique, is blackballed for the third degree, by one vote, the balance of the Lodge believing him to be worthy, what course should the Lodge pursue in his case. Please answer through the 4nd. Y.

 

Why, brother, it is well understood that one blackball rejects in Masonry; and while it is the duty of every member of the Lodge to assume higher grounds than those which would lead him to reject an applicant solely on the ground of a personal pique, if a single blackball appear in the ballot, the candidate is rejected, and we have no right to question the objector; and,, most certainly, the action of the Lodge is at an end for the time being. There is no general law regulating the length of time which shall elapse before the rejected candidate for the second or third degree can again petition; and where there is no local law regulating this matter, we think the common practice is to suffer six or twelve months to elapse; but, in any event, the C2

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

rejected candidate must again petition, which petition mast take tN usual course.

 

RIGnM OF EXPELLED MASONS.

 

MissouRr, December 27, 1862.' To THE EDrron of TnE MAsoNio 'ò SiGvsr."‑DearBrotlur .‑As you are expected to know everything about Masonry, and to answer everybody's questions, I take the liberty of asking your views on the following points, to wit 1. Has a man who has been expelled from a Lodge, but who has taken his appeal to the Grand Lodge, a right to visit the Lodge before the decision of the appeal by the Grand Lodge! 2. Has a man thus expelled a right to introduce into the Grand Lodge, an his attorney, one who is not a Mason, or, if a Mason, one who is not a member of same Lodge in good standing I Respectfully and fraternally yours, In reply to the first question, we beg to remind our correspondent, and those for whose benefit he writes, that no expelled Mason can visit a Lodge.

 

And is not the man spoken of expelled?

 

Most assuredly he is; his right of appeal does not presuppose his right to set aside the action of the Lodge expelling him.

 

The Grand Lodge gives him the right to appeal, in order that his case may be reexamined by those who could not be influenced by local prejudices. And suppose the Grand Lodge shall decide that he has been improperly expelled, the very manner in which they treat the case, proves that in the interim he can only be treated as a legally expelled Mason. The Grand Lodge, by resolution, reinst6tes him to all the privileges of Masonry; and, certainly, he could not be reinstated to all those privileges, unless lie had been deprived of them. Every Lodge has the right to expel, and the Grand Lodge has a right to reinstate; but even the Grand Lodge can not fully reinstate all expelled Masons, for though it reinstate to all the privileges of Masonry, it can not reinstate to membership in the Lodge expelling.

 

Aside from all this, we hold that from and after the time when charges of unmasonic conduct are filed in the Lodge against a brother within its jurisdiction, that brother ceases to be in good standing, and can not visit until he is acquitted of those charges.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

4?9 In answer to the second question, we have to say, that in most jurisdictions the expelled Mason is permitted, on the trial of his appeal, to introduce any Master Mason in good standing as his attorney; but, of course, if he is not a member of the Lodge, he is tdniitted there by courtesy, not by right, for no brother can visit any Lodge without leave. Of course, a man who is not a Mason can not appear in Grand Lodge under any circum stances.

 

A non‑affiliated brother in Missouri, who has not paid dues in obedience to the law of the Grand Lodge, can not appear as attorney in Grand Lodge, because that law prohibits him the privilege of visiting any Lodge in that jurisdiction.

 

CAN CANDIDATES BE BALLOTED FOR AT CALLED MEETINGS} KErrnsEVaon, ILL. Having noticed, from time to time, in the Signet, a great many questions asked on different points of Masonic jurisprudence, if you will not deem it silly in me, I would like to get your opinion upon one or two points 1. When the By‑Laws of a Lodge specify but one regular meeting each month, can a ballot be spread, for either of the degrees, at any other time but that meeting? 2. When a brother petitions to be Passed or Raised, and is blackballed, how .Ong a time should elapse before a ballot could be spread for him again? By answering the above questions, you will much oblige your friend, R. C. C. ‑ To the first question, we say that the Grand Lodge of Illinois has clearly set its face against hurrying candidates through the degrees, and though we have not a copy of the By‑Laws of that Grand body, we hazard nothing in saying, that it is the duty of Lodges in that jurisdiction to ballot for candidates only at regular stated meetings, and this is in conformity with the general practice in the United States; the reason is obvious. Of the time of holding the regular monthly meetings, every member is apprised by the By‑Laws of his Lodge, and it is hi duty to be present. The harmony and well being of the Lodge require that the most vigilant care be observed to admit no one by initiation, advancement, or affiliation, who would not be fellowshiped by all; but, if ballots can be properly taken at a called meeting, this important end may be defeated.

 

We say, then, that a ballot for advancement can not be properly taken at a called meeting of a Lodge in Illinois.

 

X74

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

To the second question, we have to say, that the ancient law is silent upon the subject. Nor do we know that any courso of practice has been so general as to settle the matter by common law usage.

 

We think, however, the most general practice is to require the candidate to wait the same length of time prescribW for those rejected on application for initiation.

 

CAN A LODGE APPEAL FROM THE DECISIONS OF ITS MASTERò ST. Loofa, Mo., January,, ;SM DP. MITCHELL.‑Dear Brother.‑Please answer the following: Will the ancienò nsages of the Craft justify an appeal by a Lodge from the decision of its Master? The Old Charges, as also the Ancient Regulations, are silent upon the subject mooted by our correspondent. It must be remembered that the present Grand Lodge system dates back only to 1717, and, therefore, we should not expect to find rules for governing Lodges under this system, of an older date. But after a somewhat careful examination of the history of the Grand and subordinate Lodges of England, from 1717 to 1804, we are unable to find any rule laid down which has a direct bearing upon this subject.

 

We know, however, that the rules for the government of the Grand Lodge of England were modeled somewhat after the rules of Parliament, and, hence, we should be inclined to believe that in all cases where ancient Masonic law was not involved, an appeal from the decision of the Grand Master would have been, and, probably, was entertained. It is idle to talk about conducting a legislative assembly in harmony and order, without appropriate rules., and it must be admitted that the rituals and ancient usages of Masonry make no provision for the government of legislative bodies of Masons.

 

Some Grand Lodes in the United States condemn, in strong terms, the use of Parliamentary rules in tbo government of Grand Lodges.

 

We think, however, that th* denunciation should extend only to terms‑the names given to the rules‑for these very Grand bodies are governed by Par, liamentary rules, as is every Grand Lodge in the world. . &1t QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

476 these rules are by no means as necessary for particular or subordinate Lodges, because they are not, in the proper sense, legislative bodies. We think, however, that in both Grand and subordinate Lodges, there are cases where an appeal from the decision of the presiding officer could not be entertained, and that in subordinate Lodges, where there is less necessity, it would, nevertheless, be competent to make a rule allowing an appeal from the decision of the Master, in certain cases.

 

We will explain.

 

The Grand Master, as also the Master of a particular Lodge, has in charge the Book of Constitutions; it is made his imperative duty to see to it that the ancient lavas of the Fraternity are lived up to;‑ he superintends and directs the manner in which the rituals are to be performed, being always bound by the Landmarks of the Order; and, hence, it follows that he can not be dependent upon others for a proper construction of the ancient laws, lie must be governed and govern the Lodge by the laws of Masonry, as he understands them, and, therefore, in such cases, no appeal can be entertained from his decision, but in all cases where the laws of Masonry are not involved, we can see no impropriety, but, on the contrary, safety, in allowing an appeal from his decisions.

 

The legislative business of tie Grand Lodge, and the fiscal business of the subordinate Lodge, are certainly safer in the hands of the majority, than if permitted to be influenced by undue powers vested in any one member. The Grand Lodge of England has ever recognized and maintained the right of a majority to rule; and there is no one rule more repeatedly and clearly defined, than that which subjects the Grand Master to the will of the Grand Lodge.

 

Again and again, the Grand Lodge has declared that the Grand Master shall do this and shall do that, therefore, we conclude, that he has ever been regarded as the instrument, the Iòxecutive officer‑first, to see that the ancient laws are adhered to, and, second, to obey the commands of the Grand Lodge, in seeing that its edicts are carried out.

 

We conclude by saying, that an appeal should not be entertained in cases where the decision involves a. point in Masonic usage; but in the businesf transactions of the Lodge, that body may, with great propriety, reserve the right of appealing from the decision of the Master !76

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

MUST THE MASTER FIRST SERVE AS WARDEN? ST. Lours, Mo., February. 1863.

 

Ban. MITCUSLL :‑By ancient usage, can a Mason who has not served Y Warden, be eligible for the office of Master in a warranted Lodge f Fraternally, This question compels us to expose oue of the most glaring of the thousand evidences of Dermott's dishonesty, and the ignorance or corruption of the Grand Lodge of "Ancient Masons," by whom Dermott's garbled publications were indorsed, We have repeatedly used strong language against the author of the dhiman Rezon, and, doubtless, we have sometimes been censured by those who have long labored under the mistaken impression that the dhiman Rezon contains truly the Ancient Constitutions; to all such we say, examine carefully the testi. mony which we are about to introduce, and then say whether the English language contains words of opprobrium too harsh or severe to be fulminated against this innovator into the body. of Masonry. Before proceeding further, we _beg again to impress upon the minds of our readers, that there is a vast difference between the Old Charges and the Old Regulations, The first constitute and have ever been considered the immeò` morial, unalterable laws of Masonry; in other words, the written Landmarks of the Order, which never have, and never can be altered or amended.

 

The power to meddle with this code, except to give the written Landmarks a fair and spiritual construction, nowhere exists. Whilst the Old Regulations have been declared subject to amendment (provided, always, that an Ancient Landmark be not removed), by the earliest action of the Grand Lod‑e of England, justified and sustained in so doing by the precedents of 1663 ; and hence it is that the old and new Regulations are referred to and quoted by all the old .

 

Masonic writers.

 

Those which are to be regarded as the Old Regulations, are such as were collated by Anderson, in obedience to the order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722the Regulations then believed to be in force, being such as Anderson and the Committee of fourteen collected from the old manuscripts that were brought forward from different parts of the kingdom.

 

The new Regulations are all those which QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

477 have been made since 1722.

 

When we speak of ancient usage, we may refer to the Old Charges or Regulations, for we mean by this term, to refer to that which was the custolu, the practice, the manner, in olden times, whether written or traditional.

 

From the foregoing it will, of course, be understood that when we show what.was the law as contained in the Old Charges, we show what the law now is, and must continue to be, there being no power to alter or amend it. But when we quote from the Regulations, old or new, they are only to be considered paramount, so far as long and continued practice renders them, so to speak, the common law of the Fraternity, and even then they may be amended or altered, should a pressing necessity exist.

 

From the Old Charges, as collated by Anderson, we make the following extract No brother can be a Warden until he has passed the part of a Fellow Craft nor a Master until he has acted as warden; nor Grand warden until he has been Master of a Lodge.

 

(See Signet, vol. i., p. 300.) There is no ambiguity in the language of this law.

 

Particular Lodges formerly conferred only the Entered Apprentice degree‑they made Masons, the Grand Lodge, only, conferring the other degrees; and, hence, a Fellow Craft was eligible to the office of Warden.

 

The law now in force, requiring a brother to be a Master Mason in order to serve as Warden, or hold any other office, is not *a violation of the old law, as above quoted, because that does not contemplate more than to declare that the brother must be at least a Fellow Craft.

 

But how stands the matter in relation to the ‑iuestion propounded by our correspondent ?

 

The custom throt.,7hout the United States is, we think, with only two or three exceptions, to consider every Master Mason, who is a member of the Lodge, eligible to the office of Master, and yet, in this very practice one of the written Landmarks, is removed, violated, trampled under foot, and totally disregarded, a thing which no man or set of men have the right to do.

 

It will be observed that the law makes no exceptions ; it does not provide for a departure from it in the formation of new Lodges, or Lodges in abeyance, Lnd not in fact Lodges.

 

These "agents of the Grand Lodgo, 478

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

or Grand Master," authorized to work on trial or probahori and make Masons, were not then thought of. All Lodges were, regular, constituted, warranted Lodges ; and Masons made in any other way were deemed to be clandestine.

 

But now, in this land of progressive Masonry, we are told that any Master, Mason may be appointed Master of a new Lodge, though he must not be installed, and that any mere Master Mason may bo elected and installed Master of a chartered Lodge.

 

But, we will now proceed to show the origin of the practice in violation of the fundamental law, as above stated. Our a readers will agree with us in saying, that if any man under= takes to present to the world an immemorial law or Landmark differing from the foregoing, it would be incumbent on him tb' show that the law, as contained in Anderson's Constiltdiom, was incorrectly or falsely collated, or that it was an invention of the author.

 

Dermott wrote just thirty years after Anderson; but with all his preeminence for slander and misrepresentation,, with all his efforts to throw suspicion around the Grand Lodge of England, and to excite distrust of its founders, he nowhere undertakes to discredit the authenticity of any portion of the Old Charges.

 

This, we apprehend, would have been rather& hazardous undertaking for a man of no other character than that of an adventurer and innovator, especially when he was' aware that some of the most learned men in England, incu, too, whose character stood above reproach, were concerned in the collection of the old laws of Masonry.

 

But Dermott was not to be deterred from his purpose.

 

To insure the prosperity of his spurious Grand Lodge, it was incumbent on some one to falsely charge the Grand Lodge of England with violating the ancient laws, and of making Masons by modern rules, and for' this dirty work a more willing or accomplished tool could not be found than himself.

 

And we need not add that he did not shrink from the task.

 

But it was necessary for his Grand' Lodge to have an ancient code of laws, so called.

 

He had no" old documents to refer to; the manuscripts' were all ie the' archives of the Grand Lodge of England, from which body he' stood expelled ; the old brethren whohad sent them forward In 1720‑21, were dead, aud,..therefore, lie had access to Andersoiei QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

479 blication, as sanctioned by the Grand Lodge of England; )lc from that book what suited his purposes, without giving credit, and added such as lie thought would tend to make his Grand Lodge popular, and, failing to say where this code came from, left his followers to infer that they had been in the possession of the Ancient Masons, time out of mind. And this is the man, and his the Grand Lodge, that has caused all, or nearly all the innovations and departures from the Ancient Landmarks in the United States. His Grand Lodge sent warrants here, and he flooded the _country with his Ahiman Rezon; its doctrines and precepts became the settled doctrines and precepts of the land. Every brother who published a Chart or Masonic book of any kind, referred to and quoted from the Ahiman Rezon; and, until the Signet made its appearante, every Masonic magazine or paper quoted from the Ahiman ‑Rezon, as the highest authority‑the English Coustitu= tions; and, even to this day, these teachers are slow to admit that the horse is not fifteen feet high.

 

We make the following extract from Dermott's AhtmanRezon, , London edition of 1801, page 33 The wardens are chosen from among the Master Masons, and no brother can be a Master of a Lodge till he has acted as warden somewhere, except in extraordinary cases. or when a Lodge is to be formed, and none such is to be had, then: three Master Masons, though never Masters nor Wardens of Lodges before, may be constituted Master and wardens of that new Lodge.

 

The reader can not fail to see the design in the alterations here made in the old law. By the former a brother must first serve as Warden before lie could be the Master, and no exceptions are made; therefore it did not exactly suit the policy of the Depnty Grand Master of the spurious and illegal Grand Lodge.

 

He wished to be at liberty to plant a new Lodge when and where he had the opportunity, and that without delay; lie was engaged in beating up for volunteers under his banner, and the good old way of requiring a brother to have some experience and qualifications to preside over a Lodge, was altogether too slow a way to make new Lodges, to a man in a hurry, as lie was, to build up a new Grand Lodge, with an ancient name, and at the same time to put down the only oppo. sition‑‑the true Crand Lodge of England.

 

American Masons DSO

 

QITFFTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

have not only adopted Dermott as the standard, but their love; of progressive Masonry has been such, that they have even imitated their file leader in his practice of improving upon the Old Landmarks. It must be borne in mind that Dermott did not undertake to violate the Old Landmarks, unless it becaTne necessary.

 

He required that the Master should have served ass Warden, if such a brother could be found, but if a past Warden was not to be had, then lie authorized the old law to be set' aside.

 

Upon this the American Grand Lodges have improved, by failing to require any inquiries to be made, whether s past Warden could be found or not.

 

We, at present, do not remember a sin ale Grand Lodge in the United States, that does, not consider any mere Master Mason, whether he has served` As Warden or not, eligible for the office of Master.

 

We conclude by saying to our correspondent, that we have, and can have but one paramount law; that we have, and must. continue to look upon the first published code, viz., that by Anderson, at the order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722, as that code. That no man or set of men ever undertook to question its genuineness, garble, or misquote that law for thirty years after its publication, and then it was done by an expelled Mason, a man destitute of moral principle, and, there fore, c‑‑ltitled to no sort of credit.

 

But even granting his char after had been ever so fair, his testimony is worthless, because, it was denounced from 1752 to 1813, and when the union took place at the latter date, his writings, his authority, and his very name was treated with silent contempt by the united Grand Lodge of England.

 

We say, then, that however universal the practice in this country may be, or however long it may have been continued, every Lodge that elevates a brother to the, chair of Master, who has not served as Warden, removes one of the Old Landmarks; for be it remembered that when we speak of long and universal usage constituting common law, we do not mean that such a law can exist in derogation of a Landmark. Common usage makes Regulations, but it can not make Old Charges, and there is no such things as new Charges.

 

Regula.. tions are rules which may be changed, altered, amended, or .

 

added to, to suit the country and times.

 

In England, Francä, QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

481 Scotland, Ireland, Russia, Prussia, etc., it might be necessary and proper to make a new Regulation, so that the laws of our Institution should not conflict with the peculiar laws of either of the States, while the same Regulation might not be proper or admissible in the United States. But whether in Europe or America the power nowhere exists to dispense with that portion of the Old Charges,.which requires that every candidate for Masonry shall express a belief in God, simply because this is one of the Old Landmarks, no one of which can ever be removed ; they constitute the great foundation upon which the whole superstructure is erected, and Masonry would crumble into ruin, were it in the power of innovators to tear away, one by one, the foundation‑stones of the noble edifice.

 

In a moment of wild fanaticism, the Grand Lodge of England has attempted to remove a Landmark, by striking out the word "born," so that she could make Masons of liberated slaves; but in this she. will signally fail, for while every other country takes pride in, looking back upon the purity of Masonry in England. in other, days, all will treat with indignation and scorn the unholy effort to palm upon them the material for our building, which stands, rejected time out of mind.

 

A Mason must have been free‑born,, not because A. B. or C. thinks such a man more or less respect‑, able, but because such is one of the fundamental laws.

 

Andi so, likewise, a brother to be eligible for Master, must first servo as Warden, whether he is thereby better qualified to preside or not, because the fundamental, the immemorial, the immovable law requires it.

 

RAIdATING, PROFANE SWEARING, EM Mo., January 21,185& BRO. MITCHELL: ‑l wish yon would publish the following questions, and your answers, in the next number of your valuable paper‑the Signd.

 

Is it Masonically right to reject a Master Mason who is in good standing, when be petitions a Lodge for membership? Can a ballot be renewed after the worshipful Master has declared the petition rojected, for membership, or for any of the degrees? Does it require a clear ballot to elect a Master Mason to become a member of any Lodge? Is not profane swearing to be considered gross unmasonic conduct?

 

Could .s. member be tried, suspended, or expelled for such conduct, when habitually pram ~?

 

Yours fraternally,

 

M. 11 si 482

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

To the first question, we say, it is clearly the right of every Lodge to say who shall, and who shall not become a member thereof, and, Hence, any member of it has the right to deposit a blackball, when application for affiliation is made. A brother may be in good Masonic standing, and in most respects a good man, and yet unfit to become a member of a particular Lodge. We have known a good man rejected, for no other reason than that he was known to be contrary, troublesome, and annoying to the ordinary business of a Lodge, and we could not say the objection was not sufficient, for it is the bounden duty of every member to guard the harmony and well‑being of the Lodge. Of course, it must be borne in mind that a rejection for affiliation does not impair the Masonic standing of a brother.

 

To the second question, we say, a ballot can not be renewed after the Master has declared the applicant rejected, whether for a degree, or membership, until the usual time has elapsed. But as there is no ancient rule governing in this case, we can not say how long a time should elapse, but, in the absence of a local law, we know of no better rule than that which governs in rejected candidates for initiation, viz., twelve months.

 

To the third question, we say, it does'require a clear ballot, a unanimous vote, to elect a candidate for initiation, advancement, or membership. We hold that no brother, not a member, can enter any Lodge without the unanimous consent of all the members present. A brother can not visit a Lodge if one member objects‑the harmony of the Lodge must be preserved.

 

To the fourth question, we say, profane swearing is clearly a violation of the principles, teaching, and rules of Masonry, and while it is the imperative duty of the Lodge, and of the members individually, to use all suasive means to induce a reformation in the offending brother, it is certainly the duty, as well ss privilege, oú the Lodge to deal with the brother, provided the milder means have been tried and failed. We think, however, that there are but few cases where it would be right and proper to expel a brother for profane swearing. Most men swear from habit, not meaning what they say.

 

We were once a profane" swearer, and we have often been made to tremble with fear, and. feel poignant self‑abasement; when suddenly reminded of the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

488' import of our indecent, ungentlemanly, and God‑insulting language‑we never meant what we said at such times. Masonry produced a reformation in us, and, if judiciously applied, it is capable of reforming any and all, except the blasphemer‑ho, who so far denies the existence and power of Jehovah, as to deliberately and knowingly defy His vengeance.

 

Such a man deserves to be expelled, for he may be regarded as being beyond the pale of moral influence and kindly suasion ; but, in all other cases, we think the punishment should first be admonition privately, then admonition in open Lodge, then trial and reprimand, and all this failing, we think he should be suspended until he ceases thus to offend against God and our Institution.

 

In this connection we feel called upon to say, that much too little attention is paid to a solemn injunction which every Master Mason receives in the Lodge room, after being raised to this, sublime degree.

 

How many of us faithfully and with brotherly kindness warn each other, whenever, and in whatever we stray away from the path of rectitude.

 

Alas l how many, on the contrary, go behind the brother's back and make charges or complaints of improper conduct, without trying the all‑powerful influence of private, confidential, brotherly admonition.

 

Yea, we fear there are some brother Masons who take more pleasure in joining with the world in condemning a Mason's conduct, than in using a brother Mason's influence to throw a veil over his faults, and aid in a reformation.

 

If in this we are not mistaken, if we have not judged too harshly, how strikingly do the examples referred to, appeal to us all to renew our covenant of love, and more faithfully practice Charity‑that Charity which vaunteth not, is not puffed up, but which is of long sufferingthe strong arm of Masonry.

 

FINANCIAL. DI4FICULTDM‑‑H0W SETTLED.‑CAN A MASON PASS MMSELF WHO CAN NO't USE HIS ARMS? LAKE ViEw, ST. MARY's PARisa, LA.

 

DEAR SIR AND BROTHER :‑It is not my wish or desire to give you much trouble, but when I became a Mason, I did so with the determination of being an set:se, working Mason; this explanation will be an excuse for the trouble I have heretotore given you.

 

I am happy to say, the questions answered by you have been 484

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

highly appreciated by the Masons in this section, and are considered beaoaa lights by all who are lucky enough to get hold of the Signet.

 

Your answer in the September number, as to where the right of trial exidted whether in Blue Lodge or Chapter, was read by many here with great satisfaa Lion.

 

The neat questions which I now submit, and for which I seek answers, will, l have no doubt, be considered by you as posers.

 

1. A difficulty of a financial nature occurs between two Masons, neither of then being members of,a Lodge. But the Lodge, under whose ju?1Adiction they both live, takes cognizance of their difficulty, and brings them before the Lodge; they both appear; but one says he will not suffer the Lodge to settle the difficulty, the other is willing. Can the Lodge compel the brother to come to a settlement; or, in other words, would his not complying with the wish of the Lodge to settle, be sufficient to bring a charge of uumasonic conduct against him; and if snob charge be brought, ought the Lodge act on it? 2. A man appears in the aute‑room of our Lodge, accompanied by a Master. Mason, whom we know well, who vouches for the stranger as a Master Mason, having sat in a Lodge with him four or five years since; but the stranger is afflicted in the arms by rheumatism to such an extent that he is unable to use them; he is willing to answer any questions that may be asked him; he is also ready to give them any and every proof in his power that he is what he professes to be.

 

Would we be justified in admitting this man or not? Fraternally, Our answer to the first question, is as follows: Masonry, so far as we understand its teachings, does not deprive its members, of any civil right possessed by them previous to their connection with the Order, neither does its requirements come in conflict with the laws of the land. The above premises are taken. for granted.

 

We think, that when two Masons have a financial difficulty, it is the duty of the members of the Order, in the first place, either as individual members, or as a Lodge, to use their best endeavors to effect a settlement: and, in order to effect this, they may, as has been done in the case under consideration, bring both parties before them in Lodge, and there, by every means in their power consistent with honor, endeavor to bring about an amicable adjustment of the difficulty. It is the duty of the contending brethren, to give good heed to the advice given them, and, by some concessions and sacrifices on the part of each, evince a desire that their relations as brethren of the same household should continue undisturbed.

 

But if, after the r QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

4'8:) counsel of the brethren, one of the party should refuse to leave a settlement of the matter in dispute to the Lodge, and determine to have recourse to law, then should the Lodge see to it, that they so conduct their suit, without malice and rancor, that the enemies of our beloved Institution may have no cause to rejoice.

 

Whilst we would deeply regret to see two brethren enter into a lawsuit, we should, at the same time, deny the right to punish them. It is a right guaranteed t0 all citizens to appeal to the laws of their country for redress, and, most assuredly, a Lodge would be overstepping her bounds, were she to resort to intimidation, in order to prevent one of her members from exer cising that right.

 

In all matters connected with Masonry, we admit that it is the imperative duty of the brethren to abide by the action of the Grand and subordinate Lodges, under whose jurisdiction they may for the time live.

 

But this is a case outside the control of a Lodge; and, while we assert that brethren ought to do all in.their power to adjust "difficulties of a financial nature," which may arise among them, we are clearly of the opinion that a Lodge would be acting harshly, were it to coerce a brother to abide by her decision in the case above alluded to, and that she could not sustain herself before her Grand Lodge.

 

In conclusion, we submit the following from the Old Charges ‑the written Landmarks of the Order But with respect to Brothers and Fellows at law, the Master and brethren abould kindly offer their mediation, which ought to be thankfully submitted to by the contending brethren; and, if that submission is impracticable, they must, however. carry on their process, or lawsuit, without wrath and rancor (not in the common way), saying or doing nothing which may hinder Brotherly Love and good officer,, to be renewed and continued, that all may see the benign influence of Masonry‑as all true Masons have done from the beginning of the world, and will do to the end of time. (Anderson's tb"itutions. See also Masonic Signd, vol. i., p. 303.) In answering the second question, we would say that, as a general rule, when a stranger applies for admission to a Lodge as a visitor, it is the duty of the Worshipful Master to submit him to a strict examination ; but if he be accompanied by a Master Mason, " who is well known," and is willing to vouch for the 486

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

stranger as a Master Mason, he having sat in Lodge with hire some four or five years before, then it is clear that a Lodge has lawful information that, at the time referred to, the applicant e as recognized as a Mason. The stranger then comes forward and states that he is ready and willing to give such additional proof as may be required, or that is in his power, that he is what he professes to be; but, unfortunately for himself, he is afflicted in the arms to such an extent, by rheumatism, that he is unable to use them, and on this account alone, a Lodge doubts the propriety of receiving him as a visitor.

 

The fact of his being thus afflicted, whilst it would, according to ancient law, be an insuperable bar to his initiation, does not, in the present case, furnish any grounds for his rejection. We take it for granted, that at the time of his making he was " a perfect man, having no maim or defect about his body, that would render him incapable of learning the art" of Masonry; and if sickness and disease have since rendered him helpless, the fact furnishes an additional incentive to the brethren, to‑extend to him that sympathy and courtesy which lie has a right to expect, and when bestowed in a proper spirit, is so grateful to the feelings of the recipient. That this is in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Order every Mason will at once admit.

 

Were it otherwise, we should erase from our Trestle‑Board that beautiful design which teaches us to soothe the unhappy, sympathize with the misfortunes of our brethren, and compassionate their miseries; and, by so doing, we would shatter our beautiful fabric into a thousand pieces. Masonry would present but few charms to us, if her protecting Regis was to be withdrawn, if sickness, or disease deprived us of the use of any or all our limbs. What a melancholy terming. tion to the labors of many a devoted Craftsman, who has spent long years in the endeavor to dispense true Masonic light and knowledge, if, when old age, with its too frequent accompaniments, sickness and disease, overtake him, when ‑his days of usefulness are passed, he should be thrown among the rubbish, as unfit for further use.

 

But, thanks to that God who inspired our first Grand Master to found our beloved Instiò tution, Masonry teaches us higher and holier duties‑‑duties QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

487 which we owe to our Creator, our country, and the whole human family, but above all of the human family, in a more especial manner, to our brethren. These duties are clearly and forcibly illustrated‑they are the foundation of our Masonic Temple. Let us see that they be preserved in all their purity, and not tainted by the slime of selfishness.

 

With this view of the subject, we say.(to use the language of our correspondent), the Lodge would be justifiable, after subjecting the brother to an examination with a view to h1A present standing in the Order, in admitting him as a visitor.

 

FOR WHAT CAUSE CAN A MASON BE DEPRIVED OF MASONIC PRIVILME3 t ST. Louis, Mo., March 22, 1853.

 

BRo. Mrrus mx ‑‑Can & Mason be deprived of those general privileges which he acquires when he becomes a Master Mason, except for immoral conduct, or a violation of his general duties as a member of the Fraternity T Are not all laws barsh, arbitrary, and in opposition to the spirit of our Order, that would prevent a Mason from withdrawing from his Lodge, or, if nonaffiliated, that would punish him for declining to attach himself to a Lodge, or oontribute to the Charity Fund.

 

Fraternally,

 

S.

 

The answer to the first question is, we think, plain and simple. No Mason can be censured who lives in obedience to the moral law, and who performs all his duties as a Mason. On the contrary, we should rather say that such an one deserves to rank high among the " good and true." The second question involves principles and consequences, the right understanding of which is of vital importance to the peace, harmony, and well‑being, if not to the perpetuity of Masonry. If our Institution has for its government a code of laws, without the power to enforce obedience to its mandates, then is its foundation laid upon sand, and liable to be swept away by the tide of popular will.

 

If, in this progressive age, men are permitted stealthily to enter the Holy of Holies of the Temple, and blot from the record book the" Landmarks which their fathers have set" and institute, in their stead, statutary laws which better minister to the pride, ease. and convenience of nominal Masons; if they are permitted to make 488

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

rules which pander to the baser passions engendered by the love of gold, then may we look forward to the day when the strong arm of the Great Founder of our Order will be withdrawn from its support, and soon one stone upon another shall not be found to designate the spot where once stood the proudest, the most glorious moral edifice the world ever saw. if all Masons have the right to demit whenever they choose, then may the time come when so large a number will withdraw, should Masonry become unpopular. as to leave large districts destitute of workmen. Even without this privilege, have thousands, in times gone by, Judas‑like, betrayed their trust, and, with hearts filled with venom, attempted to sting the hand that succored them.

 

Time and again has Masonry, like Christianity, encountered opposition, until its cowardly members left its light but dimly burning in the‑ hearts of so few of the faithful, that impending ruin seemed to threaten it on all fides.

 

If this state of things has been brought about when the Institution was governed by its old and wholesome laws, how much more the danger when the practice is gaining ground, to trample on the old laws, and make new ones, under the pretext of suiting the spirit of the age.

 

And why may not our fears be realized, if the present popular theory becomes the settled law, viz., that non‑affiliated Masons are entitled to all the general privileges and immunities of Masonry, while, at the same time, they are released from all obligations to do the work of Lodges, contribute to the Charity Fund, assist in defraying the expenses incident to the Association, and from any and everpthing not agreeable, or pro lable to their selfish views.

 

As Chairman of the Correspondence Committee. we felt it to be our duty, in 1847, to call the earnest attention of the Grand Lodge of Missouri to the alarming and growing evils resulting $‑om the present system of granting demits, and the exemption of non‑affiliated Masons from Masonic duties. We attempted to show that the whole thing was wrong, and that non‑affiliated Masons could not thereby be exempted from any of their original Masonic duties.

 

We took the ground that, as they enjoyed all the general privileges; they should be required to bear an equal share of the general burdens; and, hence, we QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

48'9 recommended that they be required to contribute to the Charity Fund an amount equal to the dues paid by working members; and, for a failure to comply with this reasonable and just requisition, we asked that the ties which bound us to them should be severed. The Grand Lodge sustained our views, and imposed a tax on all who were known to be able to pay. This law and our report were violently assailed in most of the Grand Lodges having a Correspondence Committee. We were gravely told that we were right in saying it was the solemn duty of every Mason to belong to a Lodge, and contribute to the Charity Fund; even the validity and force of the ancient law, which we quoted, was not denied, but they said " we have no right to compel Masons to give charity;" that Masons should be left free to give, or not, as they may please.

 

In our report upon the same subject, in 18.50, we undertook to show that our Institution possessed all the power necessary to enforce obedience to its laws, or the known duties of its members; and, at this period, we had the gratification of knowing, that while the Grand Lodge of Missouri was suffering the castigation of her sisters, generally, and many of its own members were denouncing our doctrine. and sympathizing with the independent non‑affiliated brethren, Florida nobly came forward in vindication of the ancient law, and levied a similar tax. In 1851, we were cheered by reports from several Grand Lodges who had retraced their steps, and declared in favor of the principle.

 

And now, we think it may be safely said that at least one‑third of the Grand Lodges concur in our views, and many others are on the anxious bench.

 

As it is of the utmost importance that the action of the Grand Lodges should be uniform upon this subject, we shall proceed, briefly, to bring forward such evidence as we hereto fore have, and do now rely upon for the correctness of our views. This being done, we may, or may, not, as we happen to feel, pursue the subject with such additional comments as may ò,eem to be to the point.

 

The Ancient Charges are, of course, silent upon the subject of non‑affiliated Masons; first, because there was then no such thing known as a Mason's withdrawing from Lodge duties, QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

when notified of a meeting.; and, second; because permanent local Lodges, with By‑Laws, etc., were not known. But one of the oldest Regulations of a Grand Assembly of Masons now on record, was made under the following circumstances: When Cromwell came into power, Charles 1. was beheaded, and Charles. II., then Prince of Wales, escaped into France, and remained in exile, during which time he was made a Freemason, and witnessed many of the advantages growing out of the Association, and when lie was restored, in 1660, he openly espoused the Order, and did much to advance its prosperity, by encouraging a revival.

 

In 1663, he wrote a most remarkable instrument (see Signet, vol. ii., p. 487), which was intended as a charter for the Masons, and under it a Grand Assembly was held on the 27th December, of that year, when Henry Jermyn, Earl of St. Albans, was chosen Grand Master, who appointed Sir John Denham, Surveyor General, and Mr. Christopher (afterward Sir Christopher) Wren, and Mr. John Webb, Grand Wardens.

 

At this Assembly, among other things, the followings Regulations were adopted 1. That no person. of what degree soever, be made or accepted a Freemason, unless in a regular Lodge, whereof one to be a Master or warden in that limit or division where such Lodge is kept, and another to be a Craftsman in the trade of Freemasonry.

 

4. That every person, who is now a Freemason, shall bring to the Master a note of the time of his acceptation, to the end that the same may be enrolled in such priority of placeas the brother deserves; and that the whole company and fellows may be better known to each other.

 

That the custom of enrolling their names, at the time of making, had long existed among Masons, there car‑ be no reasonable doubt, and the reenactment of this old rule had become necessary, only because the civil wars, which had so long distracted England, caused the Masons to disband, and the Society to dwindle into almo‑A utter ruin. This registry of names was evidently intended to accomplish the same ends which are now obtained through membership, in local Lodges.

 

No one can believe that those who failed or refused to comply with this edict were permitted to enjoy equal privileges with the obedient and faithful; for it will he observed, that the terms of QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

491 the law are imperative‑4' every Mason shall register his name "and thereby place himself in a condition to be recognized and treated as one of the Fraternity ; and it follows that disobedience cut them off from the benefits and privileges pertaining to the Order.

 

The nest Regulation to which we call attention, we find in Anderson's Constitutions, by whom it is called the " Ninth Article of the Old Regulations;" and, of course, it was so regarded by the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722, when it was first published.

 

It reads as follows No set or number of brethren shall withdraw or separate themselves from the Lodge in which they were made, or were afterward admitted members, unless the Lodge becomes too numerous ; nor even then, without a dispensation from the Grand Master or Deputy, and when thus separated, they must either immediately join themselves to such other Lodge that they shall like best, or else obtain the Grand Master's warrant to join in forming a new Lodge, to be regularly constituted in due time.' We think no one can misunderstand the meaning of the above. No one can withdraw or separate from his Lodge, unless the Lodge becomes too numerous; but even then he can not do so upon his own judgment of its propriety, but he must obtain permission from the Grand Master, or Deputy.

 

But what further must he do?

 

He does not even then acquire the privilege of retiring to his warm fire‑side, and there ‑fold his arms in luxury and ease, whilst others of his brethren are engaged in doing the work of the Lodge.

 

Far from it.

 

It is made his imperative duty either to join another Lodge, or assist in forming a new one; thus showing, beyond the possibility of a doubt, that " drones in the Masonic hive " were not permitted.

 

The foregoing ancient law does not refer to those brethren who are called to travel, or who remove beyond the jurisdiction of their Lodge. Anderson speaks of an immemorial custom of granting a diploma to all of this latter class, and that usage makes it their duty to join another Lodge as soon as they locate or fix their residence in the vicinity or jurisdiction of one, and a failure to do so releases the Craft from " obligations 'Anderson's Canditutiow, edition 1756, p. 313 ; also, Signd, vol. ii., p. h" 492

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

to give them work :" in other words, absolves the Fraternity from all Masonic obligations to them.

 

If we chose to rely upon the Ancient Regulations above quoted, we think no one could doubt the right of Grand Lodges to prohibit the subordinates from granting demits, except far the two causes mentioned, viz., to travel, or when the Lodge becomes too numerous; and it is equally clear that the same Grand bodies have not only the right, but they are commanded by the old usage to require all non‑affiliated Masons to connect themselves with Lodges, or contribute an equal amount to the Charity Fund, and, for a failure to do so, to sever the fraternal ties. But we will furnish further evidence that this branch of the American system is in direct opposition to the practice of the Grand Lodge of England, whose precedents have higher claims to universal approval than those of any other governing head.

 

Those who are familiar with the history of the Grand Lodge of England, can not fail to remember that the principle for which we contend, has been, at all periods, sustained by that Grand body. Very soon after its organization, that Grand Lodge instituted a system for the collection and disbursement of a Grand Charity Fund, to which all the members were asked to contribute, and those who were not affiliated were commanded to come forward and register their names, for which they paid a specified sum, to go to the Grand Charity Fund.

 

At the Grand Lodge, on December 2nd, 1741 (Morton Grand Master), it was Resolved, That, before the brethren proceed to businees in any Committee of Charity, all the laws relating to the disposal of the General Charity of this Society be first read ; and that, for the future, no petition shall be received, fenlen sexy brother +hall, at the time of signing the same, be a member of some regular Lodge, aisd & na+ne of such, his Lodge, be always spcif6ed.' Here is a statute made in strict obedience to the old usage, and the Grand Lodge of England rigidly enforced it, and others of a similar character. No brother was allowed to draw a dollar from the Charity Fund, unless he was a member of A, Lodge; and, to this day, no one except non‑resident foreigners Anderson's Cbrulitutione, edition of 1756, p. 303; also, Signet, vol. il., p. 13L QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

483 can draw from that fund, unless he is a member of a Lodge. But, as before intimated, this is not an isolated case, where tho Grand Lodge has made distinctions between working and nonworking, or non‑paying members. On one occasion, if not more, the Grand Lodge determined to raise funds from nonaffiliated Masons, to assist in erecting a Grand hall. On another ,)ccasion, funds were needed to sustain the female school under its patronage and control; and, in both instances, the Grand Lodge commanded all her subordinates in the kingdom, to require all Masons within their respective jurisdictions to come forward and register their names, and become paying members. But the Grand Lodge of England did not suffer this law to remain on its statute book a dead letter, as has the Grand Lodge of Missouri.

 

We suppose that there was quite as strong opposition to the law in England, as has been witnessed in Missouri. The outsid8, non‑paying, do‑nothing Masons, have everywhere a powerful influence upon the Lodges; and they are generally the more wealthy and prominent members of society, and Lodges are apt to lack the nerve to ‑make such men obey.

 

This influence was extensively felt, at one time, in England.

 

Some forty Lodges joined in with the non‑paying party in denouncing the law as arbitrary and unjust; but the Grand Lodge, not believing it,unjust to place all Masons on the level, by requiring like contributions from all, very promptly arrested the charters of all Lodges that failed to enforce the law, from which time we hear of no further opposition to it.

 

Our correspondent asks if all laws are not harsh and arbitrary, and contrary to the spirit of the Order, which would prevent a Mason from withdrawing from his Lodge ? We might very properly refer him to the letter and spirit of the old law, as constituting our answer ; but it may not be amiss to add further, that if we understand what Freemasonry is, it is intended to unite all the brotherhood "into one common band, or Society of friends and brothers." By this union we understand that each comes voluntarily under obligation to do his whole duty to all others ; to bear his fair proportion of burdens.

 

Masonry does not contemplate the making of friends for a day only, but by strong and endearing ligaments of Brotherly Love, it engages 494

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

its votaries to walk with, and for a brother; to stand by and ' sustain each other through all the varied walks of life; to defend a brother's character, to administer to his wants, to nurse him in sickness, to follow his remains to the tomb; and, lastly, to cherish in the greenest spot of his memory, the recollection of his virtues, aye, and then to comfort, console, defend, and relieve his widow and orphans.

 

And are we to be told that such a society as this is held together by ties so frail, that any or all its members may at pleasure cut themselves loose, and thus sow the seeds of coldneglect, . or bitter. discord ? No, no; a thousand times no I He who attaches himself to the Craft is a member for life, and while tire Society possesses the power of perpetuating its existence, it is bound to cut off all who clandestinely introduce innovations, or moral diseases, which would poison and contaminate the whole. The individual member possesses no power to withdraw from his responsibilities or burdens; he can not, in any way, abridge or alter his duties, as a member of the great family of friends.

 

We have been asked what we would do with the application of a brother who would ask to withdraw from all connection with, or obligation to the Fraternity, because, in his opinion, Masonry is not suited to the spirit of the age, and does not merit cultivation.

 

In answer, we have to say, that if the brother is not sane, his application and reasons should be treated with mild forbearance, but if it be possible that a rational man can be found who would resort to this pretext, in order to sever his ties to the Fraternity, we should be bound to believe that he had some ulterior, and, to him, higher object of interest to accomplish, and, in such case, it would be a pity, to thwart his views, and, h6nce, we would recommend that he should be accommodated in the only way known to Masonry, viz., by expulsion.

 

We think it is high time that the Fraternity in America should pause and consider how far they have suffered Masonry to become the convenient vehicle of designing men, to use or not‑to put off or on, as a loose coat‑when convenient.

 

If the level is designed to enforce any principle, its, most prominent teaching is to place all on an equalitv, both in regard to the benefits and burdens of Masonry.

 

QUESTIONS OF ?MASONIC USAGE.

 

495 We have been told, time and again, that Freemasons are free men, and must be left to do as they please about affiliation, and giving alms. Now, all this is true, with a single exception, every Mason is at liberty to do as he pleases, provided he pleases to do right.

 

Every American citizen is a free man, and is at liberty to do what he pleases, provided he pleases to obey the laws of his country ; and thus are Masons at full liberty to do anything not contrary to the lettgr or spirit of the Masonic law; and, hence, we conclude by repeating that, by the laws of Masonry, a brother can only demit to travel, or to assist in forming a new Lodge, and that all who are now non‑affiliated should be compelled to unite with a Lodge, or contribute the same amount paid by Lodge members.

 

Of course, all who are not able to pay, without detriment to their family, should be allowed to hold membership, exempt from dues; but it is to be expected they will assist in the work of the Lodge.

 

DO EXPULSIONS IN AN ENCAMPMENT, OR CHAPTER, AFFECT A MEMBER IN BLUE LODGE? MIssouRI, March 24, 1853.

 

BRo. MrrcHE7.7, :‑Will you please answer the following question through the Signet, and oblige many of the Fraternity in my neighborhood Do expulsions from an Encampment, or Chapter, affect the Masonic standing of a brother so expelled, in a Lodge of Ancient, Free, and Accepted Masonry t Fraternally,

 

O.

 

We are very sorry to be compelled to disturb that self, complacency which some brethren feel because of their possession of the higher degrees in Masonry, but every day's experience and observation teaches us that every attempt which has been made, since 1717 (and none were made before), to improve, amplify, and adorn Freemasonry, has tended, in an eminent degree, to encumber the old and perfect system with novelties and diseased excrescences, which, though eating sores upon the originally healthy mass, are heedlessly suffered to corrode and corrupt, until the most skillful are rendered unable to apply a panacea. We are asked if expulsion or suspension from a Chapter or Encampment affects the standing of the brother below.

 

Now, we are expected to answer all mooted questions of Masonic usage, by the rules of ancient Masonic law ; but 196

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

where shall we go to find an ancient law, having any sort of bearing on this subject ? A short period of time, indeed, must' be deemed sufficient to intervene between the introduction of a system, and the time of asking for usages growing out of that .

 

system, to render said usages ancient, if any usage in reference to the Orders of Knighthood may be so considered; and these remarks are equally applicable to Chapters of Royal Arch Masonry. Who will undert4ke to prove that the Masonic arganization of Encampments and Chapters is more than one hundred years old ?

 

If it can not be shown they are of ancient origin, how ridiculous to claim for them the right or necessity of being governed by ancient law.

 

We have repeatedly said, .and confidently maintain, that there is no Masonry whatever in the Orders of Knighthood.

 

It is known that these are emphatically Christian degrees; it is not attempted to be concealed frorn 6e world, that none need apply for admission into an Encampment, who do not believe in the Christian religion, and it is further known that Masonry opens its doors alike to Christian and anti‑Christian, with the simple condition that all must believe in the existence of the one GOD.

 

The Encampment 'degrees, therefore, are not Masonic degrees, though permitted to be so called through the management of modern improvers and innovators.

 

The same inordinate love of novelties, and of progressive Masonry, has led to the tacking on some thirty other degrees, beautified and adorned by innumerable highsounding and imposing titles, and they, too, are permitted to be` call(.d Masonic degrees, although, if we may judge the stream by the fountain from which it flows, we should be forced to conclude that this magnificent improvement dethrones Jehovah, and places reason triumphantly in His stead.

 

Why is it that expulsions from this Association, this falsely called Ancient and Accepted Rite in Masonry, is not considered as affecting the Masonic standing below ?

 

Simply because it is known that 411 theso degrees are modern inventions, and, consequently, form no part of Ancient Masonry,

 

Very well; and the same reason will equally apply to the Encampment degrees, and to the Chapter organization.

 

Masonry is the same now that it was in 1717, and, though it has been subdivided, and more degrees QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

497 are required to convey a thorough acquaintance with the whole, still are we bound to regard all beyond as distinct and separate as though it bore the name of Oddfellowship, or any other foreign cognomen. We know that, in 1717, and for many years after, all of Masonry was controlled in a Blue Lodge. The Holy Royal Arch was, it is true. during the time of Dermott, given as a separate degree above the Master, but it was considered part and parcel of that degree, or rather the completion of it, and, hence, it was given in a Blue Lodge. A Mason, expelled from a Lodge, or, if you please, a Blue Lodge (for there was then no other), was, of course, expelled from all the privileges of Masonry.

 

But we are told that the great number of degrees above, now called Masonic, changes the whole ease. We think not. We think that what was Masonry then, is Masonry now, and nothing which was not Masonry then, can be Masonry now.

 

We say, then, that the only ancient rule, applicable to the subject under discussion, was, that an expulsion from a Blue Lodge, expelled from all Masonry, and this is now, and must ever be considered a paramount law.

 

But 'an expulsion from a Chapter can not affect the standing below; first, because, according to the Ancient Regulations, no such thing as a Chapter is known in Masonry; and, secondly, because the Master Mason, as such, is presumed not to know anything of the causes which would lead to expulsion above, and it would be unreasonable to ask him to discredit a brother because an institution, about which lie knew nothing, had so done; and quite as well might an expulsion from an Oddfellows' Lodge be brought to bear in a Masonic Lodge, as an expulsion in an Encampment be made to so operate.

 

We say, then, to our correspondent, that an expulsion or sus. pension from a Chapter, or Encampment, can not be made to operate in any way in a Lodge of Master Masons. Neither a Chapter nor Encampment has the right to expel or suspend fr(m all the privileges of Masonry.

 

An Encampment may expel or suspend from all the privileges of Knighthood, but it has no right or power to make its penal ‑laws operate in a Chapter, much less a Lodge.

 

A Chapter, in like manner, may suspend o: expel from all the privileges of Royal Arch Masonry; but 32 498

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

for the same reasons, its penal laws can have no effect is a Lodge of Master Masons. In short, neither of the organize tions above can make regulations which are tQ be operative below; while, on the contrary, an expulsion or suspension from below cuts off all communication above.

 

A brother Master. Mason, in good standing, can not sit with a man in any Masonic organization above, if he has been expelled by a Blue Lodge, for, in this case, the great foundation, the platform upon which all other degrees called Masonic have been established, has been removed.

 

The Master Mason knows him to be expelL‑d from all the privileges of Masonry, by the only Masonic body having the power, by ancient law, or even modern usage, 1o make that expulsion universal.

 

CAN AN ENTERED APPRENTICE OR FELLOW CRAFT BE SUSPENDED? ‑, MISSOURI, April 12, 1863. ' . MR. EDITOR:‑Under the present American organization, can an Ent*" 4pprentice or Fellow Craft Mason be suspended or expelled? and, if so, by what power? Yours respectfully and fraternally,

 

S.

 

We suppose that, notwithstanding the prevalence of the false and mischievous doctrine, that '* Masonry is a progressive science," it will still be admitted that every Ancient, Free, and Accepted Mason is liable to be tried and suspended, or expelled, for immoral or unmasonic conduct. We know, further, that a Mason can be made nowhere, except in a regular Lodge, nor can he be tried anywhere else; and, as we all agree in saying that Masonry is essentially founded upon, and governed by, principles of justice and equality of rights, it follows that a Mason can only be tried in a Lodge where he may be allowed to enter and confront his accusers.

 

The truth of all this was never questioned, so far as we know, until after the meeting of the Baltimore Convention, in 1843, which body gravely decided that an Entered Apprentices' Lodge was no Lodge at all, and, that the Fellow Crafts' Lodge was no Lodge at all, but that the Masters' Lodge could work on the Entered Apprentice's or, Fellow Craft's degree.

 

From which‑ it will be seen that au QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

49! Entered Apprentice could only be tried by a Masters' Lodge, if, indeed, he could be tried at all. Very many, assuming the correctness of the decision of the Baltimore Convention, have, with seeming propriety, contended that an Entered Apprentice or Fellow Craft could not be tried for any offense, because, not being a member of any Lodge, the penalties for unmasonic conduct could not lie against him, as he could not be expelled from an Association of which he was not a member; and this, we think, is a consistent view of the subject. But it will be our business to inquire whether the decision of the Baltimore Convention was in accordance with the Old Regulations, and the established usages of the Order.

 

If it should turn out that an Entered Apprentices' Lodge can not be, and never was a regular Lodge, then we shall certainly contend that an Entered Apprentice is no Mason at all, and, of course, he im at liberty to commit any breach of the moral law lie may choose, without in any way becoming amenable to a Lodge of Masons.

 

But if, on the other hand, it should appear that, in this respect, the Baltimore Convention was either ignorant of, or willfully set aside and attempted to trample upon the Ancient Regulations, or universal usages of the Fraternity, we must be permitted to say that, so far from the decision of the Baltimore Convention being entitled to the force and power of an edict, it can only receive, as it deserves, a place among the many modern attempts to make innovations into the body of Masonry.

 

Having so recently quoted the law of 1663, and 1722, which emphatically declares that no man can be made a Mason anywhere except in a regular Lodge, we think it useless to make the extracts here. Our readers, we trust, are familiar with them, and are well aware that the law provides for no excep tions to the rule.

 

Not all the Grand Masters in the universe can legally make a Mason anywhere but in a regular Lodge. We say then, that an Entered Apprentice is made in a regular Lodge.

 

" Oh, yes," say the advocates of the Baltimore Convention, `~ that is all true, the Entered Apprentice is made in a regular Lodge; but, mind you, it is a Masters' Lodge, working on the Entered Apprentice degree."

 

And now, we say, let Qs put this doctrine to the test.

 

00

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC IISA(.'R.

 

 In Anderson's Constitutions, as collated by order of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722, we find the following AnT. 10. Apprentices must be admitted Fellow Crafts and Masters, only hfre, unless by a dispensation from the Grand Master. (Old Regulations. See Sipwt, Irol. I., p. 339.) The foregoing was declared by the Grand Lodge, in 1722, to be an Old Regulation, and, from 1722 to 1725, all the Lodges subordinate to the Grand Lodge of England, were per mitted only to make Entered Apprentices, the Grand Lodge reserving to itself the exclusive right to confer the second and third degrees. Now, when we remember that the same Old Regulations required, and commanded that all Masons should be made in regular Lodges, and none could be made elsewhere, can any man reasonably conclude that all the Lodges chartered, constituted, and enrolled in the first eight years, viz., from 1717 to 1725, were no Lodges at all ? or will any one contend that, in all cases, a Masters' Lodge was constituted and restricted in their work to the Entered Apprentice's degree? We know the latter could not have been the fact, for immediately after the amendment of 1725, charters were issued to a few localities for Masters' Lodges. But it must seem ridiculous to suppose an Entered Apprentices' Lodge is not even a regular Lodge, when we know that the Grand Lodge of England held its Grand communications in the Entered Apprentice's degree; aye, and never opened a degree above, until they were prepar ing to install the Grand Master.

 

Entered Apprentices were voting members of the Grand Lodge on every feast day, nor could a new Regulation be made without the approbation of a majority of all present, including Apprentices.

 

That we may not be misunderstood, we will give the law ART. 14. Every annual Grand Lodge has an inherent power, and authority to ware new Regulations; to alter these for the real benefit of the Fraternity; provided always, that the Old Landmarks be carefully preserved, and that such new Regulations and alterations be proposed and agreed to, at the third quay terly communication preceding the annual Grand Feast ; and that they be offered to the perusal of all the brethren before dinner, in writing, even of the youngest Entered Apprentice; the approbation and consent of the mRjority of all she brethren present being absolutely necessary to make the same binding and abiigstory; which must, therefore, after dinner, and after the new Grand Matst QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGB.

 

501 la installed, he solemnly desired, as it was desired and obtained for the Old Regulations, when proposed by the Grand Lodge to about one hundred and fifty brethren, at Stationers' Hall, on St. John the Baptist's Day, 1721. (Old Regular Lion% Art. 39.)' Here is positive proof, that Entered Apprentices were not only present in Grand Lodge, but that, for amendments to the Regulations, they were entitled to a vote. But should further proof be required to show that the Grand Lodge did all its 'business in the Entered Apprentices', Lodge, we are prepared to furnish any amount; we think, however, the following will suffice. Under the head of Grand Master, we find the following AnT. 3. Then the Grand Master shall allow any brother, a Fellow Craft, or Entered Apprentice, to speak, directing his discourse to His Worship in the Chairi or to make any motion for the good of the Fraternity, which shall be considered immediately, or else referred to the consideration of the Graad Lodge, at their next communication, stated or oocasional.j It is to be remembered, that only the Masters and Wardens of the particular Lodges were members of the Grand Lodge, and hence we are bound to conclude, that Entered Apprentices were capable of holding office in their respective Lodges, and yet this would be supposing that the Grand Lodge of England omitted to obey that Old Charge which says, "no brother can be a Warden until he is a Fellow Craft, nor a Master until he has filled the post of Warden." But however this may all have been, it is perfectly certain that there were regular Lodges ‑)f Entered Apprentices, having no power, or authority to work in a higher degree.

 

We have good reasons for believing that the Provincial Grand Lodge of Boston, established in 1733, di4l not, for a time, usually grant charters, to be held in a higher degree than Entered Apprentice, certainly not above that of Fellow Craft for we have an account of the time when a Masters' Lodge was established in Boston. That this Provincial Grand Lodge I ad originally the power to grant charters for Masters' Lodges, is almost certain, because the amendment authorizing; Fellow Crafts and Master Masons to be made in subordinate Lodges, ' See Signd, vol. i., p. 387.

 

j Sec Signd, vol. i., p. 4.

 

sop

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.' was passed by the Grand Lodge of England, eight years before the warrant was sent to Boston ; but we suppose the third degree was then held in higher estimation than at present, .and great caution was used in granting authority to a Lodge to confer it.

 

From all we have seen, we feel bound to say, that whatever may have been the motives which governed the Baltimore Convention, it is clearly demonstrated that the decision of that. body, in the case under discussion, was in direct opposition to ancient usage, and, therefore, entitled to no sort of credit. It may be said that, inasmuch as the Grand Lodge of England early asserted the right to amend or alter the Regulations for the good of the Craft, the same right exists in this country; and this we fully indorse, provided, always, that the Ancient Landmarks be not removed, and provided, further, that the body undertaking to make new Regulations, possess the power to do so.

 

But, in this case, the Baltimore Convention did not undertake to make a new Regulation, or to suspend an old ones, but rather seem to have assumed a position as true, of old which we find was not true; and, secondly, even. had this body attempted to make or amend the Regulations, that attempt was vain, for the reason that they were not clothed with power either to make or amend the Regulations, or to enact any las whatever : they possessed no powers beyond that of giving advioh and expressing opinions for the approval or disapproval of the Grand Lodges, and very few of the latter either knew what opinions were expressed by the Convention, or who took any action thereon.

 

We reluctantly grant that a, question might be raised in Missouri whether, in that jurisdiction, an Entered Apprentices' Lodge is, in fact. a Lodge, because the Baltimore work and lectures were adopted by that Grand Lodge; but. it may be truly said, the peculiar opinions of the Convention, aside from the work and lectures, were not adopted.

 

We here venture the opinion that, in almost every instanae where an attempt has been made, however successfully for the time, to depart from, or improve upon the old usages of 09 Order, it has resulted in a derangement of that beautiful and symmetrical network, so very skillfully interwoven by our F QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

░ll$ ,forefhthers, as to produce an intimate and harmonious conneotion between all the various wants of the Order.

 

Until the days of Lawrence Dermott, and his spurious Grand Lodge, all Lodges, we think, held their meetings and transacted their business in the Entered Apprentices' Lodge; and even Dermott, fruitful as he was in new inventions, and successful as he was in introducing innovations, never suggested a doubt about an Entered Apprentices' Lodge being in truth and in fact a regular Lodge; he never thought of depriving an Entered Apprentice of the right to ballot on a petition for initiation ; nor are these novelties traceable to the fructifying regions of France or Germany; we think they are purely American. When we were a young Mason, we visited no Lodge that did not keep its accounts, and do all its business in the Entered Apprentices' Lodge; and our system of organization proves that this was the original, and is now the only appropriate manner of conducting business. No other Lodge has a Secre. tary or Treasurer, clearly showing that they were not needed elsewhere.

 

When we were a young Mason, every Entered apprentice was allowed, yea, required, to ballot for candidates for that degree; and how giaringly inconsistent is the improwd method of prohibiting Entered Apprentices and Fellow Craft.4 from voting, and allowing them to make, privately, outdoor 'objections to a Master Mason, and soliciting him to blackball an objectionable candidate.

 

We say that all this is wrong, We hold that all business should be transacted in the Entered Apprentices' Lodge; that all mere Entered Apprentices should be members of that Lodge, and the degrees above should open mainly for work and lectures.

 

Bnt, even under the present system of balloting in the Masters' Lodge, we think we have shown that an Entered Apprentices' Lodge is, to the full extent, a regular Lodge, as much so as a Masters' Loin: and though, by the modern American rule, none are considered members of the Lodge but Master Masons, still, even here, Entered Apprentices are Free and Accepted Masons, and, therefore, members of the Fraternity‑members of the great family of Masons, and, hence, are amenable to an ,Entered Apprentices' Lodge, for their moral and Masonic deportment;  503   604

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

and, whenever they depart from the teachings and known duties of the brethren of that degree, they should be summoned beforo an Entered Apprentices' Lodge, and there be tried; and that the said Entered Apprentices' Lodge alone has the power to try, suspend, or expel.

 

CAN A PrrITION BE WMmRAWN? OLYMPIA, NORTHERN ORLOON, February 20, 1850. BRo. MrrcaELL :‑I will state a case to you, as it occurred here, involving a question of Masonic usage: A. M. P. petitions Olympia Lodge for initiation, and, at the time big application was received, was considered as a man who possessed all the necessary qualiflcations to become a Mason. A few days previous to the meeting of the Lodge at which his petition was to be acted upon, the Worshipful Master became fully satisfied, from certain transactions, that the applicant was not an honest man, and, accordingly, made the fact known to the members of the Committee i but they, however, in the face of this information, reported favorable.

 

When a ballot was0ordered to be spread, the Chairman of the Com mittee moved that. the petition be withdrawn.

 

Now, what I want to. know le, this: Can a petition be. withdrawn after a report is made upon it, whether that report is favorable, or uufavorable?

 

Please answer through the Signd.

 

Fraternally yours,

 

T. M.

 

We think long established usage settles the foregoing question ; and until since other secret societies sprung up around us, whose rules have imperceptibly influenced the action of some of our Lodges, we seldom heard of the withdrawal of a petition after it became the property of the Lodge.

 

A petition is subject. to the control of the brother who prtisented it, and may be withdrawn at any time before the Lodge takes action upon it.

 

After the Lodge refers the petition to a Committee of Inquiry, it can not be withdrawn.

 

It becomes the duty of the Committee to inquire into the claims of the petitioner for the mysteries of Ma.aonry, and report to the neat regular meeting.

 

This report should not be confined to the words " favorable," or " unfavorable," but should give all the information that can be obtained, after due inquiry. Many bad men have been admitted through the negligence and inattention of Committees to the duty assigned them. We know it is not uncommon for a Committee to consult, and, for the first .time, make inquiry about a candidate, after their report is QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

505 called for in open Lodge, and from such momentary inquiry their report is handed in, or verbally stated.

 

This is certainly all wrong.

 

The Committee is allowed a month, and, during that time, they should go to those who are acquainted with t1* applicant; and learn all they can of his true character..

 

This being done, it is the duty of the Master to order a ballot, whether the report be favorable, or unfavorable.

 

We have been told that an unfavorable report is equivalent to a rejection, and, hence, in such cases, there can be no necessity for a ballot. We think differently; the usages of Freemasonry know but one way to elect or reject a candidate, and that is by a secret ballot.

 

But why not suffer a petition to be withdrawn whenever it shall be ascertained that the candidate will be rejected? There are brethren, occupying high places, who contend that the names of rejected candidates should never be published in the proceedings of the Grand Lodge, because Masonry, they say, should not leave a man in a worse condition than it found him; and the same argument will apply, with equal force, against blackballing a candidate, and recording his rejection'. The rejection does place a stain upon his character, and, if the Lodge is bound to leave him in as good condition as it found him, his petition should be withdrawn, and no record should be made going to show he is unworthy.

 

But we deny the correct ness of the position assumed by these brethren.

 

We hold that Masonry is bound to protect itself ; it constitutes one great family of brothers, and each branch is bound to protect every other branch of that family; and, hence, should the character of an applicant be investigated and found wanting by Lodge A.. it becomes the duty of that Lodge not only to record the fast but to give notice, by publication or otherwise, to the othe Lodges, to the end that an unworthy man may not go elsewhere, and impose upon the Fraternity.

 

Nor is any injustice done the applicant; he has the privilege of knowing beforehand by what rules our Society is governed; he is not, or should not be urged to apply; and, if he voluntarily throws himself in a condition to be dealt with according to our rules, he has no cause of complaint.

 

If the withdrawal of a petition were permitted BQB

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

in one case, who shall determine that all may not be subject to take the same course? And where, then, would be the necessity or use of the ballot‑bog? The friend of the petitioner could, $4 any time, withdraw the petition, and, by that means, prevent a record of rejection, and thus one of the greatest safeguards to the purity of the Brotherhood would be torn away, and, lit many instances, soon after the rejection of an unworthy man at one place, the Temple would be desecrated by his admission at another. Nor would the evil of his admission be confined 0 the Lodge receiving him; for, being once a member of the great family, his privileges extend throughout the world.

 

We once advocated the policy of withdrawing the petition of an old farmer‑after feeling satisfied that, if put to vote, be would be rejected‑because, as we then thought, he was per. manently located, and, consequently, could never petition any other Lodge, and because we thought his rejection, if known; would bring to bear an influence against Masonry. Our Lodge differed with us as to its duty, and pursued the usual course, and, afterward, facts were developed proving the wisdom of the course pursued by the Lodge. And now, while we admit that cases might occur which would seem to render the record of a rejection unnecessary, we think no distinction should b4 made, and that, in no case, should a petition be withdrawn after it is referred to a Committee of Investigation.

 

WGRIS OF REIECM MASONS.

 

LASre Vinw, ST. MARY'S PARISH, LA., March 31, 1853. ‑ BnoTamn‑‑I have some questions for you to answer, through the 3g", and I wish you to answer them at length, and give us your opinion on the law and equity of the case; it may be of some benefit to the Craft hereabouts.

 

Our Grand Lodge compels every Master Mason to affiliate, under the penalty of being cut off A‑om Masonic burial, and visiting Lodges under the jurisdiction . of the Grand Lodge. (See Grand Lodge Reports for 1852, page 75.) Now, she law also compels the brother to affiliate Oth the nearest Lodge to his residence. Suppose he applies to affiliate, and is rejected by one vote, is this brother to suffer all those penalties, after having made an effort to affiliate? and, in fact, is quite ignorant of anything between him and any of the members of the Lodge, and knows nothing that he has ever done to any one, to merit this negative ball! yet  he has to be cut off from all Masonic rights, and can not tell why.

 

The brotba QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAGI.

 

Sol who is rejected has no chance for a defense.

 

I wish to know if this is Masonry t Now, if a brother is juatiflable in casting a negative ball against an applicant fus affiliation, is it not his duty to bring a charge, if be knows aught against the applicant?

 

This, to me, is the most contradictory law I ever got hold of, and it comes in conflict with our duty as Masons.

 

We are not to speak evil, etc.

 

What do you call throwing a blackball, but doing him an evil of the grossest kind, and the worst of it is, he has no sbow for a defense.

 

I know all Lodges are not alike on this point, but the Lodge I have reference to requires a clear ballot, as in initiation.

 

I think this bad doctrine.

 

Fraternally yours, We have, heretofore, commented freely upon the justice of the law of Louisiana, requiring non‑affiliated Masons to become contributing members. We can not, at this moment, lay hands upon the proceedings of 1852, and, therefore, we can not deter mine as to the precise wording of the law.

 

We had supposed; however, that the law did not contemplate the punishment of a brother who should do all in his power to comply with the edict; and, if the Grand Lodge failed to provide for cases like the one presented by Bro. E., it was certainly an oversight. No brother should remain under the censure of the Grand Lodge, after having applied, in a regular manner, for affiliation. The object of the law is to place all members of the Fraternity ,pu a level, by requiring all to contribute equally, and equally perform the work of the Lodges; but the brother who has been rejected, should not be required even to contribute, for the reason that he has offered to do so in the usual Masonic manner, and more than this should not be required of him.

 

If, then, the 1?w of Louisiana is ,,so worded as to cut off from Masonic privileges tho brother rejected as above, we agree with Bro. E., that it is so far unjust, and, we doubt not. she ,Grand Lodge will speedily amend it.

 

As to the second question, we have to say, it by no means follows that the brother depositing a blackball is under obligations to prefer charges against the applicant. It is the l+ounden duty of every member of the Lodge to see to it that me harmox y and fellowship of the Lodge is sacredly preserved, and hence the great propriety of requiring a unanimous vote to introduce an additional member, whether by initiation or affiliation. A, brother of good standing, and generat?y of correct deportment, may, nevertheless, produce discord, if allowed 408

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

to be a member.

 

There are some good meaning men, who, from their very nature, seem to desire to rule or ruin, and suet men should never enter our Lodge as members, were we ap prised of the fact; and yet it will be seen how difficult it would be to sustain a charge against such a brother.

 

Every non‑affiliated Mason knows that he must petition in order to become a member; he knows that one blackball will reject his appli' cation ; and he should farther know that he has no right to inquire who is the individual that deposits the blackball.

 

Our correspondent thinks that the brother who deposits a black= ball, strikes in the dark at the character of the brother.

 

We think differently. The brother's Masonic standing is not at all impaired by the rejection ; he is refused membership in that particular Lodge, but nothing more ; it does not deprive him of the privilege of visiting that, or any other Lodge.

 

In short, it does not in any way affect his general privileges as a Mason. Bro. E. thinks we, in effect, speak evil of a brother against whom we deposit a blackball.

 

We must differ with him.

 

W$ only say, in a Masonic manner, that the introduction of the orother as a member of the Lodge will disturb the harmony of the Lodge; and, most certainly, there could be no propriety in balloting at all, if we are not to exercise a discretion in the choice of balls. According to the notions of our correspondent, the brother who applies to affiliate, is put upon trial, and, if rejected, is convicted of unmasonic conduct.

 

We have endeavored to show that this is a wrong view of the subject.

 

Suppose a non‑affiliated Mason were to petition our Lodge foi membership, at the same time making an open declaration that his leading object was to become Master of the Lodge.

 

Now, we could not sustain the charge that, in his petition, he was influenced by unmasonic motives, and yet, the chances are that we should tl.bdc he was governed by improper motives, and, therefore, we should deposit a blackball; not, however, with a view of casting a stain upon his character, but simply to guard against the detestable practice of electioneering for office.

 

Bro. E. intimates that some Lodges do not require a unanf. mous vote on applications for affiliation. We hope there act none such in Louisiana, for, certainly. there is no principle QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

609 better understood than that Masons are to love those who are in, more than those who are out, and the Lodge that admits a member, contrary to the expressed will of a single member, prefers the outsider, and, in effect, says to the member objecting, you can leave the Lodge, if you can not fellowship the applicant. We regard the rule requiring a unanimous ballot as absolutely essential to the well‑being of the Fraternity, and we trust that South Carolina (the only State that does not require it), will, ere long, return to the good old rule adopted at the formation of the Grand Lodge of England. and which had been the law in 1663.

 

BALLOTING FOR ADVANCEMENT.‑CALLING OFF.‑HOW SOON MAY A RFJEcrm CANDI DATE PETITION Y‑REFUS1NG PERMISSION TO ADVANCE.

 

KEITHSBURG, ILL., April 6, 1853.

 

BRO. MrrcHELL:‑If not too much trouble, please answer the following inquiries I. Can a ballot for advancement be taken at any but a regular meeting? 2. Suppose a ballot be taken for advancement to the second degree, the Lodge not having time to confer the degree, and calls to refreshment, and three or four days after calls on. confers the degree, and still calling it the regular meeting, ballots to advance the candidate to the third degree, thus avoiding a blackball, it may be, at a regular and full meeting.

 

3. If a candidate for advancement be rejected, how soon may he petition spin? 4 Suppose A. gave a social party and did not invite B.; A. afterward petitions to be Passed, and, for the reason above stated, B. blackballs him. What should be done in such case? 5. May a Lodge call off, from time to time, until near the fixed period for the next regular meeting, calling all these meetings regular.

 

R. Ii`SITH.

 

Our answer to the first question may be found in this volume. 2. A Lodge should be called off to another night only for the purpose of finishing the business began at a stated meeting. No new business should be introduced at said adjourned meeting, for the reason, that advantage might ho taken of the absent members.

 

It is certainly improper to call off, from day to day, and permit any business to be introduced that properly belongs to a stated monthly meeting. It is, to say the least, an evasion of the established usage, and should not be practiced by any Lodge.

 

510

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Candidates for initiation or advancement, should be balloted for on the stated night, and at no other time ; and, as a general rule; it would be better to do no work at that meeting, so that the business of the Lodge might be regularly and properly attended to. The degrees are more properly and more profit. ably conferred at meetings specially called for that purpose. But the Master has no right to call a meeting to confer degrees, unless the candidate has been elected to receive them.

 

In thitt connection, it may be proper to state, that no business can be transacted at a called meeting, except that for which it is called; and, hence, when the Master orders a called meeting, the summons. or notice, should state the business to be transacted, or work to be done at that meeting.

 

3. Our correspondent asks bow long a rejected applicant for advancement should wait, before he can again petition.

 

Upon this subject, thn Ancient Charges, are, of course, silent.

 

Even the Ancient Regulations, as amended and approved by the Grand Lodge of England for thirty years, are silent upon the subject, simpl^ because the subordinate Lodges conferred only the Apprenti‑e's degree.

 

In the abr,~nce of any Grand Lodge Regulation in this coon= try, we she ld say that each Lodge should exercise a sound discretion. A candidate may be rejected because he is nut sufficiently conversant with the preceding degree, in which event. the ejection may be speedily removed. Other reasons may 2a‑.ti'~ the withholding of permission to advance, having no src', of bearing upon the moral character of the applicant, and w'_,ich objections may not long exist; but as we have no right to demand, and may not know what cause leads to the rejection, it would seem that there should be a settled rule to govern all such cases.

 

Heretofore we have recommended that Lodges be governed by the same rule which applies to candidates rejected on their application for initiation, viz., twelve months.

 

As there is no Ancient Regulation, we think every Grand Lodge should make a law for the government of its subordinates.

 

4. &s to the case stated by our correspondent, where an applicant is rejected because he had slighted a member in not QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

511 inviting him to his fireside, we have to say; that if it could be proven in our Lodge that a member had arrested a candidate from so low and grovelling a motive, we should certainly votn for his suspension, until such time as he should be able to appreciate the principles of Masonry, and act more nobly upon its teachings. But we should be on our guard, least we improperly judge of the cause of rejection. We should be cautious not to withhold from the rejecting brother that Charity which we require him to exercise toward the applicant.

 

We believe it requires something of moral courage to deposit a blackball against any applicant, and we are not predisposed to believe that it will be done, in very many instances, without good came. We knew an applicant rejected once, when his standing was so~ high as to cause some of the most prominent members to ask for a demit from the Lodge, and the brother depositing the blackball dared not brook the reproach lie would have received ov acknowledging he was the man; and yet, in a short time, every member of the Lodge was prepared to thank him foi saving the Fraternity from the reproach of having a mck unworthy member.

 

We know there are a few exceptions, but,, .is a general rule, we are bound to believe there is some wellgrounded reason in the breast of every one who deposits a negative vote.

 

5. We think it is an evasion of the law to call off, from time to time, and call these meetings a continuation of the stated monthly meeting. Strictly, there is no regular meeting except the day or night mentioned in the By‑Laws, and this stated monthly meeting can only call off to an early period to finish business commenced on the stated night ; certainly, no new business should be introduced, unless all the members be rummoned, and even then, we should object to taking a ballot for initiation, advancement, or* affiliation, for this business belongs .to the regular stated meeting.

 

YA8()NIC REGALIA.

 

‑‑, TExss, June 27, 1851 J. W. S. MrrasaLL. Dear Sir:‑Tho Grand Royal Arch Chapter of Texas dosed its regular sesion at Washington on the 25th, and f am sure you will 514

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

silk velvet, four inches wide, bound with white braid, (roam at the hip, from whence is suspended a silver dagger ; on the shoulder, and in front, the scarf may be ornamented with any of the emblems of the Orders of Knighthood ; to all which may.

 

beadded a green ribbon, indicative of the Red Cross degree, and worn under the velvet scarf.

 

About the regalia of the latter degrees we care less; but Ancient Craft Masonry has ever been governed by ancient usage, and innovations can not be tolerated in any shape whatever ; and hence we have been mortified and disgusted at seeing Master Masons appear in a procession with glittering fringe around their apron, and dangling from their scarfs. In place of a scarf, we have seen a blue silk‑velvet collar, ornamented with silver stars, and trimmed with silver bullion:

 

We have seen Royal Arch Masons lay aside their own appropriate ‑egalia, and wear that of an Oddfellow, literally covered over with golden ornaments.

 

Yea, we have seen even worse departures from our rules than these.

 

All Masons should know that the only Masonic burial ceremony known to Masonry is in the Master's degree, and they should further know, that the emblem9 of innocence constitute the badge of mourning.

 

White aprons and gloves, with an evergreen in the lappel of the coat, is all that should be worn in a funeral procession; and yet have we

 

seen especial pains taken to obtain and wear the most gaudy Oddfellows' regalia at a Masonic funeral.

 

And can it be possible that Grand Lodges will permit these departures from the usages of our Order, without taking steps to correct them? We are by no means prepared to censure all who appear in procession with inappropriate regalia, for many have never been informed upon the subject, and believing the leading object of a procession to. be to make an imposing show in public, they are ready to pile on all the trappings they can lay hands on.

 

If High Priests of Chapters will permit Oddfellows' regalia to be worn icr Masonic processions, the Grand Chapter should at once speak out in terms not to be misunderstood. If Master Masons do not know the proper regalia to be worn in processions, the Grand Lodges should inform them, and require a strict conformity thereto QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

315 Our correspondent speaks of seeing Royal Arch Masona wearing scarlet aprons, trimmed with gold. Now this is absolutely too bad, and we trust the matter will soon be set right by those who have the power.

 

It may be proper to remark, that officers of Lodges and Grand Lodges can appropiately wear a blue silk‑velvet collar, to which is pendant the jewel of the office. This collar is worn in addition to the scarf, and sufficiently indicates the officers. Some Grand Lodges use purple velvet collars; but as the Grand Lodge does all its business in the Master's degree, we think blue is the appropriate color for the Grand Officers.

 

WrnWRAWING A RECOMMENDATION.

 

‑, ALABAMA, July 14,185& BRo. MrrcuELr.:‑Your answer through the Signet, to the following questions, will be esteemed as a favor 1. After, a petition is presented to the Lodge, can it be withdrawn?

 

If so, at what stage of the proceedings? 2. If I recommend or vouch for a petitioner, can I withdraw such reoommendation before the Committee reports, if circumstances should come to my knowledge not previously known, derogatory to the character of the petitioner ? 3. Is a petition considered as being submitted to the Lodge before the Committee reports upon it? Your opinion upon these points will settle some differences of opinion which have arisen among the Fraternity of our Lodge, and much oblige, Yours fraternally,

 

W.

 

The first question asked by our correspondent has been answered more than once. We hold, that a petition can not be withdrawn after it is received and referred to a Committee. Our reasons may be seen in this volume.

 

The second question is a new one to us. but, upon general principles, we think its answer is easily arrived at. The law requires the petitioner to be recommended by two members of the Lodge, who are presumed to present and exercise control over the petition, and until it passes out of their hands, they may, of right, alter, change, or withdraw their recommender tion.

 

But the withdrawal of the recommendation is equivalent to the withdrawal of the petition, as it can not be received by the Lodge, in the absence of the recommendation.

 

But if the 616

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

holders give to the Lodge the control, and the Lodge accepts, by receiving and referring to a Committee, the recommenders lose all control over it, and, of course, can not in any way change its direction. The brother who has recommended the petitioner, may, at any time, in open Lodge, declare his error in recommending, but still the petition .must take the usual course, and be ballotted on.

 

Our brethren should not forget that each Lodge, in the reception or rejection of candidates, is acting not only for itself, but also for the Fraternity at large. The Lodge that crakes a Mason, makes a world‑wide brother, bearing with him a passport to the heart and confidence of all others. ‑On the other hand, the Lodge that entertains the petition of a man proven to be unworthy, is bound, by every principle of justice to the great family of Masons, to guard and protect other Lodges from imposition, and this can only be done by a rejeoò tion and a notification in some way., We know it is difficult in some cases, to come ijp fully to the discharge of our duty We may feel no hesitancy in rejecting a bad man, who occupies an humble 1tation in society, and yet we are liable to be seized with a twitching of the nerves, when called upon to reject a worse man, who chances to possess wealth, and, through it, an influence upon the community; but he is not a' true Mason who can not rise above these paltry considerations, in the discharge of a solemn duty.

 

The third question is answered in the above; a petition is certainly considered as submitted, when it is read in open Lodge, and the act of receiving and referring, pfaces'it fully in posses. sion of the Lodge.

 

POWERS OF THE MASTER OF A LODGE. OR THE HIGH PRIEST OF A CHAPTER. LA GRANGE, July 5th, 1853. BRo. MITCHELL.‑YOU will please give your opinion on the following question as your decisions are gaining weight in most of our Lodges and Chapters Has the Master of a Lodge, or the High Priest of a Chapter, a right or powet to close a debate when several members wish to be heard, and the By‑laws,make rzpress provision that each member sball be allowed to speak twice on the same subject? Or, in other words, can a Master or High Priest refuse to grant privt leges and rights to members, granted and guaranteed by the By‑Laws? QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

511 The answer to the foregoing question will. generally‑, be considered so palpably plain, that at first view it might seem a waste of time and space to make a reply; but, strange as it may seem, there are quite a: number of intelligent men who contend that the Master of a Lodge is an absolute monarch in his sphere, and that the Grand Master is subject to no law save his immaculate will ; and it will be readily seen that these lovers of the one‑man‑power, are very likely to suppose their election as Master raises them above all law. With the view, then, of throwing some additional light upon the subject, we proceed to say that, at some period shortly after 1683, Masonry in England sunk to so low.an ebb, that nearly all the Regulations which had, from time to time, been made by the Assembly at York, were lost sight of, and the few instances of makings took place, not in Lodges regularly formed according to the Ancient York Regulations, but at the instance of any Mason who could get together a few of the Craft, choose a Master for the time being, and proceed to work.

 

The Master; in such cases, had no written law by which to be governed, and as no one knew certainly what the Ancient Usages were, the duties and powers of the Master could not be defined by the members assembled; added to this, the Master's term of service was limited to a single meeting, and it was thought safest to leave all power in his hands. His decisions were final, and his powers absolute.

 

No appeal could be taken from his decision, for the simple reason that there was no superior power to appeal to; and even had the other members of the Craft present been better qualified to decide, the time of a single meeting precluded all discussion.

 

At the reorganization of Masonry in England, in 1717, it was decreed that no Lodge should be held without authority from the Grand Lodge, and a code of By‑Laws was adopted, not in derogation of the Ancient Landmarks. These laws were declared to be subject to repeal or amendment, and, from time to time, various Regulations were adopted, defining the duties, and limiting the powers of the Master and the Grand Master. No principle is better settled by the Grand Lodge :)f England, than that every department of the Institution 618

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

is governed b; file majority rule.

 

At the earliest period, and time and again, the Grand Lodge taught and enforced this doctrine; hence it will be seen that the system of one‑manpower was wholly put down, and the whole Craft became subject to legislative edicts, made in conformity to the Ancient Landmarks; and, to this day, neither the Master nor Grand Master can transcend the powers conferred by Grand Lodge Regulations.

 

Only in the United States, we believe, is it contended that the Grand Master is above all law, and the Master of a subordinate Lodge a petit monarch, irresponsible to his Lodge, or the laws by which that Lodge is governed.

 

We do, indeed, think it strange that these opinions find favor, when the facts are considered.

 

Let us recite some of them.

 

Three or four Lodges, holding under a foreign authority, assumt and exercise the power of throwing off their allegiance form a Grand Lodge, make a Constitution and By‑Laws, defining the'duties, and prescribing the powers of all officers, including the Masters and Grand Masters. Now, admitting the legality of this assembly, it follows that the laws enacted by it, not subversive of the Landmarks, are binding upon all, and we ask how can, how dare any Mason disregard these laws? The Grand Lodge gives power to its subordinates to make By‑Laws for their own special government; these By‑Laws are submitted to the Grand Lodge for its approval, and, hence, when so approved, are as binding upon the members as are the direct edicts of the Grand Lodge. Let us suppose A. is a lay member of a Lodge; he is made a Committee to draft a code of By‑Laws ; he performs his duty, and, at his instance, they are adopted.

 

Afterward, A. is elected Master, and, being greatly enlarged by possession of the office, chooses to set up his will in opposition to the laws of his own making, could any one justify his course ?

 

And yet, if any Master may disregard the By‑Laws of his Lodge, the fact that he was, or was not a party concerned in their adoption, by no means alters the case, or affects his powers.

 

No society on earth is more emphatically.

 

a law‑abiding association than Freemasonry.

 

The Master, at his installation, is placed in possession of the By‑Laws of his Lodge, and he is solmenl‑ cba.rged to zee them executed, and QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

519 he has no right to claim obedience to them from others, while he disregards them himself; he can no more evade them by throwing himself upon the dignity of his office, than can the Junior Deacon, or Tyler. W e have never been satisfied with the generally received opinion, that the Master of a particular Lodge is amenable only to his Grand Lodge; but, not having examined that subject with sufficient care to divest our mind of doubts, we do not now attempt to call it in question; but, surely, if Lodges are not permitted to punish the refractory, or arrest the arrogantly assumed powers of a self‑sufficient and bigoted Master, no Grand Lodge will permit these highhanded measures to pass unnoticed.

 

We say, in conclusion, that every Master is solemnly pledged to obey‑and cause others to do the same‑the By‑laws of his Lodge, and from this responsibility there is no escape. It is a solemn duty of every member to obey the By‑Laws, and the Master, in an especial manner, is bound to be governed by them.

 

The institution of Chapters, apart from Lodges of Master Masons, is of recent date ; there is no ancient law, or usage, regulating their action, or providing for their government, but, as far as may be, the rules which govern Lodges are generally regarded as binding upon Chapters of Royal Arch Masons; but, be this as it may, the High Priest is certainly bound by the By‑Laws of his Chapter.

 

CAN A MASON BE TRIED FOR ACTS COMMITTED BEFORE HE WAS A MASON? DouoiAs. T1.xAs. July 16, 1855. DEAn Ban. MITCHELL :‑‑I would ask you to give your views in reference to the f,)llm.ing question of Masonic usage: A gentleman made application to Douglas Lodge for initiation, and was constitutionally rejected.

 

After which he procures a recommendation from some of the members of the same Lodge, for what purpose they knew not, save to show that he was an honest man, they having been to California and back with him. But the recommendation was used for an entirely different purpose.

 

The recommended goes to another Lodge, shows the recom mendation, is Initiated and Passed before his rejection was known there.

 

Now, what Is to be done T

 

Can this be considered an imposition sufficient to expel him?

 

Your answer through the SiglW will be earnestly lookod for.

 

Fraternally,

 

A.

 

The case, as put by our correspondent, involves the question whether a Mason can properly be held responsible for acu 52C

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

nommitted before he became a Mason, upon which subject we have, heretofore, given our views at large. We think, as a general thing, that no man can be made amenable to an institu tion or association, before he is a member of it.

 

No man can violate a law before he is placed under its influence.

 

But we have contended that there are extreme cases, where a Mason might properly be held responsible for acts committed before he came into the Order.

 

If we remember correctly, we have put a case something like the following: Suppose a citizen of New York has so conducted himself as to acquire the character of a thief, swindler, or, otherwise, that of a grossly immoral man, and, for some criminal act, he has there served a term in the Penitentiary, and suppose he afterward removes to Texas, forges letters of introduction and recommendation, and, through the influence of this base means, creates the impression that he an honest and worthy man, and, thereupon, is received into the Masonic Fraternity. Such a man, we say, should be denounced as an imposter, and spurned from society. We do not ask any man to admit that lie has been guilty of the acts charged, but we do ask that lie shall not misrepresent his standing in the community of which he was last a member: He knows that every Lodge requires the applicant to have the character of an honest and honorable man, and if his general reputation has been the opposite of this, we would hold him responsible if he did not apprise the Lodge, and ask an investigation. But, suppose he is not presumed to know that the Lodge requires him to bring an unblemished character, this would only exempt him from responsibility for the first degree in Masonry, and he would, certainly, merit the appellation and punishment of an imposter, should he attempt to advance.

 

We do not wish to be misunderstood. We would by no means close the door against reformation. We think a man may have been guilty of high crimes, and so repent and reform his life, ab to be worthy of the degrees in Masonry; but it is poor evidence of repentance and reformation, that he conceals from the Lodge (not his guilt) his previous character for dishonesty. We know it is considered hard to require a man to give evidence against 14imself, but it is known that Masonry requires this.

 

If a maa QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

521 Is an atheist, he is called upon, in a most solemn manner, to own.it, though, by so doing, he knows he will be rejected. We do not ask him to say what had been his religious views, but whether he now believes in God; we do not ask a man to tell the Lodge that he had been guilty of crimes, nor that his character had once been bad, but we have a right to know what his character now is, where he is best known.

 

In the case mentioned by our correspondent, we think tine applicant is censurable for deceiving the Lodge that made him; but we do not think, on the whole, that his conduct merits exoulsion, nor do we see how he could be held amenable to our criminal code; but we do think that, if the Lodge made him oefore his residence within its jurisdiction was sufficient, or of the usual length of time, its charter should be arrested.

 

WHEN CAN WE REFUSE TO RECOGNIZE A MAN AS A MASON ! FonT TowsoN, CuocTsw NATION, ARK., August 10, 1853.

 

DKAR SIR: Will you do me the favor to give me your opinion as regards the following question: Has a Companion Royal Arch Mason the right to refuse to recognize a Companion whom he may believe to have been guilty of unmasonic conduct, previous to the matter having been investigated before a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons? Respectfully and fraternally yours,

 

S.

 

If our correspondent means to ask whether any and every brother has the right to refuse Masonic intercourse with another, solely on the ground that he believes, or even knows him to be guilty of unmasonic conduct, we have to say that no such right exists. No one brother has the right to try another for unmasonic conduct; nor has he the right to pass judgment upon him.

 

The law points out the manner by which charge may be preferred; and, until charges and specifications ar regularly filed, the brother accused retains his Masonic standing, and must be fellowshiped by all. But if our correspondent intends to be understood, as his language seems plainly to indicate, as inquiring whether any one brother has the right to refuse Masonic intercourse with one who stands regularly charged, but not yet tried, our answer may not be so satin factorily given.

 

Until after we commenced the publication of 522

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

the Signet, we supposed it was universally admitted that, from the time charges and specifications were regularly filed by the Lodge having jurisdiction, the brother so charged ceased to be in good Masonic standing, and that no Mason had the right to hold Masonic communion with him, until, by a fair trial, he was acquitted. But we have since learned that a number of intelligent Masons assume and maintain that the same law which obtains in criminal prosecutions, in our courts of justice, is applicable to trials for unmasonic conduct in our Lodges. The law of the land very properly presumes every man innocent until, by legal trial, he is pronounced guilty; and lawyers are very much inclined to be governed by the same principle in Masonry, and, hence, it becomes proper to inquire whether this can properly govern in our Masonic Lodges.

 

In courts, of justice, the "man who makes malicious and false charges, is not thereby liable to the same grade of punishment which would be inflicted upon the criminal, if found guilty. A. may falsely charge that B. is guilty of murder, and, although the innocence of B. be clearly proven, and the maliciousness of the charge established, no one would think of trying and hanging A. for falsely accusing B. The highest grade of punishment known to Masonry is expulsion; the next highest is suspension. Any one brother may prefer charges against another, for unmasonic, or gross unmasonic conduct.

 

For the former, if proven guilty, lie is liable to suspension, and, for the latter, expulsion.

 

Now suppose A. charges, falsely and maliciously, that B. is guilty of unmasonic conduct, and this fact is established, the principles of Masonry would require, and the members would promptly proceed, not to suspend, but to expel A.; and hence i t is that the presumption is always in Masonry the reverse of what it is in our criminal courts. The crime of bearing false testimony against a brother is so heinous in Masonry, that it is always presumed, when charges and specifications are filed, that the accused is, to a great degree, if not fully guilty of all that is charged, and, therefore, he ceases to hold good Masonic standing; he is, in effect, suspended from Masonic privileges, except so far as to give him full and ample powers to make up and conduct his defense, by himself or attorney.

 

He cannot visit QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

5123 his own or any other Lodge, nor can the members hold Masonic ‑ommunion with him. We have not the space to present this sul~iect in all its bearings, but we will briefly call attention to a reason or two, showing the justice of the usage. Every Lodge is bound to give a reasonable notice to the accused, before he can be brought to trial.

 

Now, suppose an individual member is charged with the highest grade of Masonic crime, and suppose, further, that his guilt is notorious, if his standing as a Mason is not impaired, but, on the contrary, he is presumed to be innocent until convicted by trial. he has the right, any time before his trial, to go into his Lodge and demand a diploma. (The Lodge can not, consistently, refuse a diploma to any member in good standing.)

 

He may leave the jurisdiction of his Lodge (for we have no jails), and, armed with this recoir_‑ . mendation and certificate of good standing, he may travel far, and impose upon the Craft wherever he may sojourn.

 

We think no Lodge would be willing to certify that any Mason is in good standing, while charges of unmasonic conduct stand filed against him, and yet, if his standing is really good, no Lodge so believing can withhold this recommendation.

 

We think the old, and generally received usage, that every Mason under charges loses his good standing from the time the charges are preferred and filed in open Lodge, is correct and proper.

 

We say, then, to our correspondent, that, as the same criminal code of laws is applicable to Royal Arch Masons, every Companion not only has the right to refuse Masonic intercourse with a Companion against whom charges are preferred, but it becomes the duty of every one to withhold all Masonic intercourse, except so far as may be necessary to a fair and impar tial trial.

 

Some Grand Lodges refuse to let the accused sit in open Lodge during his trial, but require the testimony to be taken before a committee.

 

We are informed that the practice in this city (Montgomery, Ala.,) is to go into a Committee of the Whole, or, more properly, call to refreshment, and take the testimony ;n the Lodge‑room, but not in open Lodge, where, they think, the accused can not admitted.

 

We are nr t sure but one of the last two meth 634

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

is preferable, as a matter of policy alone, to that practiced by.. Missouri, and some others, where the accused loses‑ his Masonic standing when charges are preferred, but is admitted in open Lodge during his trial.

 

COb‑F$RRING DEGREES GRATOITOOSLY.

 

VALLEY HEAD. DE KAY.B courTY., ALA., August 13, 1865. BRO. MrTenELL :‑As you are considered the source from whence true Masonle light emanates, permit me to propound to you the following questions, with a view to elicit your answer in your next number of the Signet: Would it be strictly in conformity with the ancient usages of Masonry, to confer the degrees gratuitously upon ministers of the Gospel; and, if so, has a member of the Lodge a right to negative the petition of a worthy minister, when there it no objection urged against him, save the usual fees not accompanying his petition ? To make the case, to which I have reference, plain to your understanding, t will state it as follows There is a clause in the By‑Laws of De Kalb Lodge, No. 116, which, after specify. ing the fees required from candidates for Initiation, Passing, and Raising brethren for membership, etc., says: " Provided that any or all of the degrees may be conferred gratuitously upon ministers of the Gospel." This question has been mooted in our Lodge for the last two or three years. There is a clause, also, in the By‑Laws which requires all proposed amendments to the By‑Laws, to be submitted in writing, handed to the presiding officer, and read at a regular communication, and then lie over to the next, to be considered,' and, if a majority concurs therein, to bf come a law of the Lodge.

 

A brother, at a regular communication, submitted an amendment to the clause above specified ; at the next communication, it was referred to the next, for want of time to consider it. But, at a succeeding communication, the brother, thinking it probable that his proposed amendment would be voted down, gave way to another member, who offered the following resolution as a substitute for the whole matter " Reedved, That hereafter this Lodge will confer the degrees, free of charge, upon all worthy ministers of the Gospel, who have the care of Churches, and who devote their entire time to the ministry.‑2 The vote of the Lodge was then taken upon the passage of the resolution, which resulted in a tie vote. The Worshipful Master, not being willing to give the casting vote, again put the question to the Lodge, upon the passage of the resolution, but the result was the same.

 

The Worshipful Master then gave the mating vote affirmatively, and the resolution became a law of the Lodge.

 

Now, the questions are, would it be in accordance with Masonic usage, to COS‑; fhr the degrees, gratuitously, upon ministers of the Gospel ? and, if so, would It be Masonic for a brother to blackball a worthy minister of the Gospel, when that QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

525 Is no objection urged against him, save the usual fees not having aceompag1ed his petition.

 

Your early answer to the above questions on Masonic usage is fraternally solicited.

 

Yours, with fraternal regard,

 

V.

 

The Ancient Constitutions are altogether silent as to the fees for Initiation, Passing, etc. As we seem not to be generally understood, we will again explain what we mean by the 1 Ancient Constitutions.

 

We say, "The Old Charges," as collated by Anderson, by order of the Grand Lodge of England, and published in 1723; are the Ancient Constitutions of Mason ry.

 

They are the written Landmarks‑the immemorial lawwhich never has, nor ever can be changed.

 

The " Old Regulations" are nothing more than the Constitutions or By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge'of England, made in conformity with,.or not adverse to the Landmarks.

 

These Regulations have ever been subject to amendment, and are only binding upon us, so far as good examples should influence all good Masons.

 

The Grand Lodge of England, from time to time, made new Regulations to govern the fees, and so, also, do the Grand Lodges in the United States by By‑Laws regulate the charges made for degrees ; but if any have omitted to do so, the power is clearly. with the subordinates to exercise a sound discretion. We think most of the Grand Lodges have said the several fees shall not be less than a specified sum, and' some of them do not leave the subordinates at liberty to confer the degrees without charge. upon any one. The Grand Lodge of Missouri permitted its subordinates to confer the degrees for many years' on ministers of the Gospel, without charge ; but, a few years since, this liberty was prohibited by a very large vote. The Grand Lodge of Alabama leaves the subject expressly at the will of the subordinate Lodges.

 

Section 11, Article 4, of the Cousoao%,tion reads as follows The tee for initiating a candidate into the first degree of Masonry shall not be less than fifteen dollars; for the second, five dollars; and for the third, ten dollars; provided, that every Lodge shall be authorized to confer any, or all of those degrees gratuitously upon ministers of the Gospel.

 

It will then be seen, that, as the Ancient Constitutions are silent upon the subject, it is clearly within the power of the Lodges in Alabama to make such Regulations as they please.: 526

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

,t follows, therefore, that the Lodge to which our correspond. ent refers, has the right to receive ministers of the Gospel without charge, seeing that it has a Regulation to that effect. We very much question whether the By‑Law was properly amended by a resolution; but whether the one or the other was in force at the time spoken of, it still had the right to initiate s minister without charge, provided he was engaged in ministerial duties.

 

We are next asked if a member had the right to cast a negative vote, when no objection was urged against the candidate, save that of receiving him free of charge. If we take this question in its literal sense, we should say that any member had unquestionably the right to cast a blackball, for the fact of no objection being urged, or even spoken of, by no means presupposes that 'none exists.

 

But we apprehend that Bro. V. intends us to understand that the objector avowed his opposition to the candidate, and stated the grounds of his objection to be the non‑payment of fees. With this understanding, we unhesitatingly say that such a course would be contrary to every principle of justice, and at war with the long established usages of Masonry.

 

Every example furnished us by the Grand Lodge of England, from 1717 to the present day, places the action of the Grand and subordinate Lodges in the: hands of the majority.

 

The By‑Law of De Kalb Lodge, we take it for granted, was legally enacted, and it is the bounden duty of every member to be governed by it.

 

If, therefore, a member did blackball an applicant for no other reason than that stated, he acted ungenerously, unwisely, and contrary t4; his duty as a Mason.

 

A moment's reflection should satisfy any brother that he has no right to take vengeance upon the inno= cent, because he fails to obtain such a By‑Law as he believes to be called for.

 

For example: we have completely changed our views of the propriety of conferring degrees without charge. on ministers.

 

We now think they should be required to tam' etock in the concern, and did we belong to a Lodge in the act of making By‑Laws, we think we could offer some good reasons for our present opinion; but, most certainly, if the majority over. ruled our views, we should be acting unmasonically to reject QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

527 Pn applicant for no other reason, than that we thought he ought to pay the fee demanded of others.

 

CONFERRING DEGREES ON TWO OR DIORE AT A TIME.

 

ToxrxrNsviLLE, ALA., August 24, 1853.

 

DEAn BROTHER :‑Please be kind enough to give me your opinion upon the fol lowing questions, to wit: Can the first, second, or third degree, or any part thereof., save the lectures, be conferred upon more than one candidate at a time ! Or, in other words, can two or more applicants be introduced, Initiated, Passed, or Raised together.

 

We (our Lodge) have always refused to admit more than one candidate at the same time ; yet I can not see any good reason why the degrees, or a part of them, can not be conferred upon two or more just as well. Your opinion will confer a favor, etc. Fraternally, R.

 

The Old Charges or Ancient Constitutions, are silent upon the subject of makings.

 

That the Grand Lodge of England permitted as many as five candidates to be introduced and receive a degree together, we are bound to believe, from the language of the first article upon "makings," as collated by Anderson, and which is styled an Old Regulation.

 

It says No Lodge shall make more than five new brothers, at one and the same time, without an urgent necessity.

 

In our time, the construction put upon the language above gLoted is, that not more than five be made at the same meeting, and that each was to be initiated separately, but that this is not a fair construction of the language, we refer, first, to its literal reading, and, second, to the reading of the next Article, which uses the word meeting, when meeting is evidently meant. It. is as follows ART. IL‑That no Lodge shall ever make a Mason without due inquiry into hip character; neither shall any Lodge be permitted to make and Raise the same brot'_er at one and the same meeting, without a dispensation from the Grand Master, which only on very particular occasions may be requested.

 

But what of all this?

 

The Regulations of the Grand Lodge of England were ever subject to amendment.

 

It is true, they, asi! cnl1Cd fllc Ancient Constitutions, and so far as their antiquity tl talcs Q:~rn to our respect, so far they should influence tra) action of our Grand Lodges, and no farther.

 

528

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

The Old Charges are truly the Ancient Constitutions :.f Masonry ; they constitute the written Landmarks, which eau not be removed ; but the Constitution of the Grand Lodge of England, like the several Constitutions of our Grand Lodges, were altered or amended at pleasure.

 

The third Regulation declares that no Lodge shall ma ae a Mason for less than on' guinea; and it prescribes the disposition to be made of that guinea; and yet it is not pretended that Grand Lodges may not make what Regulations or By Laws they please in relation to fees.

 

Some of them, Alabama in the number, have authorized the degrees to be conferred, without any charge, upon ministers of the Gospel. ' It is very clear to our mind, that an improper impression prevails, as to what are, in reality, the Ancient Constitutions of Masonry. The Grand Lodge of England annually amended her Constitution or Regulations, but never removed a Landmark‑a law in the Old Charges.

 

We say, then, the usage of the Grand Lodges in the United States is the highest authority we can quote, in relation to the question of our correspondent ; and, upon this subject, we undertake to say, that although there are exceptions to it, the general nsage has been, for many years, yea, ever since the organization of Grand Lodges in this country, to confer no degree, or any part of it, upon two candidates at the same time. We have seen what is improperly called the second section of the Fellow Craft's degree, conferred or given to several at the same time, nor can we regard this as very improper, as the second section is nothing more than the lecture exemplified, . and, certainly, we may lecture any number.

 

Aside from the fact' that the almost universal usage now is to introduce but one at a time, we think there are reasons in favor of this prudent way of working that can not be overcome; we can not explain, our meaning here, but in the Lodge room we undertake to say ihat we can show the palpable impropriety of conferring a degree upon more than one at a time.

 

We can find no reference made to this subject in.the Constitn‑, tion of the Grand Lodge of Alabama; indeed, we suppose it was believed to be so generally understood that only one at a time cculd be initiated, that a By‑Law to that effect was not required., QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

529 Tl:e celebrated Mormon prophet, Joe Smith, was instrumen. tal in obtairinn a dispensation from the Grand Lodge of Illinois, to establish a Lodge at Naavoo, and very soon the. applicants were so numerous that the prophet was left to the choice of losing the fees of a great number, or of making them in gangs, he promptly chose the latter course ; and, if w e are not mistaken, his hal,it was to initiate one or two dozen at a time, not one in ten of whom was ever instructed, or Masonically knew anything of the degree. The Grand Lodge very properly arrested the dispensation or charter, and pronounced those who were thus imperfectly made, to be clandestine, until they were healed.

 

And we think the Grand Lodge did its duty ; but if more than one can be initiated, who shall say that a score may not enter together ? We think it not out of place to add that, at best, too much haste is used in making and advancing Masons. More evil than good has resulted from making Masons rapidly, and there is no necessity for it; certainly, not in Alabama, where Lodges are sufficiently numerous in most parts of the State to do up all the work offered, in the ordinary and better way.

 

We may, moreover, safely say, that the Grand Lodge of Missouri will not sanction the initiation into either of the degrees of more than one at a time.

 

CHRLMIAN rRAYER9 IN MA30JTRY.

 

HouxA, LommAvs. August 23.1853.

 

BRo. 1drrmELL:‑Ought there not to be some uniformity in the prayers used in Masonic Lodges, as in other Masonic ceremonies? Bro. Stewart, in his Freemason's Manual, gives various forms of prayers, that differ from any I have ever heard in my own Lodge, or seen in any other Masonic book.

 

Slivold this be so? But it seems to me, there is another objection to these prayers.

 

They are sectarian. . They are constructed upon the theory of a tri‑personal God. and can not be used in sincerity by any one who does not believe that the innoo‑nt second person died to make a vicarious atonement to the offended first. in behalf of guilty man.

 

Now, there are many Masons who repudiate this doctrine, who yet worship the Lord sincerely. pray to Him, and receive the Bible as His divine revelation; why, then, should not Masonic prayers (I mean those used in Masonic ceremonies) be addressed directly to the Heavenly Father, like the "Lord's Prayer," without the addition of such expressions as. " For the sake of," o,"through the merits of Thy Son."etc.

 

‑84 580

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

I know of no authority for this form of prayer in the Bible.

 

In Paul's l' to the Ephesians (last verse of the fourth chapter). there occurs, in the Fmgllt version, this expression, " even as God, for Christ's sake, hath forgiven yo4 x' but, by turning to your Greek Testament, you will flnd this to be a mistram tiou~ The rendering should be " God, in Christ," not " God, for Christ's erlttt%l Neither did‑our Lord, when He taught us how to pray, or at any other time, all anything about IIm merits. or His sake.

 

There are those, claiming to be both Masons and Christians, who believe when Christ said, "I and My Father are one," He meant one in no qualified but really one‑one God, one person ; who believe that the threefold distf of essential principles existing in the Deity, known as Father, Son, and I Ghost, are united in the one divine person of Jesus Christ, and who pray to as to the manifested God, not to any other person " for His sake." It is not with the view of opposing any system of religious belief, or of a ing my own, that I make these suggestions ò but to deprecate the introd of sectarianism into Masonic ceremonies.

 

Do you not think, brother, that I l right f

 

Yours sincerely,

 

w. M. Mueow HovxA, LooisimvA, September 13, 1863.

 

BRo. MrrenELL‑‑In my letter to you of the 23d of August, I used an e don which might be misunderstood.

 

That letter related only to one subject‑~l prayer, and in making the assertion that the expression " for the sake of Christ,,' was not authorized by Him.

 

I bad reference only to its use in prayer‑to custom which prevails in nearly all our churches (founded on the doctrine of tbe' vicarious atonement), of praying to the Father " for the sake of" the Son.

 

The expression ', for My sake," occurs in the Sermon on the Mount, but to very different sense. "Blessed are ye when men shall revile you,. and secute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you, falsely, for My sake.'+  As I said before, however, the remarks I made upon this subject were not Is. the spirit of opposition to the religious opinions of anybody, but were intended': to show that the objections entertained by some Masons, to a certain form a(1, prayer, were conscientious, and not altogether trivial, and that, therefore, that"~ form of prayer ought not to be used in Masonic ceremonies.

 

Take another case: Can not a Jew be a Mason

 

And how could he b expected to unite ia a prayer to the Father "for the sake of Jesus Christ Y" w. X IL, The foregoing very sensible and appropriate suggestions of \ Bro. Mercer, necessarily involve the consideration of the on,,,'; inal design of Masonry. If the fact of its origin with t,111" Jews must be taken as evidence that its teachings had no refer ence to Jesus Christ, we are left to admit the propriety of ths~ ; .' complaints made by our brethren of that religious faith, for tk" lest one hundred years, because of allusions to our Saviour, s the ceremony of our Order.

 

For, as we haveendeavored‑

 

'' QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

531 show in our history of Masonry, every reliable tradition in the Ancient Craft degrees tends very clearly to prove that King Solomon was the founder of the Institution. But we think the facts connected with the origin of Masonry tend to prove, that it was designed to prepare the minds of men for the coming and teaching of the Saviour of the world. We have, in our history, attempted to show that Masonry was instituted by divine permission, or, perhaps, by divine command, in order to upturn the Heathen Mytholo(r y, and, also, to assist in laying the foundation for that system of moral reformation absolutely necessary to the successful introduction of Christianity. We might, perhaps, avoid responsibility and further labor, by referring our correspondent to our views above alluded to, but, in that investigation, the direct question of Bro. Mercer is not considered.

 

Hence, we feel it to be our duty, in as brief a manner as possible, to examine this subject, so far as it is involved by the inquiry of Bro. Mercer.

 

Those who are familiar with ancient history, will remember that the Egyptian Mysteries were originally instituted purely for the purpose of retaining and transmitting a knowledge of the self‑existent and eternal God, a knowledge of whom seemed in danger of being lost by the superstition and idolatry of mankind. The cultivation of these Mysteries was then and for a long time after confined exclusively to the priesthood, or those who were considered teachers in divine things. Afterward, the Mysteries were made merchandise of.

 

They were divided into greater and lesser Mysteries, and finally subdivided into degrees or divisions, suited to the capacity or claims of the various classes of men, so that room was made for the whole human family to enter and participate, to some extent, in the rituals and teachings of the Institution, which had now fallen into the hands of idolaters, and no longer tauzht the doctrine :)f one God.

 

Thus constituted, it was deemed essential to tem poral and eternal happiness, to be initiated at least into the lesser Mysteries, that the Institution was presided over by the gods, and that there only could their wrath be appeased or favor courted.

 

To such an extreme was this doctrine carried, that lie who failed to gain admission, because of an inability to undergo the terrible ceremony of initiation, was looked upon an  531  532

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

under the curse. of the gods, and, therefore, an object of detes. tation to all mankind. These‑Mysteries, variously modified.or changed to suit the peculiar heathen worship, were introduced and cultivated in every country, and by every people.

 

Yet God was never without a pand of faithful witnesses, ready and willing to testify to His omnipotent power.

 

The Jews became His peculiar people, and, at last, they alone retained a knowledge of His being.

 

But even these, His chosen people, became corrupted by.the influence of heathen notions. They made unto themselves laws which they vainly supposed superseded the laws of Jehovah, and turning aside, they ran after strange gods. Such was the condition of the world when David was King of Israel.

 

If we understand the character of this monarch, it is made to exemplify the capacity and tendency of man to practice evil works, and the power and willingness of God to be reconciled to the vilest of His creatures, upon the simple condition of repentance.

 

Few kings had done more evil by waging unjust wars than David, and few men had more openly dared the vengeance of Jehovah, in the violation of His known laws, and yet he became a man after God's own heart.

 

The three last years of King David's life were emphatically devoted to the service of God, by unceasing efforts to impress upon the minds of men the wisdom, the power, and mercy of his divine Master.

 

In his sincere devotion, David desired to honor God by the erection and dedication of a house to serve as a restingplace for the Ark of the Covenant, and for the reception and dwelling of the great Shekineh.

 

But God refused to permit him to erect the house, because he had been a man of blood.

 

Here is a fact to which we ask attention.

 

If David was then a man after God's own heart, with all his sins forgiven, why did God refuse this request?

 

We say, it was because the house of the Lord was intended to be a type oú the reign of our Saviour, which was to be a reign of peace.

 

Again: God appointed this work to be done by the son of David‑and truly was King Solomon's reign one of peace, thus carrying out the design.

 

The reader will remember that the Jews were not on terms of religious intercourse with the heathen nations.

 

No heathen was permitted to approach their altars where God was QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

533 worshiped.

 

The Jews believed that God was their God; that all His blessings were for them; and, hence, they prayed that His curse would fall upon their enemies; not supposing that Ile had blessings in store for those who denied Him, and per secuted His people.

 

How, then, must the Jews have been surprised to find the foundation of the House of the Lord so laid, that a place‑the outer Courts‑was to be provided for the .worship of a!1 nations.

 

Here was evidence to the Jews, that God was manifesting mercy toward every nation, kindred, and people.

 

In short, that He was God over all.

 

,Solomon not only received wisdom from Heaven, but God gave him great rides, so that he was under no necessity to call on his people's enemies for assistance ; and yet, he did call on the King of Tyre, his people's ancient enemy, for timbers. The King of Tyre freely and gladly granted his request. The father of the then King of Tyre had raised and educated a young man, who became the most celebrated workman in archi tecture and sculpture in the world.

 

King Hiralu sent this artist to King Solomon to assist in erecting the House of the Lord.

 

Now, we ask if all this can be satisfactorily accounted for in any other way, than by supposing God so ordered? We think God was preparing the way for that reign that should teach His mercy and goodness, alike to the Jew and Gentile; and as His whole plan for the redemption of fallen man was based upon man's privilege to use the means provided by Him for the accomplishment of the end, we are permitted to see and understand the wisdom of the plan itself.

 

We think God put it into the heart of Solomon to call upon the King of Tyre, thereby showing the Jews, that even the Gentiles were permitted to participate not only in the erection of the edifice, but also in the plan of salvation.

 

We think God put it into the heart of Hiram, King of Tyre, to render the assistance asked, that the Gentile nations might see, that while the Jews were His peculiar people, His plan of salvation was alike open to all.

 

But is it not most remarkable that Hiram, King of Tyre, sent his most accomplished workman to King Solomon? The people of Tyre would not worship at the Jewish altar; they did not believe in the God of the Jews, and it would seem strange ago

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

that their sovereign should do all in his power to assist in the erection of a house, to be dedicated to that God in whom neither he nor they believed; and equally strange, that the King of Tyre would seek to elevate the fame of his rival, by sending him his most accomplished workman.

 

We do not hesitate ‑te believe, that this was a part of the divine arrangement.

 

The Jews and Gentiles here had an opportunity of beholding both Jew and Gentile, engaged in the erection of the House of the Lord. Here, too, was to be seen God's plan for breaking down the wall of partition between the Jewish and Heathen nation s and not more plainly in anything than the employment of Hiram, the Widow's Son, as the master workman. If Qe# '' designed to break down the prejudice, founded in ill feelings, existing between Jew and Gentile, no plan would be so likely to effect it, as the employment of Hiram Abiff, whose mother was of the tribe of Naphthali, and consequently a Jewess, tint;; whose father was a matt of Tyre, and hence a Gentile.

 

Him* s Abiff was, therefore, both Jew and Gentile, and of all men else, the best fitted to do away with the hostile feelings of the two nations, and thereby prepare the minds of all to worship at the altars of the living and true God.

 

With this view of the subject, we can understand why it was, that God inspired Hiram Abiff with " wisdom to devise all manner of cunning work, and to solve all difficult questions."

 

His decisions veers ‑4 satisfactory to all the workmen on the Temple, as he was rAft presumed to be partial to either Jew or Gentile.

 

We learn from the Bible, that King Solomon was inspired with greater wisdom than had ever been given to any king, and it is a matter of interest to inquire for what purpose this great wisdom was granted to him ? Does any one suppose it was alone for the purpose of enabling him to erect a fine building? Such a supposition is inconsistent with the true character of God.

 

We know that He requires His created intelligexees to render an account according to the talents received of Him,, and it fellows, that extraordinary wisdom was not given to Solomon except far extraordinary purposes.

 

We think di+nme wisdom was given in this case, that Solomon might teach the doctrine of one God, and one salvation from the penalty of QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Us) transgression ; and this could not be successfully done‑‑allowing that man had the privilege of choosing between good and evil‑except by yielding, to some extent, to the predilections of man's perverted reason. As we have seen, the Egyptian, the Roman, or Grecian Mysteries, in some form, were every where sought after as absolutely essential to the well‑being of mankind.

 

Even the Jews were not exempt from the pernicious influence of these Mysteries, and now to counteract, and lay the foundation for the subversion of the Heathen Mythology the divinely inspired wisdom of Solomon enabled him to institute a Society, surrounded by all the alluring habiliments of Mystery, and permission was given to both Jew and Gentile to enter, and learn therein the secrets which were for man's temporal and eternal happiness.

 

We think this secret Institution was Masonry. We think that no religious dogmas were taught the initiates; but, in addition to the instructions in architecture, all were taught the doctrine of one God, and' the moral obligations all men were under to render willing o'bAdience to His laws.

 

As evidence, that what we have said is probably true, the Bible informs us that, after the Temple was completed, the wise men of all nations visited King Solomon, to behold the wonderful edifice, and to learn wisdom of Solomon. Now, reader, what do you suppose was the nature of this wisdom learned of Solomon?

 

Can any Bible reader suppose it had reference to the art of building?

 

This would be to suppose God's great designs were for the accomplishment of no great ends, arid,, therefore, can not be reconciled with His character.

 

We bclieve all the facts go to prove, that the wisdom referred to had relation to man's eternal happiness, the doctrine of one God, and man's relation to Him, through the Mediator which had been promised, and for whose coming Jehovah was preparing the way.

 

We think that, but for the teaching of Solomon, the proclamation of John the Baptist would have been listened to by none except by a portion of the Jews.

 

None others wero expecting a Messiah ; nay, all others worshiped a plurality of gods, and, therefore, would not be likely to look for a sinoo messenger of peace.

 

We suppose, that the wise men of all 686 nations were initiated into Masonry, and taught the same principles which the Institution now inculcates; and thus these wise men carried home with them that knowledge, which prepared their minds, and the minds of those who were by them afterward, in like manner, instructed for the coming event. Hence, when John the Baptist came, proclaiming the approaching advent of the Saviour of the world, there were a few everywhere prepared to believe him.

 

Thus having given a brief sketch of what we conceive to be the origin and design of Masonry, we proceed to inquire, by what authority any one can ask that the prayers in the ceremonies of Masonry should of right make no reference to Jesus Christ. Are we to be told that, because Masonry was instituted at Jerusalem, therefore no reference was or could there have been made to the Messiah? We know the Jews were then, as now, looking for a Messiah, and, aside from other evidence, we think that their punishment for rejecting Jesus Christ, as the promised Messiah, is strong presumptive evidence of their error, especially when taken in connection with the fact of their disper, lion, etc., that was foretold and has been, and is being accom plished.

 

But this latter point needs not to be proven, in order to show the propriety of Christian prayers in Masonry.

 

The Ancient Constitutions‑the immemorial Landmarks of Masonry ‑are silent upon the subject of prayer.

 

It follows, then, that neither the Jews or Christians can rely upon that ancient document for the particular form of prayer anciently used.

 

We do not pretend to say‑nay, we do not believe‑that the Old Charges, the written Landmarks, have been handed down to us in their original purity.

 

The very first article tells us, that formerly it was the usage to require Masons to be of that religion prevailing in the country where they happened to sojourn or five, which. lesson, we are satisfied, was never taught by King Solomon. We have no evidence that any particular form of prayer was introduced into the Lodges until about one hun. dred years ago, when the Grand Lodge of England made a: Regulation upon the subject, making the prayers conform some. what to the religion of the country; but this is not at all bind. ing upon us, for, if it never has been altered or amended, it hat QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

537 at all times been subject to be altered or amended by that Grand Lodge. There being, then, no ancient law regulating tho form of prayer, we are driven to the necessity of looking to the. oldest testimony, tending to show the character of Masonry. aside from our opinions, as deduced in the foregoing pages, derived from the Bible. We say, that the oldest records to which we have access, speak of Masonry as St. John's Masonry, and, if this is the oldest testimony, then is it conclusive that the proof is altogether in favor of an intimate connection between Masonry and Christianity, and so far from establishing the charge that Christian prayers are of modern date in Masonry, it proves the very opposite.

 

We say, then, that Christian prayers are not inconsistent with the principles or rituals of Masonry. We think, however, that all the contention about the form of Lodge prayers, which has been going on for the last hundred years, is merely a dispute about a shadow, for whether the Jewish or Christian prayers u, ased in the Lodge, neither has cause of complaint. The brother who prays to Jehovah, in the estimation of the enlightened Christian, prays to the same God to whom the Christian prays.

 

The brother who prays to Christ, offers his devotion to the God of the Jews‑the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.

 

We think that the silence of the Ancient Constitutions upon the subject of prayer, very forcibly illustrates the true character of Masonry.

 

In its original formation we find no evidence of its sectarianism: a belief in God and a willing obedience to His known laws, as the rightful sovereign of the world, was all that was taught.

 

We have no evidence that any form of prayer was ever attempted to be established by authority, until after the revival of Masonry in England, in the early part of the eighteenth century, when those of the Brotherhood who denied the divinity of Christ, sought to exclude all reference to Him in the Masonic ceremonies; and the subject being thus agitated in Grand Lodge, that body decreed the use of Christian prayers about 1754.

 

And, doubt, less, through the influence of England, Christian prayers have been laid down in all the American Masonic Charts, except that of Bro. Davis, of Philadelphia.

 

We had the pleasure of a 5138

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

personal acquaintance with Bro. Davis, and had several .ater views with him upon the subject of Masonry, and, to our surprise, we found him greatly defective in a knowledge of the rituals above the Master's degree. We then thought, and still think, lie knew less of the rituals of Masonry than any instructor we had ever conversed with;* and be candidly told us that his sole object in publishing the Monitor, was to exclude Christian prayers.

 

Was Bro. Davis' Monitor free from error in other respects, we should not object to adopting it as a text‑book. We want no better prayers in a Lodge than those addressed to Jehovah‑He is our God and our Redeemer. On the other hand, we are quite as well satisfied to hear supplicatiotis addressed to Christ, as He is our Redeemer and God.

 

But why are these prayers laid down in our Masonic Charts‑? Does any one suppose the 'Master under obligations to use the words contained therein? Certainly not. If a minister be present, it is usual for the Master to call on him for prayer, and, of course. he will use his own language.

 

The prayers are laid down in the books for the convenience of Masters who are not in the habit of making public prayer, as prayer must be made before the Lodge can be declared legally to be open.

 

It will be seen from all we have said, that, granting tire trans. lation of Bro. Mercer to be correct, we, nevertheless, attach no importance to the wording of the prayers‑the intent and meeaing is all that is essential. If there was a Masonic ]read clothed with the power, we should not object to meeting the views of Bro. Mercer and other objectors, by adopting the plan of the "Lord's Prayer," but for the life of us we can not perceive the necessity of such a restriction ; on the contrary, we think the proof all tends to show that Masonry was intended to foreshadow the coming of Jesus Christ, and to serve as a steppingstone to the religion taught by Him ; and, therefore, as a question of right, merely, we hold that Christian prayers are indicated by the history and teachings of Masonry.

 

DOES A REFUSAL TO ADVANCE A BROTHER AFFECT HIS STANDING? OXFORD. BECTON corm‑rlr, ALA., Juno 1, 1W& Buo. MITCHELL‑‑Suffer me to propound to you a question.

 

Has a Lodge the ò We have been informed that he is familiar with the Pennsylvania work.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Gag fight, after stopping a brother Entered Apprentice Mason, to refuse to grant him a certificate of good standing, etc., without bringing a charge against him? 19y answering the above question, you will much oblige your brother, S. C. W.

 

We think not, brother.

 

There are many reasons, either of which would make it the duty of the Lodge to prevent the advance of a candidate, which could have no direct reference to his moral character; and, hence, the arrest by no means im pairs the Masonic standing of a brother.

 

A brother may apply to a Lodge for affiliation, and be rejected. without at all impairing his standing as a Mason; and hence it is that every one so rejected continues to enjoy the right to visit, common to others.

 

In like manner the Entered Apprentice, who has been refused permission to advance, retains his standing as an Entered Apprentice, until charges and specifications are filed against him, and, in the absence of such charges, we think the Lodge should not refuse him a certificate of good standing.

 

It is sometimes urged that the certificate should not be granted, because he may go to another Lodge and receive the degrees. To this we reply, that no other Lodge has the right to confer the degrees without the unanimous consent of the Lodge which made him ; and, if the brother is about to leave the jurisdiction, this might be fully guarded against by inserting in the certificate that he had been refused the privilege of advancing.

 

But, certainly, the brother has the right to ask that the truth be stated, and the truth is, that every brother is in good standing until charges are filed against him.

 

CAN A WSPENDED MASON BE EXPECUDt Hoxs, Nawxox covn‑nr, Mo., August 27, 1853.

 

DzAR BBOTarn‑‑What is the proper course for a Lodge to pursue In relation to a Mason who is under suspension, indefinitely, for unmasonic conduct, and who, since his suspension, has been guilty of additional and more gross unmasonic conduct? .1 want you to write me on the subject, and also give your views in the fnet, as a large portion of our members wish to know your opinion. Fraternally,

 

Jonx H. Ross.

 

The proper course to be pursued in a case like the above, ie simply to file charges of gross unmasonic conduct, making the 540

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

specifications as in other cases, upon which the Master witl appoint a time for. trial, and have the accused notified, according to the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge. This case, however, presents a difficulty in Missouri, because the custom there, as sanctioned by the Grand Lodge, has been to suffer the accused to sit in open Lodge during his trial, which privilege can not, of course, be granted to a Mason under suspension, and, therefore, we advise, that the accused have the privilege of appearing before a Committee, appointed by the Lodge or Master, which Committee shall take down in writing the testimony for and against the accused. The testimony so taken shall be read in open Lodge; the accused may be defended in open Lodge by his counsel, provided lie be a Mason in good standing. After the cause is fully and fairly heard, the question of guilty or not guilty is to be determined by a vote of the Lodge. If he is found guilty of gross unmasonic conduct, the question of expulsion must be determined, as a less or milder punishment can not be inflicted on one already under suspension for an indefinite period.

 

We think it is very clear, that while a Mason can not he tried for an offense of a less or even the same grade of that for which he is undergoing due punishment, it becomes the bounden duty of the Lodge to try him for a greater offense, Suppose a brother be suspended (as is frequently done in some jurisdictions) for non‑payment of dues. In such case it is per. fectly within his power to remove the disgrace whenever he chooses to pay his indebtedness.

 

But if he knows himself to have been guilty of crimes, or unmasonic conduct, which would subject him to indefinite suspension or expulsion, he would not, as a matter of self‑protection, pay his dues, if his suspension shielded him from trial for a greater offense.

 

The Mason who is suspended for a definite period, may be tried for a higher offense, and be indefinitely suspended, and then, if believed to be guilty of gross unmasonic conduct, the penalty of which isexpulsion, he may be tried and expelled.

 

There are four grades of punishment in Masonry. First, reprimand; second, suspension for a definite period ; third, sus. pension for an indefinite period ; fourth, expulsion.

 

Immora QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

541 or unmasoi.ic conduct, according to its magnitude, will subject a brother to either of the first three,; but nothing short of gross unmasonic conduct can subject him to the last. Gross unmasonic conduct may be defined to be an offense or crime so wickedly and deliberately perpetrated, that but little hope can be entertained that the offender will soon repent, and honestly endeavor to make restitution or atonement. AòMason should not be expelled so long as there is a reasonable hope that the offender is not corrupt at heart. Expulsion is the highest order of punishment known, to Masonry, and very few expelled Masons are ever restored. But, if circumstances demand it, every Lodge owes it to itself and to the Fraternity at large, to inflict the punishment ; and the reprimanded Mason is just as liable to this higher grade of punishment as is any other Mason.

 

CAN A ROYAL ARCH MASON BE A MEMBER OF Two CHAPTERS? COMP. MITCHELL'‑Can a Royal Arch Mason, who has been elected and Installed in office in a Chapter, obtain his demit before the time for which be was elected expires? I will explain.

 

I have before me a paper from a Chapter in a sister State, which says, that they can not demit a member who holds the office of second Grand Master, till the end of the year, which is about six months hence.

 

They recommend him, and say, that he has paid all dues, and that he shall have his demit at the time just stated‑six months.

 

Can any one holding such certificate join another Chapter, before the expiration of the six months, and hold office in said Chapter? Is such certificate proper according, to ancient usages in Masonry, the member taking final leave? Yours fraternally,

 

II. S. S.

 

The officers of a Chapter or Lodge are elected for " twelve months, and until their successors are duly elected and installed." We hold that no Mason can resign an office which he has accepted, and into which he has been installed. The usage of the Grand Lodge of England clearly shows that the absence of an officer, whether by removal or death, does not authorize a new election.

 

On the contrary, the vacancy must be filled by pro tem. appointment; that is to say, the next officer below takes his place, and his place is filled by appointment.

 

In the absence of the Master, the Senior Warden becomes, for the 542

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

time being, Master, the Junior Warden becomes Senior Warden, and the office of Junior Warden is filled by pro tea. appointment.

 

We think the Lodge or Chapter has the same right to per mit one of its officers to demit, that it has to grant the privilege to any other member; in such case, his office is filled the balance of the term, as above stated.

 

Suppose a beloved brother or companion is about to remove to Europe, there to fix his residence, would it be treating him justly, to put him off with a half‑mad4up certificate or diploma, that would allow him to visit, but not become a member, in his new home? We say, it would not, for the unanswerable reason, that it is made his duty by the old laws, to attach himself to a Lodge as soon as he locates in the vicinity of one.

 

As the same laws which govern in Lodges are, as far as may be, applicable to Chapters, we say. that tle Regulations of the Grand Chapter referred to are incorrect.

 

To the second question we say, that the certificate referred ,o gives the holder no right to connect himself with another Chapter, for he can not be a member of two at the same time, and the certificate declares that be is still a member in another jurisdiction. There must be satisfactory evidence not Orly that lie has paid his dues and is in good standing, but that he has demitted from the former, before he can be a m inlber of the latter. Of course, lie can not hold office where Ne is not a, member.

 

HOW TO OPEN A LODGE IN THE ABSENCE OF THE MASTER AND WARD‑TY3. COTTAGE HOME, September 12. 1853. DEAR SIR :‑Will you please answer in the Signd. whether the following is according to Masonic law and usage: "If the Master, Senior, and Junier Wardens are all absent, the Lodge can not be opened, except on funeral ocò%asione,, unless a dispensation is obtained."

 

In such a case, would not the right to open the Lodge and conduct the business and work, devolve, by ancient Masonic law and usage, upon the last Past Master, who has passed the Chair in that Lodge, present, without a dispensation from the Grand Master.

 

By the Constitution of our Grand Lodge, all Past Masters by " office," who have passed the Chair In a Lodge under its jurisdiction, are ex‑officio members of the Grand Lodve. me. long as they continue to be members of a subordinate Lodge under the jmia11oò Lion of the Grand Lodge, and no longer.

 

Now, would not such Past office‑ n QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

542 Members of the Grand Lodge, be entitled to preside in the Lodges of which they ate meme,,rs, and in which they had served as Masters, in the absence of the Master and both Wardens, without a dispensation, on funeral and all other occasions? My own opinion is that they would, and would take precedence in their right to preside, according to the following order, to wit, the last blaster first, the next. and so on, counting back in the line of succession, up to the first Master, each in his order of succession.

 

Yours fraternally,

 

R. J. Frrz To the foregoing we have to say, that without permission by dispensation, from the Grand Master, a Lodge can not be opened for any purpose whatever, unless the Master or one of the Wardens be present. The dispensation or charter, under which the Lodge is holden, is grant=ed directly to the Master and Wardens, and their successors, and they alone are directly responsible to the Grand Lodge for the manner in which the business and work of the subordinate is performed.

 

Should a Lodge violate or trample under foot the well‑established usages of the Craft, the Grand Lodge would summon the Master and Wardens to show cause, if any they have, why the charter shall not be arrested. The members, generally, are not so summoned, for the simple reason, the three first officers are alone responsiLle.

 

Hence, the Lodge is not allowed to do business or work of any kind in their absence, unless their responsibility ii; removed by authority of the Grand Master.

 

Soon after the reorganization of Masonry in England, the Grand Lodge made a Regulation, requiring a Past Master to preside in the absence of the Master; but very soon this Regulation was repealed, and the reason given was, that on a careful examination of the old usages, it was found that the Wardens succeeded to the Cha,ir in the absence of the Master, and such custom has ever since continued to be the law of the Grand Lodge of England. The spurious Grand Lodge of London, calving itself the Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons, as early as 1765, gave preference to a Past Master, and through Dermott's AMman Rezon, this custom found its way into the United States. He (Dermott) says, that if the Master be absent, a Past Master must preside, but the Lodge can not be convened unless by order of a Warden. Thus it appears, that even this groat innovator never pretended that a Lodge could legally v;1

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

proceed to open, unless one of the three first officers was preen t.

 

Our correspondent asks whether, in the event of a dispensation from the Grand Master, authorizing the Lodge to do business in the absence of the principal officers, a Past Master is not the proper one to preside, because of his being a member of the GraA Lodge. We say lie has no claim to preside, based on his leaving passed the Chair, nor his membership in Grand Lodge.

 

The Senior Grand Warden, if present, would have no right to preside because of his office, but the members would have the i iglit to proceed to open the Lodge precisely as the dispensation directed.

 

The Grand Master has all the power necessary for the occasion ; lie can instruct that a Past Master may preside ; lie may appoint any brother to preside, or lie may authorize the Lodge to choose a member pro tem.

 

Bro. Fitz further asks whether a Past Master, who is a member of the Grand Lodge, has not the right to open and preside over the Lodge, in the absence of the Master and botli Wardens? This question we have already answered. The Lodge can not be legally opened in the absence of the three principal officers. It is much to be regretted that the true Masonic law is so imperfectly understood, and that the innovations of Dermott continue so long to influence the opinions of intelligent men and true Masons.

 

CMI THE HASH M ASME A BY‑LAW? LA GBANGE, T‑‑RAs, October 4, 1853.

 

BaO. MITCHELL :‑For two or three years past I have been an attentive and much interested reader of your excellent periodical, the Signd. Your comments and decisions upon Masonic jurisprudence have more especially commanded my attention, and while I have been greatly instructed and edified by a recurrence to them, I have not felt inclined to differ with you, until I met with the October number for the present year. Your answer to the question of " G.," relative to the powers of a Master of a Lodge, or the High Priest of a Chapter, comes in con tact with all my preconceived notions upon that subject.

 

The ruling there complained of was upon a By‑Law which reads as follows: " No member sball speak more than twice upon the same subject, unless to explain himself, or by permission of the Lodge."

 

Will it be contended that the above By‑Law confers absolutely and unconditionally upon each member the right to speak twice, and for any length of time he chooses, upon any and all questions arising in the Lodge, and that the Master has no right to interpose and stop the debate?

 

If so, in a Lodge QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

5!5 composed, a~ ours is. of some seventy‑five or eighty members, two or three day* might be consumed in the discussion of the most trivial and unimportant question. Or suppose, upon the other hand, that the discussion of any subject was producing unpleasant feelings, and likely to result in harm, would not the Master, under the above By‑Law, have the authority, and would it not be his duty, W put a period to the debate? In a word, is not the Master of a Lodge clothed with the authority and power usually conferred upon the presiding officers of legislative and deliberative bodies, to say nothing of the power with which he it invested by Masonic law and usage? You say that " there is no principle better setled by the Grand Lodge of England, than that every d. partment of the Institution is governed by the majority rule."

 

Surely, they do not contend that the ballot box "department" Is governed by '░ the majority rule?"

 

I find always been under the impression that the blaster had the right to order the Craft called from labor to refreshments, and vice versa, at his option, without consulting the "majority rule."

 

Am I mis. taken or not?

 

From the Ancient Charges I thought I had learned, that the Master was to be treated with the utmost respect and reverence, and that his commands were to be implicitly obeyed ; that the members were not allowed to hold private committees or separate conversations, without leave from the Master, nor to talk of anything impertinent or unseemly, or interrupt the Master, but to oay due reverence to the Master, Wardens, and Fellows, and put them to worship I will just here make a quotation from Bro. Mackey, which is indorscd by Bro Robert Morris, and which I have never beard disputed until recently ; and although it savors much of the" one‑man‑power," I hope there are but flew "bigoted and self‑sufficient Masters," who will 'ò arrogantly assume " more power than is allotted them by Masonic law and usage.

 

But to the quotation `░ The power of a Master in his Lodge is absolute.

 

lie is the supreme arbiter of all questions of order ; nor can any appeal be made from his decisions to that of the Lodge.

 

Ile is amenable for his conduct to the Grand Lodge alone, and to that body must every complaint against him be made.

 

For no misdemeanor, however great, can be tried by his Lodge, for as no one has a right to preside there in his presence but himself, it would be absurd to suppose that he could sit as the judge in his own case.

 

This is the decision that has been made by ewcry Grand Lodge in the United States, which has entertained the question, and it may now he considered as the settled law in Masonry." My chief object. in addressing you this letter, is to elicit something more froth your able pen upon this subject, about which there seems to be more than one opinion entertained.

 

Amoo.

 

The foregoing unbiased and pungent strictures upon the views expressed by us, in the October number, demands at our hands a liberal and candid reply. Bro. "A." asks if the By‑Law, which gives to every member of a Lodge the right to speak t'‑tvice, confers " absolutely and unconditionally upon each memò her the right to speak twice?"

 

We say no, not unconditionally. ,rhe spirit and meshing, of such a law is to be taken in to account.

 

546

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

The law contemplates a fair. discussion of the subject of debate and he who wanders from the subject forfeits the privilege intended to be granted, and may, and should be pronounced out of order by the Master. In like manner, he who uses personalities becomes thereby disorderly, and should be called to his seat by the gavel.

 

But if Bro. A. intends to ask whether, if the members conduct the discussion in order, the law absolutely confers upon each the right to speak twice, we say yes.

 

The law takes out of the hands of the Master the right to arrest a discussion, and instead of leaving him the absolute and sole. judge as to the time when the debate should be terminated, secures to every member the right to be heard, even a second time.

 

If the law is too latitudinarian in the privileges it grants, we say, amend it; but if the brother will pardon us, we candidly think it is ridiculous to retain in your code of By‑Laws, a section, securing certain privileges to each member, if it is within the power of the Master to set aside that law and stultify its meaning.

 

If the Master is the absolute monarch, as held by some, why, in the name of common sense, must we have a code of By‑Laws?

 

If his will is above all power in the hands of his Lodge, or his Grand Lodge, then throw away your By‑Law, and suffer him to rule unrestrained, except by that immemorial law (not yet produced, nor ever can be), which makes the blaster irresponsible for his arbitrary rule.

 

It will not do to say, that, there are but few men who would abuse the power vested in their hands as Masters of Lodges, for although, to the honor of Masonry, we cheerfully admit its truth, yet knowing, as we do, that unlimited power ever has, and ever will be subject to be abused by a portion of mankind, it is but right and proper that the government of the Lodge should, to a limited degree, be held in the hands of the majority.

 

When we stated, that no principle was better settled than the majority rule in the Grand Lodge of England, we, of course, expected to be understood as alluding to those subjects upon which the Grand Lodge was at liberty to legislate. We could not, we hope, be understood as saying that even a unanimous vote could remove a Landmark; but we did mean to say, that the Grand Lodge of England has ever maintained and practiced QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

544 the right of enlarging or restricting the powers of its Grand Master. Only in the United States is it contended that the Grand Master is above responsibility to his Grand Lodge; only in the United States is it held, that Lodges may make By‑Laws anil Masters trample them under foot, and all this because of an ancient usage which, we assert, never existed !

 

There are certain rights enjoyed by the Master, which are not subject to legislation ; for example, lie has the power to close his Lodge whenever he shall think the good of the Craft requires it.

 

And have not the members also rights, which can neither be taken from them by legislation nor the will of the Master?

 

Every member has the right to ballot for the introduction of a new member.

 

But in all matters subject to be regulated by the action of the Lodges, viz., Bv‑Laws, the law, when legally instituted, is just as binding upon the Master as upon the members.

 

Bro. A. has correctly quoted the ancient law.

 

It is the duty of every member to put the Master and Wardens to worship; out it must certainly be understood that the Master and Wardens are acting within the pale of their vested rights, or in conformity with the By‑Laws, and it will be further seen that this respect, required by the ancient law, is not confined to the Master and Wardens, but equally extends to the fellowsthe'members ; all are put to worship, that is, respected, reverenced, each in his appropriate place or station.

 

As to the quotation from Bro. Mackey, reiterated bysome others, we have only to say, that it is the New York doctrine, promulgated long before any publication by Bro. Mackey appeared. And while, to a limited extent, we approve of it, we deny that anything can be found in the Old Charges, Ancient Regulations. or in the whole work of Aneerson, authorizing the assertion, that" the power of a Master in his Lodge is absolute." Such doctrine may be found in Dermott, probably, but not in Anderson.

 

We ask again, if this be true, why should a Grand Lodge or subordinate be concerned in making By‑Laws?

 

If the power of the Master is absolute, no law can enlarge or abridge his powers.

 

We protest against this attempt to fasten upon our Institution a doctrine nowhere taught by our how ored fathers, and so dangerous in its consequences.

 

548

 

QUESTIONS Or MASONIC USAGE.

 

" He is the supreme arbiter of all questions of order."

 

la one sense this is true, and it is proper it should be so.

 

It is made the duty of the Master to see that his Lodge is governed by, and obedient to the laws of Masonry, and his decisions as to what is, and what is not Masonic law, must be submitted to by all.

 

Questions of this character can not be appealed to the Lodge, because it is made the business of the Master to decide them.

 

Hence, the work, the rituals, must be practiced as lie directs.

 

But, suppose the Lodge has under its government and control a seminary of learning, will it be contended that lie has the right, by his office, to give the final decision on all questions growing out of the rules prescribed for the government of that school?

 

So in reference to all matters independ ent of pure Masonic law.

 

The Lodge has the right to reserve, in its By‑Laws or rules, the privilege of an appeal from his decision.

 

There is no ancient law tending to show whether it is, or is not competent for a Lodge to prescribe the number or length of time the members may speak upon any subject, and, hence, the privilege to amend the Regulations is clearly in the hands of the Grand Lodges.

 

The old laws of the Grand Lodge of England frequently refer to and recognize the right of the subordinates to instruct their representatives, thus proving what five said about the recognition of the majority rule.

 

But, after all we have said, we feel authorized to return to, and rely upon the position first assumed, viz., that if the Lodge has the right to make By‑Laws, they must be regarded as binding upon all.

 

In whatever our opinions differ from the learned author of the Lexicon, we have only to say, that this difference is to be expected so long as we are governed by the English Constitutions, as collated by Anderson, and he by the innovations of Dermott, as taught by the Ahiman Rezon.

 

Cl loose ye wholri you will serve, Anderson or Dermott.

 

HAS THE MASTE8 A RIGHT TO SUMMON THE MEMBERS? HOLLY SPRINGS, Miss., October 6, 1863. Eno. J. W. S. Mcrcunix‑Daar Sir:‑From what I have seen of your mag., asine, and from what I have learned from those who are acquainted with you, relative to your Masonic information. I have concluded to trouble you with o' QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

5‑10 few questions, the answering of which will give me great satisfaction.

 

Your labors, I know, must be great, and I doubt not you are much annoyed by inquis itive correspondents similar to myself.

 

In justification of myself, permit me to say, that this is the first communication of the kind I ever addressed to the editor of a magazine, and that I am induced to do so now, in order<o obtain th valuable information which, I feel confident, you possess, in elucidation of the subject in dispute, hoping you will pardon me for my presumption and for the 'trouble I give you.

 

"But to the question."

 

I am the Master of the Lodge in this place, and have filled that oMee for nearly two years.

 

Masonry, I am sorry to say, has been and is now, in this place, in a declining state.

 

I have hardly ‑ever been able to obtain a sufficient number of the brethren to attend the regular and stated meetings, requisite to open and close the Lodge.

 

Under these circumstances, I have adopted a course, which gives great umbrage to some of the brethren, and which some of them stigmatize as unmasonic.

 

Now, l have the good of the Fraternity at heart; my desire is to advance the interests of the Institution, and I would not, for the world, be guilty of unmasonic conduct.

 

If I am wrong, I wish to be told so, and to be placed in the correct path. Seeing the difficulty of getting a sufficient number of the brethren to attend at the regular meetings, I have been in the habit, for the last two or three months, of issuing a special notification or summons to all the brethren, which summons have required the Tyler duly to serve upon all the brethren.

 

At each meeting I have the roll called, and all absentees are required and specially notified to attend at the next regular meeting, and show cause why charges for unmasonie conduct should not be preferred against them, or, in other words, to come for ward and give an excuse for their absence.

 

Some of the brethren object to this, and say, I have not the right, and that it is unmasonic to summon the brethren to attend at a regular, stated meeting.

 

That I may summon them to a called meeting, but that neither I, as Master, or the Lodge itself, can 'summon them to %ttend at a regular communication.

 

Now bow is this?

 

Is there any restriction upon the right of the Worshipful Master, or the Lodge, to summon the brethren? They are bound, it is true, to attend the regular, stated meetings; but what prevents an imperative summons from being issued, if the Worshipful Master, or the Lodge, deem it necessary?

 

Has the Worshipful Master, or the Lodge, the right to summon the brethren to attend these meetings?

 

If I am wrong in the course I have pursued, I would be gladly set right

 

My object is to do what is right, and if I err, it will be from ignorance of what is my duty and power, and 'not from a desire to go contrary to the Ancient Landmarks and usages of the Order.

 

An early answer to the above is earnestly solicited, either through your Magazine or by letter, as you may determine best

 

Again permit me to ask your pardon for troubling you with so long an epistle, and believe me, ever sincerely and truly, your well‑wisher and brother, G. R. FnExmAN.

 

Before answering the above question, we feel called upon to say to Bro. Freeman, that no apology is necessary from those who propound to us questions of Masonic. law or usage. We commenced the publication of the Signet after many years of 550

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

close study and careful examination into the history and usages of the Order, and, for the last six years, we have devoted our entire time to subjects connected therewith, hoping thereby the better to serve our readers and promote the interests of the Institution. Hence, may it be expected that we are better posted up, and more capable of throwing light upon mooted questions, than are a large portion of the members of the Brotherhood. We have never declined answering, either privately or through the Signet, any questions heretofore put to us, and if we may judge by the large increase of our labor in this department, and the general approbation which our opinions have received, we are forced to the conclusion, that we have thus rendered the Signet far more acceptable than it otherwise would have been. Under this pleasing conviction, we rather court than avoid this branch of our editorial labors.

 

The question proposed by Bro. Freeman was never, to our knowledge, seriously raised before. We recollect that a shrewd, scheming brother, once, in our presence, denied in open Lodge, the right of the Master to summon the members, unless for, extraordinary purposes, which must be stated in the summons; but this was understood to be a maneuver to shield a favorite, who had been guilty of disobedience, and incidentally to lessen the influence of the Master of the Lodge ; and that these suppositions were well founded, we state, knowingly, that the same brother has since occupied high places in the Order, and never without claiming the strictest obedience to his mandates. It may be said that this is an isolated case, and should not affect the principle involved, and we cheerfully admit, that if the brother was right in the first position he assumed, his after conduct only proves his willingness to usurp powers which he did not believe he possessed oú right. But, without further circumlocution, we will came to the question involved. "Has the Master of a Lodge the right to exercise a sound discretion in the discharge of his official duties, where no local law points out and limits his action ?" We say he has, and that such right is essential to the well‑being and prosperity of the Craft.

 

We are not one of those who believe that the Master or Grand Master is above all law; on the contrary, we hold that, above QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

551 all others, are they bound to be governed by the law, and any law made by the Lodge, or Grand Lodge (not in derogation of the established usages), prescribing the duties and limiting the powers of the presiding officer, must be obeyed by him. But we hold that neither a Lodge or Grand Lodge has the power to withhold from the Master of a Lodge the right to summon the members to meet him in their Lodge room, at any time. he may designate, provided, a reasonable time is allowed for obedience to the summons.

 

We say he can not be deprived of this right, because, as far as we have any knowledge, it tends to show that this power was exercised and never questioned, long before the reorganization in 1717, and ever since that period, and, therefore, it must be regarded as a settled usage of the Order. And the case stated by Bro. Freeman clearly shows the necessity and importance of that power.

 

The Master and Wardens are directly responsible to the Grand Lodge, for the government of the subordinate, but the Master, in an especial manner, is held responsible for the strict obedience of the members to the laws of Masonry, and Constitution and edicts of the Grand Lodge, and it would be unjust, indeed, to deprive him of the means of enforcing such obedience.

 

We all know it is the duty of the members to attend the regular meetings; but suppose they fail to perform this duty, has the Master the right to sit quietly down, and suffer confusion, disorder, disgrace, and ruin to come upon his Lodge, and thus bring reproach upon the Brotherhood ?

 

Suppose one of the members is called to leave the country, and applies, or desires to apply for a demit and diploma, which can only be granted at a regu. lag meeting, does the power nowhere exist to compel the Inemberg to assemble?

 

We could put a great variety of cases even more urgent and important than this, but we do not think it necessary, because we regard the usage so well settled that it does not admit of an argument.

 

Of course, we must be understood as holding that, while the right to summon at all times is clearly in the hands of the Master, he has no legal or moral right to abuse that power. It is the duty of the Master to see to it that the Lodge holds its regular meetings, and as much oftener as the claims of Masonry 552

 

QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAGE.

 

and the business of the Lodge demand, and to this end lie should use notices, if they will answer the purpose, and, if not, the stern and irresistible authority of a summons should be brought to bear; but if lie undertakes to use this high authority as a means of annoyance to the members, his Grand Lodge, as the guardian of, the rights of the members, will hold him to strict account.

 

EX PARTE TRIALS.

 

MELROSE, NACOGDOCHES couxrr, TEXAS, November 11, 1853.

 

DR. MITCHELL:‑I wish to know your opinion, in regard to Masonic usage, it proceeding against a brother accused of gross unmasonic conduct, and the Lodge to which he belongs knows not his whereabouts, the last account beard of him being at wetumpka, Alabama. We wish to know how to proceed in notifying him. You will confer a favor, by answering this through the Signet.

 

T. B. Ruse.

 

If your Grand Lodge has made no provision upon the subject, you have clearly the right to cause an ex parte trial to be had, such being the usage generally sanctioned in the United States. Of course, all proper means should be taken to ascertain the whereabouts of the accused, and though residing within another jurisdiction, he should be notified by letter, or otherwise, placed in possession of a copy of the charges, and the time fixed for trial. After having received the notice, should lie fail to attend, you can go into trial, appointing some brother as his counsellor, and thus hear and determine upon the testimony, as in like cases where the accused is present. On the other hand, should you not be able to learn where a letter would reach the accused, as in cases where scamps decamp to parts unknown, you can, in like manner, go into a trial ex parte, and suspend, expel, or acquit.

 

Care should be taken, in all such cases, that justice be tempered with mercy, and that the accused have quite as fair a trial as would be awarded to him if present.

 

POWERS OF DEPUTY GRAND MASTERS.

 

CLINTON, MIHSISSIPPI, November 23, 1865 BRo. MrrcuELI.:‑will you please answer the following questions: 1. When the Grand Lodge is silent as to the duties, powers, and privileges of the Deputy Grand Muster, can that officer grant dispensations for settieg' Aside ei QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

558 mgpending the By‑Laws of a subordinate Lodge, or for any other purpose, with out the consent or knowledge of the Grand Master, while lie (the Grand Master) is at his post, i. e. at big residence within his official jurisdiction? 2. Is lie not the aid, the assistant of the Grand Master, to perform such dutie w be (the Grand Master) can not conveniently attend to, and may request or require of his Deputy to discharge, and in the absence of the Grand Master, JiU his sWton.

 

S. Has he any power except such as may be bestowed upon him by the Grand Lodge, or deputed to him by the Grand Master, during the recess of the Grand Lodge? Or. is his power coincident with that of the Grand Master, to be used wherever and whenever he may choose to exercise it? Your compliance will oblige, yours truly, etc.,

 

GEo. II. GRAY, SR.

 

We fear our views, to reference to the foregoing subject, may be thought somewhat ultra, even by Bro. Gray.

 

We ]told that the office of Deputy Grand Master is of modern institution, there being no satisfactory evidence that there ever was a Deputy Grand Master, until 1666. when, after the great fire in London, Sir Christopher Wren not being able to superintend, in person, the erection of the great number of public buildings then under his care, felt called upon, and did appoint a deputy. We hold that it is competent for any Grand Lodge. to be constituted without having a Deputy Grand Master at all.

 

This officer is no more necessary for the legal formation of a Grand Lodge, than is that of Grand Chaplain, Grand Orator, or Grand Lecturer, neither of which

 

is

 

known in the ancient ritual. We are not inclined to call in question the right of a Grand Lodge to create these offices, or quite a number of others, in order to the carrying out its laudable plans. But we assert that the mere name does not give power to the officer.

 

We have undertaken, elsewhere in the Signet, to show that the Grand Master has no prerogatives.

 

We have shown that the most learned commentators upon the English law, clearly exclude this class of officers from any claim to prerogatives.

 

The king enjoys prerogatives, by reason of the inherent right which belongs to and descends with the crown.

 

But the Grand Master is, and ever has been, an elective officer, subject, formerly to the edicts of the, assembly of all the Masons, and latterly to the edicts of the Grand Lodge. Now, if this be true, the Grand Master has none but delegated powers; be can do nothing of his own right, but must act within the pale of 554

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

the law creating him an officer.

 

And, we apprehend, no one will contend, that lie who only enjoys a delegated power, can himself delegate that power to another.

 

The Grand Master can only do that which his Grand Lodge empowers him to do, except that which common usage has assigned to him, in the absence of local regulations.

 

The Grand Master, by common consent, and, in most jurisdictions, by the By‑Laws of the Grand Lodge, can grant dispensations to set aside or suspend the By Laws of a subordinate Lodge, but, most certainly, he can not authorize another to do this for him.

 

He can not say to the Deputy Grand Master, go to Lodge A., and, if you believe it necessary, set aside their By‑Laws.

 

A written dispensation to do this extraordinary thing, must emanate directly from the Grand Master.

 

In Alabama, the Grand Lecturer has the right to sot aside the By‑Laws, and pronounce upon cases of emergency; but, most assuredly, the Grand Master could not delegate to him this power.

 

The Grand Lodge, which creates the office, can alone prescribe the duties and privileges of the officer.

 

The Deputy Grand Master is an officer of, and can do precisely what the Grand Lodge authorizes him to do, and no more. W say, then, in answer to the first question, that when the Deputy Grand Master is not empowered by the Grand Lodge to set aside the By‑Laws of subordinate Lodges, lie can not do so by any right of his own, nor through those of the Grand Master.

 

In answer to the second question, we say, that the Deputy Grand Master is an aid to the Grand Master, to do and perform all things sanctioned by the laws of his Grand Lodge. In the absence of the Grand Master beyond the jurisdiction, the Deputy Grand Master enjoys all the powers of the Grand Master; and why ? Because, for the time being, he is the Grand Master of the jurisdiction, and ceases to be the Deputy.

 

The third question is answered above.

 

The Deputy Grand Master must be governed by the laws of his Grand Lodge ; nor can the Grand Master depute to, him any powers not authorized by the Grand Lodge, any more than can the Governor of a State depute powers not sanctioned by the laws of that State: In Missouri, they have about twenty District Deputy Grand QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

555 Masters, intended to serve instead of, and supersede the necessity of a Grand Lecturer.

 

There the mere name led astray some of the best Masons.

 

They took the ground that, as they were Deputy Grand Masters for their respective districts, in the absence of law, they enjoyed all the rights that the Grand Master would, if in their several districts; and, hence, without law or precedent, some of them actually arrested charters, and compelled Lodges to close doors, without ever consulting or corresponding with the Grand Master.

 

Thus, the mere name attached to an inferior officer, was presumed to give him powers not claimed for the Senior Grand Warden, and not claimed or exercised in that district by the Deputy Grand Master.

 

The Grand Master possesses no power to set aside a law of his Grand Lodge, and he alone possesses the power, by common usage, to set aside or suspend the By‑Laws of a subordinate.

 

CAN A MASON BE REQUIRED TO PUT AWAY HIS WIFE I A brother in Texas has stated a case, and propounded to us a question, which involves the principle indicated by the heading of this article. We do not feel at liberty to publish the communication, but, we think, he will be able to understand our views of the whole subject from what we shall say.

 

We hold, that the laws of God are paramount to the laws of Masonry, should they at any time be found to conflict, which, however, we think, will never happen. The Bible tells us, that the man and wife are one flesh, and the same holy volume declares that "he who putteth away his wife, committeth adul tery."

 

Now, with this law of Heaven staring us in the face, how can a Lodge undertake to punish a brother for cleaving unto his lawful wife, though, by his own admission, she has been guilty of gross immoral conduct. To suppose a Lodge possesses the right to punish a brother, under such circumstances, would presuppose the right to cause the separation of man and wife; and this, we suppose, no Lodge in Christendom would undertake, in defiance of that holy law, which denounces a curse upon him who separates man and wife. But, aside from 556

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

all this, we doubt the expediency, and question whethc= more evil than good would not grow out of Lodge interference in such family matters.

 

The brother who continues to live in peace and harmony with his wife, though lie knew she had been guilty of infidelity to him, may have reasons, satisfactory to himself, that she has repented and reformed. But, whether this be true or not, we, as Masons, have no ri,rlit to inquire, for it is not our privilege to penetrate the secrets of the family circle.

 

The protecting arm of Masonry is thrown over the wife and children of every brother, and it is the duty of the Lodge to see to it, that no other Mason is guilty of conduct which might lead to the severance of conjugal ties, or cast a stain upon the offspring of a brother.

 

But, suppose a Mason has been recreant to his solemn engagements, and, serpent‑like, has stolen the priceless jewel of the family fireside, it by no means follows, that it is not a Christian virtue in the injured husband, to forgive a repentant wife.

 

We say, then, that there are but few cases, if any, where a Lodge would be justifiable in holding a member responsible for continuing to live with his lawful wife.

 

THE OPFRATIOV OF DEB7\'ITE SUSPENSIOXS.

 

DR. MITCHELL ‑‑A case of this sort occurred in Rising Sun Lodge, No. 29, at Decatur, Alabama, and we ask for your opinion in the case.

 

A member was suspended for six months, for intemperance, and, at the end of that time, the suspended member, through one of the regular members, asks for a demit, although he (the suspended brother) was not present. which was grant ed. A portion of the Lodge voted against his having a demit, because there war no evidence to show that any reformation had taken place. A motion was made, before the demit was granted, to appoint a Committee of three, to examine into the conduct of the suspended member. during those six months.

 

The Master ruled the motion out of order; an appeal was made to the Lodge, and the Lodge sustained the Master.

 

' Query.‑Is it right for a demit to be granted under these circumstances? Respectfully,

 

w. M.

 

The brother who is suspended for a definite period of time, is, of necessity, restored by the operation of that law, when the time specified expires, unless new charges and specifications be filed. A member, suspended from all the privileges of Masonry QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

55T for sit months, needs no action of the Lodge to restore him to full fellowship at the close of the tinge specified ; whereas, a brother suspended indefinitely, can never regain his standing, except by the action of the Lodge, or Grand Lodge.

 

While, a Mason is under suspension for a specified time, the Lodge may entertain cliarges against him, if the penalty of those charges will subject him to indefinite suspension or expulsion. So, in like manner, while a brother is suffering the penalty of definite or indefinite suspension, charges may be entertained, the penalty of which would expel. In short, any brother, under the penalty of a minor offense, may be charged and tried for a greater.

 

It often happens that a brother is suspended for six or twelve months, for intemperance, or profane swearing, the Lodge entertaining the hope that lie will reform within'that time. The Lodge is not only subject to be disappointed in this charitable expectation, but it sometimes happens that the offender defies both the admonitions of his friend:, and the forbearance of the Lodge.

 

In such cases, it is proper for the Lodge to protect itself against the contaminating influence of an association with him, and, therefore, before the expiration of his term of punish ment, take steps to cut him off altogether.

 

We say, then, that, in the case as put, the brother lead the same right to ask for a demit that any other member had; and it was not necessary to inquire into his conduct, for the past six months, in order to give him that right. The Lodge, of course, had the right to refuse a demit (if the By‑Laws are as they should be), and it was within the power of any member to deprive the brother of the privilege of asking legally for a demit, by simply preferring charges against him.

 

We think the brother's application for a demit was in order, and that it was out of order to ask for a Committee of Inquiry, unless based upon charges of unmasonic, or gross unmasonie conduct.

 

Suppose the Committee had been raised, and, having performed their duty, reported that no reformation bad taken place in the brother; what then? You would not refuse film a demit, on the ground that he was not in good Masonic standing, 558

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

because, by the operation of the law suspending, lie recovered his good standing by the death or termination of that law. The brother then being in good standing and full fellowship, he could only be deprived of all the privileges of other members, by filing charges against him. Had the brother. who moved for a Committee of Inquiry, accompanied that motion by charges and specifications, we apprehend the Master would have entertained the proposition.

 

But, after all, the brother is no safer from charges since his demit, than before; the Lodge holds, and may exercise precisely the same control over bis unmasonic conduct, if his residence is within its jurisdiction.

 

THE MASONIC YEAR ENTERPRISE, kiss., January 29, 1854.

 

BRo. J. W. S. MITCHELL.‑Dear Sir:‑From what I have seen of your magazine and what I have learned from those who are acquainted with you, relative to your Masonic information, I have concluded to trouble you with a few questions, the answering of which will give me great satisfaction.

 

Can a Lodge, acting under dispensation, hold a legal and regular meeting after the close of the Masonic year, which is the 27tb day of December. And the Grand Lodge should meet several weeks after that time, say the third Monday in January.

 

Can the Lodge go on and bold its regular meeting, say the second Saturday in any month ?

 

Can they go on and transact business at its regular meeting, or do its powers close with the end of the Masonic year? Yours, very respectfully and fraternally, S. B. PARKER.

 

A correct answer to the foregoing must be based upon the wording of the dispensation.

 

If this instrument, in the case alluded to, gives the power to the brethren to continue their Lodge only until the 27th of December, then. of course, the power ceases at that time ; but if, as we suppose is the case, it clothes them with Lodge powers until the meeting of the Grand Lodge, . then, unquestionably, the meetings maybe legally kept up until the very day on which the Grand Lodge assembles, provided, the dispensation be thus long retained.

 

If the dispensation gives power to hold a Lodge until the close of the Masonic year‑which would be unusual‑then the power extends to the day appointed for the meeting of the Grand Lodge.

 

There is no general rule fixing the beginning and end of a Masonic ycwr.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

55U There is no more reason for being governed by St. John the Evangelist's Day, than by St. John the Baptist's Day, nor is there a good reason, we think, for being governed by either. Each Grand Lodge regulates the Masonic year by its annual communications, and, hence, the difference in the various jurisdictions. We think we established the fact in our last May number, that a dispensation confers all the powers, for the time specified, that are conferred by a warrant; but as in some cases, near the close of the last century, the brethren were allowed thirty days to have their Lodge constituted, the warrant, in such cases was called a dispensation for the said thirty days, but no work could be done until the Lodge was constituted.

 

It will be seen, then, that the practice of issuing dispensations, to run from year to year, is a modern innovation made manifest by the Regulations of 1763, as also by those of 1717, both of which declare that no Mason shall be made, except in a "regularly constituted Lodge." From the foregoing facts, Bro. Parker will at once see, that although the modern practice of making Masons in a Lodge, whose first three officers are not installed, is in direct violation of the Old Regulations, yet, whatever power is conferred by the dispensation, must, of necessity, continue in force until the time specified expires.

 

THE FAMILY OF A SUSPENDED MASON.

 

A brother of Texas asks us the following question : If a Mason dies while under suspension, is the Fraternity under obligations to his widow and orphans' We say that Masonry is emphatically a society of rewards and punishments; it holds out strong inducements to every member to live in strict conformity with its rules and its teachings ; it promises to the good and true, brotherly kindness and fraternal protection, while living, and a transfer of that Brotherly Love, and, if need be, relief and support to his family after his death. On the other hand, i t threatens him, that if guilty of unmasonic conduct, it will cut him off from all the benefits and privileges of the Order.

 

It must be seen, from the foregoing, that all the claim which the Mason's family have upon the Fraternity, is derived by and through his connection with the 560

 

QUESTIONS OF MASO\'IC USAh11 Order, and it would be unreasonable to suppose that claim to be of a higher order than is held by the Mason himself. A suspended Mason is, as far as the Fraternity are concerned, thrown back in the same condition lie occupied before he was made a Mason; the brethren can have no Masonic intercourse with him, they can not talk with him about the rituals of Masonry any more than to one who is not a Mason ; they are released from all Masonic obligations to him ; in short, the mystic tic is cut and as his family derived their claim upon the Fraternity solely through his connection with the Order, their claim ceases to exist the moment that connection is destroyed.

 

And this is as it should be.

 

Aside from the innate pleasure and reward which Heaven offers for a life of integrity= and virtue, the most power. ful inducement the Mason has to continue steadfast in well doing, is the consoling reflection, that if lie shall die in Masonic harness, his brethren will see to it that his widow and orphans shall eiot want for true friends in their hour of bereavement, nor bread and raiment in their poverty.

 

There are many men, so prone to go astray by the indulgence of their inordinate passions, that neither their fear of God, nor love of an unblelnisleed reputation, are sufficiently strong to restrain their passions within due bounds, who, nevertheless, can not contemplate the holy ties which bind the Brotherhood to their wives and children, without a shudder at the very thought of severing that tie by their own unmanly and wicked conduct.

 

We say that the family of a suspended or expelled Mason has no claims upon the Fraternity, not enjoyed by the world at large; the stream of Brotherly Love and relief leaving been legally withdrawn from the main trunk, it can not flow through the branches; the Mason having been, by the laws of the Institution, deprived of all claims upon our charity, has, by his own disobedience, deprived his family of all claims whatever.

 

HON LONG MAY A?T ELECTED CANDIDATE DELAY INITIATION? SAN AUOD`JTINE, TExAs, November 26. 1353. BRO.J. SP. S. Mrrcn$rT,:‑Upon the following statement of facts, will you please express, through the Signet, your opinion, as to whether the Lodge acted 1D socordance with Masonic law and usage, in initiating a candidate QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

B. petitioned Lodge No. ‑, to be made a Dfason, and on On 30th of January 1847, was declarea duly elected to take the fir.4 degree in Masonry, but paid no further attention to the matter, until the regular communication of said Lodge, In November. 1853, when he presented himself, tcadamd his fve, and claimed to be Initiateu under the order of the 30th of January, 1847. Between those period$ he removed to Louisiana, where he remained two years, and returned to Texas; and when be applied to be initiated. there was a Lodge nearer his residence than the one to which he first applied. The Constitution of the Grand Lodge of Texas requires that a candidate shall apply to the Lodge nearest his place of residence. Fraternally yours,

 

H. M. K.

 

Taking the foregoing statements as portraying the facts of the case, we feel constrained to say, that the Lodge acted injudiciously and contrary to a usage which has grown into law, and the greater is the wrong, because of the dangerous piecedent which it sets. It is usual for Lodges to regulate, by ByLaws, the time allowed to an elected candidate to come forward and receive the degree; but, in the absence of all local law., universal custom prescribes a reasonable time, and if in thi:tperiod the candidate fails to apply, his fee is forfeited, and his application and election becomes a nullity.

 

The usual time is three months, subject, however, to extension, if the candidate is able to offer a satisfactory reason for his delay.

 

Suppose, for example, that he shall be taken sick, and should not be able to come forward, we hold that even the time spoken of by Bro. K. might be extended to him.

 

Again, suppose the elected candidate should be called to travel, before having it in his power to be initiated, we think the time might be extended to his return but in the case as put, there is no sort of excuse offered for the delay.

 

The candidate, in effect, says to the Lodge: " I did not choose to be initiated soon after my election, but considering it my interest now to become a Mason, I demand initiation a.g a right under my election six years ago."

 

To show tLe fallacy of this proposition, and the evils which might grow out of its practice, we will suppose that, at the time of the candidate's election, his moral character was unimpeachable, but since that time, he has become a drunkard, or otherwise an immoral man. In this case, would the Lodge consent that this former election should be considered binding?

 

We know not, but it must be borne in mind, that if it can be considered binding in the one case, it must be so considered in the other.

 

It may be said that, 38 562

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

tinder this state of things, any member would have the right tt arrest the candidate by an opea objection in the Lodge, and this is true; but it is not righ t to compel a brother thus to make ,his, objections known, whet. the usages of the Order, if lived up to, would afford him an opportunity to arrest the candidate by means of the ballot‑box. We say, then, that we sincerely hope the course pursued by the Lodge spoken of, will not be imitated by another. Under ordinary circumstances, three months is quite time enough to give an elected candidate to come for ward.

 

It n ill not do to tell us that the candidate spoken of was well known, and his character unimpeached ; the thing to be considered is, whether, under like circumstances, any and all men might be permitted to dictate to the Lodge the time at which they are to be initiated.

 

We regard our Institution so far independent of outsiders as not to look upon any man's introduction as conferring a favor, and, hence, we should be ‑slow to consent to the initiation of any one who lead treated the Lodge with silent contempt, by voluntarily staying away after he was given the opportunity to enter. As a general thing, we think the motives of such men may fairly be impugned, and even under a petition de navo, we would weigh all the facts in casting our ballot, and, most certainly, we should demand that he petition anew.

 

LADIES' DEGREES.

 

MmDEv, LA., December 9th, 1855.

 

13RO. J. W. S. MrTCREra.:‑As you are considered the true source of Masonic light, please inform me, through the S&jnet, whether it is right or wrong to confer the degree of '░ Holy Virgin" on a Master Mason's daughter, after she is married fome contend that it is wrong, and others say that it is right. Your views on this subject will be of great importance.

 

Fraternally,

 

WD.t.IAM Lss.

 

We say to our correspondent, that we know nothing of the degree called the " Holy Virgin," and, consequently, we can not Pay to whom it belongs. Of right, we are inclined to the belief, that it does not belong anywhere among Masons, surely, no one will contend that it is a part and parcel of Masonry.

 

We sup. pose. it to be something like the degree called the " Mason's QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGB.

 

563 Daughter ;' indeed, we have heard that it is the same, with some new embellishments; if so, we have no objection to its proper use, but we solemnly protest against practicing a fraud upon the ladies, by calling it a Masonic degree. There is no Masonry in it, and if ladies are so told before they take it, we have no objections to its use, and, certainly, if a Master Mason's daughter is once eligible to receive it, she is always eligible, unless she forfeits her claim by improper conduct, and marriage will not be so considered. We have never believed that thin several newly invented degrees, given to ladies, do any harm, and sometimes we have known good to result, but we insist that the truth shall be told, that in them there is no Masonry ; that the Lodges have nothing to do with them, and that no Grand Lodge recognizes them as being an appendage to, or in any way having a connection with Masonry.

 

We know that Bro. Lee may very properly charge us with having traveled out of his question, and given an opinion not asked for; but the brother will remember, that we are public property, and feeling it our duty to answer his question, we did not wish our answer to be misconstrued into an acknowledgment that his was really a Masonic question.

 

alARGING A FEE FOR AFFMIATION.

 

MURFREEsBORo, Feb. 21, 1854.

 

J. W. S. MrmuFI.L‑Dear Sir:‑The subject of charging a fee for membership for brethren joining us from other Lodges, has been discussed in one of our Lodges, and their By‑Laws so amended as to allow brethren to join without the usual fee of five dollars. As the Masonic propriety of this step has been ques. tioned, a number of the brethren are desirous to have your opinion upon the subject. Hoping you will give this subject a notice, I remain, Fraternally,

 

JOSEPI1 S. CARETS, N. M., Murfreesboro Lodge, No. 205.

 

The practice of charging for affiliation originated with the Grand Lodge of England, under the following circumstances When Sir Christopher Wren, the last G. Master of OperaLive Masonry, became old and incapable of superintending the Craft, the Institution was almost totally neglected.

 

Several attempts were made to revive it, and one of these proposed 564

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

a number of innovations,, among which was the admissiou of gentlemen who were not architects, or Masons. Theses several causes tended to drive the old members from tho Lodges, and without them the young members were unable to bring the Association into notice.

 

Thus. did Masonry decline, until there were but four Lodges in London.

 

In 1715, the four old Lodges made a united effort to produce a revival, and among the causes which led to their unprecedented success, the most conspicuous one was the earnest and zealous manner in which the members lived up to the rules and teachings of the Order. The Grand Lodge was established in 1717‑Lodges were established in various parts of the kingdom‑the royal family, and the nobility took a lively interest in promoting the cause, and Masons were rapidly made. About 1739, a considerable portion of the members became dissatisfied with the action of the Grand Lodge, superinduced mainly by a few aspiring and restless persons, who had more to expect. from discord than from peace and harmony. In 1742, some fifty Lodges had withdrawn, or totally neglected to make their returns to the Grand Lodge, and these were severally cut off by striking their names from the list of Lodges.

 

About this time, or shortly after, the Athol Grand Lodge sprung up, and its members were expelled, and the Institution pronounced clandestine by the Grand Lodge of England.

 

During all this controversy, a great number continued to withdraw, or rather to neglect their attention to Lodge duties.

 

The Grand Lodge soon perceived that a large proportion of the applicants for charity were those who had long neglected to contribute to the prosperity of the Order. and, therefore,, passed an edict, requiring all Masons; in the. Kingdom to come forward and register their names, and, at the time of doing so, to pay a small sum into the Charity Fund, and provided that all who failed, or neglected to comply with this Regulation, should cease to hold a claim upon the Charity Fund.

 

At a future period the funds arising from the fee of registry were set apart to assist in establishing their newly instituted Masonic school.

 

Thus have we briefly alluded to the, origin of affiliation fees, and so far as example and precedent may be brought to bear, it seems that.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

565 the right to charge a fee for affiliation now exists, and whenever and wherever the condition of the Craft requires such fiscal aid, we do not doubt the right of Lodges to demand the fee but situated as most Lodges in this country now are, we very much doubt the propriety of making this. charge. If a brother pays his fees for the degrees, remains a member, and pays his dues so long as lie continues a citizen within the jurisdiction of :his Lodge, it is, we think, rather unjust to charge him a fee for connecting himself with another Lodge within the vicinity of his new home. In most instances, the members who paid no such registry fees, are anxious to have the new comer affiliate; they may, and often do, stand in need of his counsel and assistance, and, certainly, it seems inconsistent, under such circumstances, to make him pay for the privilege of doing his duty. We would tax non‑affiliated Masons, but we would not charge a fee for affiliation.

 

CAN OTHi<R8 THAN xasONS T=FY IN M.moNIC =AtSf Ilno. MnrcHmL ò.‑If it will not be imposing too much upon :yon, I should be pleased to have your opinion upon the following query, as soon as convenient, as it will, perhaps, occur very soon in our Lodge, and I wish to be prepared to decide it correctly.

 

Can we travel outside of the Fraternity for evidence against a brother? If M, how is that evidence to be procured? The case is simply this, that you may the better understand : One member of our Lodge owed another five hundred dollars‑‑ten fifty dollar notes. The brother owing say‑, in the presence of a gentleman, who is not a Mason, and by whom be will be able to prove it, that he paid him four hundred and fifty dollars, but, In Abe hurry of the moment, he on'.y took up five notes, supposing, he says, that he had nine of them, and did not Siscover the mistake until the other five were presented. The other brother ccatends that he only received two hundred and fifty dollars.

 

The character of the two brothers bath, heretofore, been alike unimpeachable ‑both are ministers of the Gospel. The prospect for a compromise is gloomy, and I feel sure that the case will come up for investigation in our Lodge, and I wish to know what course we will pursue, both brothers being alike entitled to credit in their statements.

 

If you will answer this, in a written communication to me, soon, you will confer a favor on

 

Yours fraternally, For reasons deemed sufficient, we suppress the name and residence of the brother who asks the foregoing question . We 666

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

say that, in many cases, it is not only proper; but absolutely necessary to the cause of justice, to introduce the testimony of those who are not Masons. We are proud to say that prefer ence should be given to the testimony of a brother, and this is proper, because we have no right or authority to put any one not a Mason upon his oath, and, therefore, we must rely upon his mere statement as a gentleman, and, while in most cases we should incline to give full credit to such testimony, we could not, and should not be expected to consider it of so.high a character as the testimony of a brother in the Lodge, who, by our laws, is required to testify under that solemn .R1asonic pledge, peculiar to the Fraternity, and which is every way as imposing as an oath in a court of ,justice.

 

It follows, then, that if the testimony of one not a Mason is to be weighed against that of a brother, we are, by the very laws of evidence, constrained to attach the greatest weight to the latter. We say, further, that, in all cases where full and ample justice can be done, by confining the testimony to Masons, none other should be admitted; but, most certainly, there are cases where great injustice would be done a brother, if lie were refused the privilege of establishing his innocence by one who is not a' Mason.

 

Indeed, our usage establishes this doctrine at the very threshold of Masonry.

 

When a candidate petitions for initiation, our Committee inquires for his character and standing of those who best know him, whether they are Masons or not, and the evidence thus elicited is duly weighed, and, if not opposed to, or inconsistent with the statement of a Mason, or, if it stands alone, it is fully relied upon, and is made to form the basis of the report.

 

We say, then, that whenever it is believed by the Lodge necessary to the full development of the important facts, to introduce testimony from those who are not Masons, it should be done.

 

Take an extreme case, and it will show the principle.

 

A Mason in Missouri, who was at the time a Fast Master, broke open the mail and stole five hundred dollars of our money. He bad also treated others in the same way, and thus obtained a large amount of money.

 

These facts having been proven on his trial, and a jury of his countrymen having sentenced him to. Wrteen years' imprisonment in the Penitentiary, we suppose the QIIES11ONS 6F MASONIC use*GE.

 

+569 Lodge, of which. lie was a member, did not wait for the evidence of Masons to prove the man guilty, and a fit subject for expelò sion. No Lodge, we presume, would hesitate about the proper course to pursue in any similar case. The proper way to obtain the evidence of one not a Mason is, for the Lodge to appoint a Committee, to take down the statement of the witness .in writing.

 

The parties should be notified of the time and place, and allowed to cross‑question the witness, who is requested to answer upon his honor.

 

The testimony thus obtained should. be read in open Lodge on the trial, and such weight given to is as the circumstances of the case would seem to warrant; but we warn our brethren not to be more willing to give credit to the statements of the outsider, than that of a brother, when equally disinterested.

 

SIGHT OF THE PILLARS OF THE TEMPLE.

 

PETERSBURG, ILL., December 6,185& BRO. MITCHELL.‑Dear Sir:‑Masonically, we are doing well here. We have 8% much work to do as we desire, and that of good material.

 

By the way, let me ask you a question.

 

It may be of but little consequence, but it is one about which there is some difference of opinion, viz.: What was the bight of the pillars in front of Solomon's Templet

 

Masons in Illinois teach that they were thirty Eve cubits high.

 

Where I was made a Mason, I was taught that they were eighteen cubits.

 

I find, from an examination of the various writers in the Bible, with one exception only, that they were eighteen cubits. The bight of the Temple was only thirty cubits.

 

Josephus also says they were eighteen cubits. (See 1 Kings vii. 15.

 

2 Kings xxv. 17. Jeremiah Iii. 20‑22. 2 Chronicles iii. 15.) Please give me your opinion as to what we ought to teach as to their bight. If this difference of opinion prevails to any great extent, ought it not to be cor. rected, and taught the same in all Ledges? Let me hear from you at your earliest convenience, and believe me Fraternally yours,

 

Jso. BEwsrrr.

 

We beg to say to Bro. Bennett, that our delay in answering the foregoing communication is mainly owing to our want of a scientific acquaintance with architecture, and our inability to procure an accomplished arc4itect to make the proper estimate in order to show whether, according to correct rule, the pillars of the porch of the Temple must have been eighteen cubits or thirty‑five cubits each in bight.

 

We have examined the passages in the Bible, referted to by  66$

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Bro. Bennett, and, though we have long since made up our mind., that the hight of the pillars was eighteen cubits each, are do not feel competent to the task of settling this question, and, therefore, all we shall say at present, is designed to elicit inquiry, and call out some brother who may be able to show what must have been the hight of the pillars, in order to complete the symmetry of the Temple.

 

We have heard it said, that the writer in Chronicles intended to be understood as giving the length of the two pillars united, by which it will be seen that there would be a discrepancy, as twice eighteen would make thirty‑six. But, in addition to this, we are bound to believe, that each writer attempts to describe minutely the dimensions of the Temple, and if.. as stated in Chronicles, the porch was one hundred and twenty cubits high, we ask, whether the pillars should not, by the rules of architecture, have been more than eighteen cubits each in hight. Or ‑ the other hand, we ask, whether a building, surpassing all others in beauty of proportions, twenty cubits in width, and forty cubits in length, could have had a porch one hundred and twenty cubits high? We agree with Bro. Bennett, that there should be uniformity with Masons upon this subject. How ridiculous must it appear to the learned architect, that while we, as Masons, profess once to have had the exclusive control of architecture, we can not, at this day, agree as to the architectural proportions of Solomon's Temple.

 

It is not necessary that we shall call in question the testimony of either of the writers in the Bible, for though there is a disagreement as the work comes to us from King James' translation, this disagreement may, for aught zee know, have been produced by the translators, or they may be reconciled by n. critical examination of the whole subject, as intended to be described.

 

For example, it is difficult to tell precisely at what point one of the writers ceases to speak of Solomon's private Temple, the Temple for Pharaoh's daughter, the house in the forest of Lebanon, and commences to speak of the Lord's House at Jerusalem.

 

It will be seen, therefore, that a correct view of the whole subject can only be arrived at by a critical examima‑' tion of the meaning and intention of the writers, and, above QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

569 all, by a proper estimate of the proportions of the building, for though we may doubt the testimony of one or the other of the writers, we can not doubt the symmetry of the edifice.

 

From the foregoing it will be seen that we, like Bro. Bennett, stand in need of more light, and we sincerely hope, that some of our accomplished brethren will let us hear from them upon the subject.

 

CAUSE FOR REJECTION.

 

Much 2, 185& DEAR BROTHER :‑The subsenbers to‑your journal have waited very impatiently for the February number to reaen this village, but thus far in vain.

 

Perhaps, we have been a little ton remiss in duty, hence, the delay on your part.

 

Do not withhold the" light" longer front us.

 

Direct us aright, and "may we finally reach that bouse not made with hands eternal in the heavens." I will ask you a question on Masonic usage.

 

Would I be acting as a true Mason. in voting, to blackball a candidate, because I thought, from my knowledge of the applicant, that be would not make a good and true brother! To illustrate. We have a petition before our Lodge for initiation.

 

I know not anything positively against the man. but I very seriously doubt his ever making himsef a true Mason.

 

Yours truly,

 

G.

 

 A thorough conviction, on the part of any member of the Lodge, that an applicant will not make a good Mason, is certainly good cause for casting a blackball; but we should be careful in coming to this conclusion, for, while it is our bounden duty to keep out all bad men, we should not forget our own imperfections, and the probability that, where no positive objections can be urged, Masonry may be expected to improve the character and conduct of the initiated. We can suggest no rule better calculated to lead us to correct action in cases like the one mentioned by brother G., than the one which applies in our criminal courts, viz., that, where a reasonable doubt exists, it is safest to lean in favor of mercy.

 

POWERS OF D. D. G. YASMMS.

 

BATON ROUGE, LA., March 18, 1854.

 

BRO. MrrcHEr.I.

 

There are two or three of the brethren here who desire to get the Signd from the commencement of its publication.

 

Can you furniah it! If so, what will be the price up to the end of the present volume!

 

Please write t.vd let me know.

 

Frateraally yours, 1l03 ADAM 670

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

I'. S.‑At the Annual Session of the Grand Lodge of Louisiana, In A. D. 1851. the following resolution was proposed: "Be it Resolved, That the M. W. G. Master shall appoint a suitable brother to act as District D. G. Master in each of the following districts, who shall have the power to visit and superintend the Lodges of his district, and give them all proper instruction in relation to the labor of the Lodge, and in the practice of the Rills and Ceremonies of Freemasonry."

 

'

 

'

 

'

 

' A Commission, worded to correspond with the instructions, was given by the M. 1V. G. Master to each of the D. D. G. Masters.

 

Now, the questions I desire to propound to you are the following 1. Does a D. D. G. Master under the resolution and commission possess any powers other than mere authority to advise and instruct? 2. Can he arrest the proceedings of a Lodge in his District, when he is satisfied that the Lodge is acting, or is about to act, contrary to the usaggs of Masonry, or to violation of the Landmarks of the Order‑and when there is no time to confer with the Grand Master to prevent the wrong? S. If the D. D. G. Master is in a Lodge in his District as a visitor or member, and he sees a violation of the Rules and Regulations, or Landmarks, about to be perpetrated, can he assume his rights as D. D. G. M., and interpose his authority to prevent the wrong, until the direction of the M. w. G. Master can be ob. tained? Your answer to the foregoing, either to me privately or in the Signet, will mush oblige a great admirer of your Masonic views and judgment upon Masonic usage A. A.

 

During the past year, in two or more numbers of the Sigtet, we investigated the official powers of the D. D. G. Master We there proved that the office was one of modern creation not referred to by the ancient laws, and now it is only neces. sary for us to say, that we hold the powers of the D. D. G. Master to be precisely those which are given to him by the Grand Lodge, and no more. The office is created by the Grand Lodge, and by it alone can the officer be clothed with official powers. Suppose we were to admit, that the Grand Master possesses inalienable rights and prerogatives, still he could not delegate to another powers which he derives from the Grand Lodge; delegated powers can not be delegated to a third party.

 

We repeat, then, that D. D. Grand Masters possess no powers not delegated to them.

 

Under the law of Louisiana, we think, the D. D. G. Master is nothing more than a Grand Lecturer, and thus we answer the first question of our correspondent.

 

Under the resolution of the Grand Lodge, the A D. (lò: Master is authorized to arrest the proceedings, under the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

571 circumstances mentioned in second question ; for, being authorized to superintend, it seems to be fairly inferable that he leas the right to take the Chair and preside; and, if so, he certainly may direct and control the action of the Lodge for the time being. This constitutes a reply to the third question also; for, whether he be present as visitor or member, the law does not. oy a fair construction, lesson or change his powers.

 

CHARGES AGAINST A NON‑RESIDENT.

 

LoutsiAYA, February, 1854.

 

BRO. MITCHELL‑‑A man once a member of a Lodge in the State of‑, demitted and removed to another State. lie afterward caluminated and mistreated a member of the Lodge from which he had demitted. The injured member preferred to say but little about the matter, but the Lodge, deeming the member mistreated or aggrieved, transmitted charges against said demitted member, and proposed to send forward the testimony to the Lodge to which the removed member had attached himself, whenever called for.

 

Said demitted and removed member was summoned to appear in his new Lodge. He appeared and demanded an immediate trial, and in the absence of testimony was, of coarse, acquitted Now, it i's reported, that the aggrieved member, mentioned above, stands suspended in the State where the removed was tried, and for want of testimony against him, which had not yet been called for, was acquitted.

 

Please tell us, if this be so‑As this Masonry?

 

Your opinion relative to the above, we hope, will, accordIng to your usual course, be positive and forthcoming.

 

Fraternally yours, It is impossible, my brother, for us to say whether the Lodge referred to did its duty br not. If, in any particular, it omitted to give time and opportunity to the parties to be heard with all the testimony deemed important, for and against the accused, then did it fail to perform its duty, and is certainly reprehensible; but if, when the charges were read, the accused admitted their truth, and, hence, demanded an immediate trial, the Lodge was justifiable. in putting hiin on his trial, for under this state of things there could be no use i:‑ sending for testimony. It sometime& happens that Charges are made against a brother which, though true, are too trivial to demand punishment, and, for aught we know, the case referred to may be of this kind.

 

In short, we are not given to know enough of the case to enable us to say whether the Lodge did its duty or not.

 

We can not suppose the brother was acquitted on the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

ground, that he could not be held responsible by the Lodg4 from which he had dcmitted ; for, while his demit shows that alt the time there were no charges pending against him, it by no means follows that his unmasonic conduct might not afterward be discovered, and brought to light, requiring investigation and Masonic trial, and lie could only be tried by the Lodge of which he was at the time a member, or under whose jur1w diction he resided non‑affiliated.

 

INSPALLATION OF REKLEGTED OFFICERS. .

 

OAX BOWERY, At.A.

 

Are subordinate Lodges required to install their officers every year?

 

If the old officers, or the most of them, are reelected, must they still install?

 

Plea" answer by letter or Signet.

 

T. R. R.

 

The proclamation, made at the election of an officer, is‑"Brethren, take notice. Brother A. B. is duly elected Worshipful bluster, or Senior Warden (as the case inay be) for the ensuing twelve months, and until his successor is duly elected and installed "‑and, hence. it would Fccin that if lie be reelected he need not be reinstalled, as lie can not be his own successor We think one installation is binding, until the officer is supei seded by another individual.

 

But, taking the example of the Grand Lodges as a correct and safe guide (and we know of no higher authority), all Lodges are justified in, if not required to install after every election. We do not know of a Grand Lodge , that does n,ot install every year, though the same brethren be reelected. This course being pursued by the Grand Lodge off Alabama.; we give it as our opinion, that it is expected that every subordinate will reinstall annually, whether the same officers be elected or not.

 

Of course, no doubt can exist of the! propriety of installing those who have not filled their respective places the preceding term.

 

APPEAL. FROM THE DEMON OF A VASTFR MmDLETowx, JEFFERSON cov‑‑rr, KY., February 7, 1851 Bno. MrroaZLL:‑What is your opinion in regard to an appeal from *e decision of the Mapter of a Lodge?

 

Is it in accordance with Masonic precedailt QUESTIONS OF b1ASONX USAGE.

 

578 and usage? or is it an innovation, which in modern times has crept into Masonry? The validity of such an appeal has been quite a subject of discussion among uaany of us, and we are anxious to hear from you, as we regard you as competent authority upon the subject.

 

Your visit to our Lodere at. tbisplace, two or three years ago, is still fraternally remembered.

 

Please answer in the Stand.

 

Yours, fraternally,

 

C.1 v.llILTOV.

 

We have several times answered the above question through the Signet, and, therefore, must be excused for not enterillg at large upon the subject at this time, especially, as no attempt has been made to controvert our opinions.

 

We hold that, in all cases where the ritual and usages of the Order are concerned, the decision of the Master is final. IIe is directly responsible to the Grand Lodge for his official acts. To his care, together with the Wardens, is intrustcd the charter and Boole of Constitutions.

 

It is made his duty to see to it, that the Constitutions of the Order, the edicts of his Grand Lodge, and the By‑Laws of his Lodge are not violated.

 

The known rules of the Order he is bound to enforce, and it would be. folly to expect of him a faithful discharge of all these duties, if he is deprived of the right to determine what is, and what is not Masonic law, or Masonic usage.

 

But, beyond this, wa deny that the Master's opinions or decisions are final. The ordinary business of the Lodge (the fiscal concerns of the Lädg c) grows out of local Regulations, with which the ancient lawn have but little to do.

 

They are mostly of a character such as the Grand Lodge has no direct concern in, but affect only the private interests of the Lodge and members.

 

In those things the Master is nothing more than the executive officer, to execute the will of his Lodge, and, if he misappreliends that will, or perversely attempts to trample upon it, the remedy is clearly in the hands of the members; his decisions may be appealed from and overruled.

 

And this is true in all cases where the ancient laws, usages, and the edicts of his Grand Lodge are not invalved.

 

We know it is confidently asserted by some writers, that the Master is supreme in all cases‑that in no case can the Lodge gainsay his decisions; but can it be possible that any Lodge would tolerate this doctrine, when it may be seen that 674

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

much evil might result from it? Some Lodges have their money invested in a Masonic school‑others have it loaned out, and this is done by a vote of the Lodge, and the most disastrousä consequences might result from the exercise of supreme power by the Master. We might proceed to illustrate our subject, but we presume it is not necessary.

 

nTrfiDRAWL\G CHARGES.‑SIG1MG BYòLAR& LAKE VIEW, ST. MARY'S PAR2sn, LA., Feb. 9,185L J. W. S. MITCHELL.‑Dear Sir:‑The many questions answered in the Signet y you, can not fail to give full satisfaction to those inquiring for true Masonic Information. I wish you to answer, in the Signet, the following questions, at your earliest convenience, viz.: Can a charge be withdrawn after the Committee has reported on it? I will give you a case : A brother brings a charge against a brother. A committee is appointed, and says, in its report, that the Lodge ought to take cognizance of the brother's conduct.

 

At this stage of the proceedings, it is the wish of the Lodge, as well as of the brother who brought the charge, to withdraw it i now, would a motion to withdraw the charge be out of order? or should the Worshipful Master put this motion? He rules the motion out of order.

 

The Committee is present at the time also, and joins in the wish to withdraw the charge.

 

Our By‑Laws are silent on this subject, and we appeal to you for infor mation.

 

You have all now.

 

You can answer it in as short a manner as posslble.

 

Question 2.

 

We Initiated, Passed, and Raised a brother in our Lodge, but he did not sign our By‑Laws.

 

He leaves the vicinity of our Lodge, and goes off without a demit.

 

We place his name on the Secretary's books, and charge him with dues for two years.

 

We find out where he resides. and notify him, if he does not pay up, we will suspend him.

 

His plea is, that he did not sign our By‑Laws, and he did not consider himself a member of the Lodge.

 

Now the question is: On his receiving the degrees in our Lodge, is he not a member of our Lodge? and can we not make him pay clues to our Lodge until he taker a demit? I am, fraternally yours, EvGE~z DA LY.

 

To the first question, we say, that charges and specifications may be withdrawn at any time, provided all parties concerned are willing. But after charges are filed, a trial must be had, if the accuser or accused insist upon it. And this is manifestly proper, ò for the withdrawal of charges, though urged by a majority of. the Lodge, might leave one or both the parties liable to censure. The accuser has a right to demand an opportunity to sbow that he does not bring charges based upon false prcwisos ; on tLq QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

575 other hand, the accused may demand a thorough investigation, with a view to the removal of all suspicion. A motion to withdraw may, certainly, be entertained, if consented to by the interested parties, as this course presupposes the amicable se6 tlement of the whole affair.

 

We have been so long accustomed to seeing Lodges prescribe, oy a clause in their By‑Laws, the manner of making initiates members of the particular Lodge, that, when we first read the second question propounded , by Bro. Daly, we incautiously answered that, if the By‑Laws required the signing as a condition of membership, the brother referred to never having done so, was not, nor ever had been, a member. Shortly after Bro. Wynn, as will be seen hereafter, called our attention to the subject, and we at once saw the error into which we had fallen, and, of course, made the acknowledgment and correction.

 

We say now, that the old law everywhere contemplates the affiliation of all Masons, and, most clearly, regards initiates to be members of the Lodge in which they were made; and this is essentially necessary and proper, for the same law requires a brother, who desires to join another Lodge, to bring a certificate of his membership in a former Lodge, which he could not do if he had not been a member.

 

But we will not argue this question, preferring to refer the reader to Bro. Wynn's strictures, under the head of ‑'What constitutes membership?" We will add, however, that when a candidate is elected to take the three degrees, lie is elected (on condition that lie takes them) a member of the Fraternity at large, and of the particular Lodge, and, hence, it is not in the power of a subordinate Lodge to make a new Regulation, controlling the same.

 

DEMITTED MASONS, WHERE TRIED.‑RIGHTS OF PAST MASTERS.‑POWERS OF DECDTY GRAND MASTERS.

 

EDWARDS, Mississippi, March G, 1854 BRo. MscHEit:‑I desire much to have your opinion on a few points in Masonic usage, and earnestly ask it, not to bolster up opinions of mine, but for in,ormation for myself and others.

 

I have written to our Companion Moore, of Boston, anC will write to our Bro. Moore, of Cincinnati.

 

You may select your own way to inform me. I regard the subjects to be of general import, and know they hare been treated of, by Bro. Moore, of Boston, at least.

 

576

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

I do not now bear in mind in what order I propounded queries.

 

But that of no import.

 

1. A brother obtains a demit from a Lodge, say in Mississippi, removes tt Texas, and, after doing so, is believed to have been guilty of unmasonic conduct, can the Lodge demitteVl from try him? See vol. viii. page 18, JLasonic Xrgazint, in which. I understand, the affirmative was taken by a Most Worsh plul Grand Master, and sustained by the Xagazi?m

 

Yet in vol. vi. page 303, a Lodge, under the same jurisdiction, can not try, when the brother has demitted and lives withfu tho jurisdiction of another Lodge.

 

Does not this look contradictory? 2. Have Past Masters any right to seats, as members, in the Grand Lodge? Bro. Moore, of Boston, argues this to my satisf'yietion. (Vol. v. page 8d.)

 

My ohj;òct in getting at the right, is to move for the right, if` in Mississippi we are %vro:1g.

 

I um for making Masonry, as all things are now‑a‑days, progressive.

 

But to by truly progressive‑understand me‑‑going back is progress, if oae is wrong, and then following the right as near as man can.

 

3. H.is a Right Worshipful Deputy Grand Afaster any inherent right, except in case of decease, absence, etc., of Jfost Worshipful Grand Master? Shall we construe absence into an absence from the city or county where the Grind Lodge Is held, or from the State‑his jurisdiction.

 

We should ascertain, if possible, the whole truth, not meaning to reflect upon the intentions of any brother. No brother ought to take this unkindly, when one of us thinks he bas erred. I would not say one word to offend.

 

Suspending By‑Laws, by even the Most Worshipful Grand Master, is of doubtful utility. Permit me to suppose a case: Mr. A. B. hap :een duly elected to receive the first degree in Lodge B., in the southern r~ct,of his State. IIe is duly Initiated.

 

Our brother then petitions for the second degree, receives it.

 

About this time he is accused of forgery, or its nearest kin, and while under such accusution,and before trial, he visits a northern portion of the same State, meets with the Right Worshipful Deputy ;rand Master, or say the Grand Master himself, and is very desirous to receive the third degree, because the Lodge in that town or city is peculiarly blest in having active and zealous officers, who confer degrees ably. Ail this is ärged upon the said Grand Officer‑‑a dispensation is granted, and an unworthy man is made a Master Mason.

 

May not this occur? Is it right that alò‑such power be vested in any man!

 

If right. in whom? I could illustrate an opposite case, where a very worthy man was subject bo be ituch injured, at least for a time, by a cross‑grained brother casting a rejecting òote‑no objection to the man‑voting " blind " against anybody. Yet heref even though a fair name may be held without a blot, would it not be better that no dispensation be granted, aid to let this innocent one be under a cloud for a month, until a Lodge in some city could produce the stone which builders had rejected, and use it as a fair and a good stone?

 

If a Grand Master would grant a dispensation in this, a kind heart would sympathize and blame not; yet. I might ask, had he the right I I hope you will understand these queries, and will reply.

 

They are not put to you for light and trivial reasons, but toget at principles.

 

Yours, as a brother,

 

M. R'. PIIIIdm QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USACS.

 

;5Z‑T We think the answer to the first question, is almost selfevident, and will suggest itself as soon as we determine tho :Masonic relations of a non‑affiliated Mason. We say, that ,o non‑affiliated Mason is amenable alone to the Lodge under whose jurisdiction he resides; this is the only Lodge within the length of his Xasonic cord, and the only one having the right to serve a summons on him, and we think the general practise is in conformity with the above views. What, then, is the condition of the brother alluded to by Bro. Philips?

 

He his demitted from a Lodge in Mississippi, and located in Texas. Now, most assuredly, the Lodge in Mississippi has no more control over the brother than has any one Lodge in California. All will admit, that if lie bas affiliated with a Lodge in Texas, that that Lodäc alone is competent to try him for unmasonia conduct.

 

And, pray, what difference does this make?

 

He is, as a non‑affiliated Mason, amenable to the nearest Lodge;.ard none other can exercise control over him.

 

And this is as it should be. A brother should not be compelled to travel a thousand miles to defend himself against charges, while a Lodao at his door is equally competent to try and determine the case. We may be told that the offense was committed before the brother demitted from the Lodge in Mississippi, and still it does not alter the case.

 

If the Lodge was in possession of the facts before the dernit was granted, it would wear the appearance of injustice and tyranny to prefer charges now, when it is almost certain that the accused could or would only have an eg parte trial.

 

But, suppose the Lodge was not apprised of the charges against him until after his demit and removal, which is probably true, the course of justice and the :purity of Masonry need not suffer thereby, for, though that Lodge has now no more control over the brother than if he had never been a member of it, it, in common with all other Lodges, has the right to prefer charges, take depositions, and forward to the Lodge ruder whose jurisdiction the accused resides,: and, after having granted ample time for correct testimony to be obtained, through depositions from Mississippi, the Lodge in Texas must nee4a give the parties a fair hearing, and either acquit. or condemn anJ punish the accused.

 

sv 678

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Not feeling it to be our duty to comment here upon the seem Ilng'contradiction in the opinions of Bro. Moors, of Boston, vie give our own views, without reference to the passages referred to by Bro. Philips.

 

'

 

The second question is one which we examined at length, in "reviewing the claims set up by the Philips and herring party of New York, in 1849.

 

In that review, we made a thorough .examination of the history and usage of the Grand Lodge of England, with reference to this subject, and though we have not the leisure now to hunt up and make extracts from said review, we feel it due to our present relations to say a few 'words: upon the subject, as many of our readers have not the back'volumes .:of the Signet.

 

We say, then, that the Grand Lodge of England ‑'was constituted, in 1717, by all the Masons there assembled, ‑including Entered Apprentices.

 

We say, drat the business. was done in the first degree ; that no mention is made of Past Masters having anything to do in the formation of the Grand Lodge.

 

We say, that when the Ancient Charges and Ilieaulations were published in 1723, the individuals pointed out, as constituting or forming the Grand Lodge were (in addition to the Grand Officers) the Master and Wardens of particular Lodges. No mention was made of Past Masters. We say, that in the editions of the Englisli 13oolc of Constitutions, published under the editorship of Dr. Anderson, bv order‑ of trle `Grand Lodge, Past Masters are nowhere mentioned as being entitled to seats in Grand Lodge, and we further say, that Past Masters, as such, never did occupy seats in the Grand Lodgeof England, until after the union of 1813. The origin of the ',claims of Past Masters to membership in Grand Lodge is briefly as follows. When, in 1739, a few refractory, disappointed office‑seekers and bad men were expelled or suspended 'by the Grand Lodge of England, they claimed to throw themselves upon their original rights, denounced the Grand Lodge as innovating upon individual rights, and proceeded to matte ,Masons when and where they pleased, without warrant, even while some of them were under sentence oú expulsion. ' Some years after; vin., 1753, these worthies went through the'forms of establishing a Grand Lodge, under the imposing title oÇ the ä,QUE$TZONS. OF MASO?TTC U$,~QV ; ' 572 Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons. This spurious and clandestine body prevailed on the third Duke. of Athol, then Grand Master. of Scotland, to preside over it, and we learn that Lawrence Dermott was made Grand Secretary, and, in 1772, he was its D. G. Master,. In.175G, he published a manual for his Grand body, entitled the True Ahiman Rezon, made up of extracts from the En#is4 Constitution.‑, altered and added to, to suit ` the purposes of his party.

 

The Duke of,Athol .was, probably, ` never present at any meeting of this spurious body; but even if he were.often there, and .pfiesidsd,as;:Qrand Master, we'know ` that grand 14 asiers, in, those days, superintgnded, very little of the concerns of Masonry, this being considered the especial duty of the Deputy.

 

Thus was Dermott placed in a position‑ to give and expound the Masonic law to his .Grand body, and all who took authority under it.

 

This man, published a vindictive article, ridiculing, abusing, and falsely charging the Grand Lodge of Enaland.with being a body of.modern Masons, inno v.ating' upon the ancient laws.

 

The true Grand Lodge, it seems, paid no attention to his vile publications, content with denouncing the clandestine body, and forbidding Masonic com munication with its members.

 

Dermott resorted to'every pos. sible expedient to make his party popular, and, perhaps, the most powerful was that which. made Past Masters life members of his Grand Lodge.

 

It may be readily seen, that this bait very naturally exercised a powerful influence.

 

Some of the old Lodges were induced to give up, ,their charters from the true Grand Lodge, and take warrants from Dermott, because all then considered it a great honor to be members of the Grand Lodge; and, by working under the Athol Grand Lodge, all Masters, after passing the Chair, became life members.

 

This ;spurious Grand body sent a number. of,warrants to America, accompanied by a copy of the Ahiman,;Rezon, and,. Hence, the origin of the so called inalienable, rights of,Past Masters.

 

At the union of the two Grand Lodges of‑England, in 1813, Past Masters were given a seat and membership upon the principle of compromise.

 

The spurious Grand Lode‑consented to throw away the 4himan Rezon, and the united Grand Lodge has since been, and is now governed by the old;,E.nglislt Constilutions,..u ò 6SO

 

QIIESTIft'N3 OF biASOtiIC USAGE.

 

originally published by Anderson ; bat, in consideration of aria yielding, as before stated, Past Dlasters were given scats in the Grand Lodge, and occupy them now, ciz., oae Past blaster from each Lodge.

 

From the foregoing it will bo seen, that fast Dsastcrs, as such; have no inalienable rights‑that they were made members of the spurious Grand Lodge, not by any law claimed to be ancient, but by an edict or new Regulation. It will be seen, also, that they note occupy n, scat in the Grand Lodge of Eng~ land, under an edict or spocial enactment of thbt body, aud, hence, it follows that t3rcy nowhere enjoy 1.his privilege, esce~pt e ~ by the voluntary authority or permission of the Grand Lodge. 'We say, then, that tho whole matter is under tire control of the local Grand Lodges, In some districts each Past Master ~s given a seat and rote‑in others, as in Kentucky, the Past Masters collectively have but one vote, tlrongh one Lurlred be present, and iu other States they are not permitted to Lave rnembersLip at a11.

 

The third question has also been a.nswcrcd through tlro Signet. ~Ve lravo stated, and challenged contradiction, that such aq office as Deputy Grand Dsaster was never beard of, until 1GG6 after the great fire in London, when Sir Clrristoplrer ~Vren, the last Grand Master of Operative Masons, being unable to superò intend the rebuilding of the city, and the especial superintendence of some fifty churches, was compelled to appoint an assistò ant, wLo was called lris Deputy. `Ve say that, in the oldrecords. the office of Deputy Grand Duster is not mentioned. But, granting we may be mistaken in this, we take the ground, that the reorganization of 1717, now universally approved, totally and completely changed, even the relation of the Grand Duster toward the members of tire Order. Originally, it would seem, that the powers' of ‑tlre Grand Duster were almost unò limited, although the Masons met him in council at York, arit~, therefore, were presuured to exercise an influence over him; indeed, they did not eoutrol Trim.

 

Certain it is that, in 1663, odicts were passed by the assembly, limiting and defining' h~ powers ; and we fearlessly say, that tho reorganization of I7I7, or the establishment of the Grand Lodge of England, ~nidd# QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE 581 clearly and emphatically made the Grand Master its executive officer‑‑its instrument to carry out its behests, and execute its laws. We can not comprehend the soundness of that doctrine which teaches that it is in the power of three or more constituted Lodges .to form a Grand Lodge, and elect a Grand ,Master to preside over its deliberations, and see that its laws are executed, and, at the same time, tells us that the officer, so brought into power, is greater than the power creating the. office, and electing the officer. We can not understand the doctrine of irresponsible power in an officer, whose term of service may be regulated by the Grand Lodge.

 

We do not appreciate the inalienable rights of a Grand Officer, whose duties are pointed out, extended, or curtailed, at every Grand. Annual Communication of the body over which he presides. We say, that the Grand Master in England, or America, is the creature of the Grand Lodge, and bound to obey its edicts, and, therefore, may be deprived of every inalienable right once exer‑. cised by. ancient Grand Masters.

 

And, as the office of Deputy Grand Master is comparatively of modern creation, it is fairly to be presumed, that this officer never did have any other than delegated powers, it is hardly to be presumed, that he has now. inalienable rights.

 

We say, then, that the Deputy Grand Mas ter has just such powers as are given directly by his Grand Lodge, or as that Grand body permits the Grand Master to clothe him with.

 

By the laws of the Grand Lodges generally, the Deputy Grand Master is given the power to discharge the duties of Grand Master, in the absence.of the fatten; and, most certainly, he is not absent, unless he is out of his State or Masonic jurisdiction.. In the absence of the Grand Master, the Deputy is, for the time. being, to the full extent,, the acting Grand Master, clothed with all his powers, and may, of right, do all that is permitted to be done by the Grand Master, when present, or within his jurisdiction.

 

We agree with. Bro. Philips, that it is doubtful whether anlimited power to suspend By‑Laws should be given even to the Grand Master, and, most certainly, when given, should be exercised with great caution.

 

QIIESTI6XB' OF MASONIC USAGE. ' We would gladly sap more in reply to Bro. Philips, but there are other demands upon our time, which we are not at liberty to neglect.

 

DOES AN UNFAVORABLE REPORT REIEcr A cANDiDATET ‑ LODGE, No. ‑, April S, 1854.

 

BEG. Mrrcurr.L :‑Please give me, through the Signet and Journal, your views on the following communication:' A man applies for initiation into this Lodge.

 

His petition was iòeferred to the Committee on Character. Two of that Committee (the other being absent):, reported" the candidate is not under tongue of good report."

 

The petition was rejected by other members of the Lodge.

 

I wish to know, if the report; as made by the Committee, is a rejection of the candidate, in itself, or not?

 

The candidate was born and brought up within sizi miles of this village, and the Committee have known him for many years, par.,‑, ticularly the two who reported against him.

 

What have you, to say as to the course of the Chairman of the Committee, who vouched for the candidate, and afterward reported bim " not under tongue of good report"' And what say you' of the other Committee‑man, who reported with the Chairman, and, finally, voted: for said applicant! Yours fraternally,

 

I.YQUIRas. We were called on for our opinion in a similar question,` mooted in a Lodge in Alabama, not long since, and our answers . then was precisely what we shall now repeat, viz., that we know of but one way of electing a candidate, viz., by secret ballot and we know of but one way of rejecting a candidate, and thaf is by a secret ballot; and the case, as now put, shows the im+ portance of a rigid adherence to this rule. We know how unwilling some good brothers are to report unfavorably id particular cases, though they know the applicant to be un; worthy. Sometimes one or more members of the Committee are under personal obligations to the applicant, and feel that as misconstruction might be placed upon their motives by the individual, should the facts come to his knowledge; and, unfortunately, ‑there are some Lodges cursed with tale bearers, who, it would seem, could not hold their tongues, though they believed the harmony of the Lodge would be disturbed by their talking. In such cases, though we can not say it would be tight, the Committee might report favorably, and yet preserve the purity and harmony of the Lodge, by casting r, blackball.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGB.

 

OW It maybe that the brother who recommended the applicant, irv the case referred to by our correspondent, did, at the time,' believe him worthy, and afterward changed his opinion ; but this' a is rather singular, if he had known the applicant well for any., considerable time. The other change alluded to is still mora> remarkable, and, in charity,. we can only account for it by sup=' posing, that he also changed his opinion. 'But, now that we' think of it, we doubt whether our opinion, in relation to either, is of the smallest consequence, as we can do no more thau, imagine a solution of the grounds of action. , The first question being one of vital importance, we desire' to speak out and say, emphatically, that the report of the Committee is not final, either for oragainst a candidate; theremust be the action of the Lodge‑and ancient usage, as well as. the general practice; indicate the use of the ballot‑box as that only Masonic method of determining the matte: MASONS KEEPING TIPPLING SHOPS.

 

JAc ‑.‑To, Mm, March, 1834., J. W. S. MITCHEI.u‑Dear Brother:‑For the satisfaction of a much dissatisfied'. minority. permit me to state a case which came up for action at the last regulaio communication of Jacinto Lodge, No. ‑, and to a .9k yoar opinion, through the .Agnet, as to the legality of the action of the Lodge on that occasion.

 

Inclosed‑, please. find copy of.By‑Laws.

 

Bro. B‑. Maater.Mason, was kept out of the Lodge for five years, or near it, owing to his being engaged in a business whichti conflicted with Section 2, Article 3, of our By‑Laws.,

 

Upon his. abandoning the liquor traffic, and his candid avowal that he would not engage to it again, he war regularly Initiated,.Passed, and Raised to the sublime. degree of Master Masbn: Changing his views, however, and wishing to embark in the retail of spirituous ‑F liquors again, he submitted his petition to the Lodge, at February communiea,‑' tion, asking for a demit.

 

The petition having to lie over a month, be, in the meantime, made purchase of his liquors, and commenced retailing, under,s license regularly obtained from the Board of Police of the county.

 

bfarch Communinaiion.‑Upon motion to receive the petition of Bro. B., andto , grant him a demit, being duly seconded and stated, by the Worghipful Master, :it, was held and argued by Bro. B.'s counsel, that Section 2, Article 3, of our BynLaws, is wholly unconstitutional, improper, and oppressive i that' Masonry heir., its legitimate bounds, beyond which it was neither in. the power of the Grand Lodge, nor its subordinate Lodges, to carry it, and that these, limits, aeäpre‑ , scribed, are the Ancient Landmarks of Masonry, the Book of Cvnstdutions, etc., upba the onchand, while strict obedience and conformity to.the, laws of.tbe land well an impregnable barrier on the other, that Masonry was general, and nr_t loppl. ,.

 

$84' QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Hence, ze^‑ion .. Article 3, of our By‑Laws. was a modern innovation, destrua$ ive to civil liberty, and in direct conflict with the rights of Masons, as guaranteed to them by the laws of the land. Ile also held, that each individual member had a right to determine for himself, as to the constitutionality or legality of any action, rule, By‑Law, or otherwise, of the subordinate Lodge to which he belonged, or any decision, edict, or otherwise, of the Grand Lodge under which it held its charter, and that no Mason was bound to yield obedience to such, unless they were within the restrictions above alluded to, according to his individual con, sitruction of the same.

 

held by the minority.‑That each subordinate Lodge had the right, under Its charter, to make its own By‑Laws, to suit the circumstances of its particular locality‑hence By‑Laws are local, not general‑that each code of By‑Laws must be submitted to the supervision of the Grand Lodge, under which the subordinate Lodge holds its charter, whose prerogative alone it is to pronounce upon their constitutionality, conformity, etc.; and when approved, ratified, and sent back to the subordinate Lodge, no member has a right to question their constitutionality, dtc:, but is in duty bound to obey and maintain them, as much as any other injunction whatever of Masonry; that such being the case with our By‑Laws; drafted to suit the circumstances of our particular locality, Section 2, of Article S. being inserted for the express purpose of keeping retail grocery men from passing our portals, unanimously adopted by our own free will and consent, supervised, approved, and sanctioned by the Grand Lodge of the State, no individual, or Individuals had a right to plead their unconstitutionality, want of conformity. etc., for any purpose whatever, and that they must stand good as the rule for our conduct as Masons, until it shall be seen proper to alter or annul them, as provided for in Section 1, of Article 14, of our By‑Laws.

 

The question as to the right of demission then came up, and something being Paid as to Bro. B.'s being under Masonic censure, he, to supersede the necessity of a charge being brought against him, candidly, in his own proper person, confessed, in open Lodge, tQ a breach of Section 2, Article 3, of our By‑Laws, but with no intention of wrong on his part. He also expressed his intention of continuing In the retail of spirituoue liquors, and that, principally, for this purpose, inasmuct as it was in violation of the By‑Laws of the Lodge, and not any disaffection on his part toward the Lodge, or any of its members, he wished to demit.

 

Whereupon, it was moved, seconded, and stated by the Worshipful Master, that Bro. B. be freed from Masonic censure, and placed in good standing in the Lodge.

 

t)ppwed.‑From' the fact that such a proceeding would nullify Section 2, Article a, of our By‑Laws, "to which we were, in every respect; obliged to a strict obdervance," and, further, that Bro. B. s was not an offense, under the peculiar circumstances, even to admit of the several degrees of punishment prescribed by Section 2, Article 3. His could not be classed as first offense, second offense, etc.,‑while he stood as an' acknowledged offender. without remorse or promise of reform, but, on the contrary, bad made an open and frank declaration of his intention to continue in the business; hence. even a unanimous vote of the ‑ Lodge could not exempt him from censure. while the law stood in full force,' and his own declaration made him guilty; past, present, and future. Modm costained

 

‑

 

,.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

b85` Bro. B. being freed from Masonic censure, and placed in good standing in the Lodge, the motion to receive his petition, and to grant him a demit, was again taken up.

 

Held by counsel.‑That, under Article 5, Bro. B. bad an undoubted right td demit, upon payment of all dues (if any on him), which was the only contingency upon which the matter then rested, and that the Lodge could not prevent his, demission, or rather had no right to refuse him a demit.

 

Held by minority.‑That Masonic usage admitted of but two grounds for demisò lion; the one, to form anew Lodge under dispensation, the other, to join another Lodge, upon removal out of the jurigdiction of one Lodge into that of anotherdiplomas being for traveling purposes‑that, although Article 5, of our By‑Laws, did not literally express and specify the primary grounds of demissioe, but simply the contingencies upon which those grounds rested, yet Masonic usage, to which all By‑Laws must be strictly conformable, gave us the spirit and implied meaning of that clause. as held and designed both by the brethren who drafted, &ad the Grand Lodge who ratified it. Therefore, they could not vote, in violation of Masonic usage, against the implied meaning, as they humbly conceived, of Article 5, of our By‑Laws, and, especially, for a brother to demit for the purpose of doing a thing, which he could not do and remain in the.Lodge. Motion sustained.

 

The above motions were sustained by bare majorities.

 

Some of the members not voting.

 

We wish to know, 1. Has the Lodge erred?

 

If so, has she erred materially?

 

If so, where does the remedy lie, and how is it to be obtained? 2. Is Bro. B. exempt from all his duties, as member of the Lodge, contributing to Charity Fund, etc.? 3. Is he amenable to our By‑Laws? 4. Has he a right to sit in Lodge capacity at our regular communications, and to join in procession on anniversary and funeral occasions? This will be submitted to the examination of the minority, and forwarded to you.

 

Yours fraternally,

 

G. w. & We are a thoroughgoing,, uncompromising temperance man. We know no half way grounds. We hold that the Institution of Freemasonry has no right to tolerate, or wink at the practice of an evil which is known to disgrace an individual brother bring,reproach upon the Brotherhood, and which leads to , heavy tax upon the Lodges, through impoverished widows and destitute orphans, simply on the ground that a relic of a barbarous age still hangs, like an incubus, upon the skirts of our law‑makers, and causes them to legalize the retail of a certain and well known poison.

 

Masons are law‑abiding men, but they are by no means bound to tolerate all that is permitted by the laws of the land.

 

A man may back‑bite, and say many evil R 586

 

QUESTIONS OF' MASONIC USAGE..

 

things of his neighbor, with legal impunity, which one Mason i9 not permitted to say of another. From the foregoing, it will, be seen that we. believe every Grand Lodge possesses the power to enact such laws, or permit their subordinates to do' so, as are calculated to conduce to the welfare and moral excellence of the members.

 

But, nothwithstanding all this, we' can not lose sight of first principles.

 

The ancient usages of.,. the Order have grown into Landmarks, and we have no right= to set aside, or trample them under foot. rhnciently our Society, was, like every other association for the practice of virtae,, governed by a code of laws deemed to be sufficient to guard its portals, and protect the Brotherhood.

 

That primitive Masons drank wine, and dealt in the article, we have good reason to' believe, and that, during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries,. our Society, in common with the Church, wore the appearance, of a bacchanalian club, we have the records of history to prove;' and,while we allude to this fact with a blush of shame, we are encouraged to do so, by the hope that this disgraceful practice may never again be sanctioned by our Association.

 

But the question arises, how is the evil of intemperance to be counteracted by the Fraternity ?

 

Can we enact laws which will make distinctions, and put a mark of condemnation upon certain classes of society?

 

Formerly, our brethren made no objectiolr to a candidate's occupation, provided it was .respectable, and this is the only ground upon which we could claim to stand in making a By‑Law, excluding the keepers of tippling shops. Has the man thus engaged a respectable standing in society? We hold, that lie should not be respected by any one; but is such the fact?

 

We know it is not.

 

On the contrary; we know that lie who has been long in the traffic of ardent spirits; though lie may have killed his hundreds, and beggared his thousands, is permitted to occupy the very highest situation in society, provided lie has saved up a large amount of the murderous gains.

 

We say that if he is wealthy, he is respectable in society, and though a few of our brothers, viewing his conduct as it deserves, may detest and abhor his true character; we can not make a law to shut him out of our sacred retreat, Oimply because the ancient usages of the Order do not permit QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

A W, 1.

 

it, and boeauar, we have ever been opposed to any Masonic' 1e ;slag, n upon tao subject, except to enforce a rigid adherence tti the pre; ei to at one of our cardinal virtues, Temperance.' We say, then, that d :e law of the subordinate Lodge, referred to by our corresponaott, is, in our opinion, not sanctioned by the paramount laws of Masonry.

 

But who has the right so to renounce it?

 

Is it In tha power of anyone member of the'' ,,edge to become the supreme judge, and pronounce against. its constitutionality? How ridiculous must every Grand Lodge appear, if their edicts may 5$ sat at naught by the judgment of a'n'y, and all who may be gove: eel by sordid motives, in setting up their judgment against the un:ttd wisdom of the law‑making power. We hold that t1io law In question was bindium upon every member of the Lodge, because it had been sanctioned liy the Grand Lodge; and before any m:%iber could disregard it, without the most palpable and flzgrai.t violation of his integrity, he must obtain its repeal by the LAge, or its con derYmation by the Grand Lodge.

 

Surely, r.o man will contend that it is one of those laws which is selfevldeiidy unconstij in tional.

 

So far from this, we know it is a mooted question. i'n the opinion of the best informed Masons.

 

But there is a feature in"the case, as set forth in ti:e foregoing statement of facts, which places the subject upon on ~hely different grounds, and renders all we have said irrelevant, sa far as the brother complained of is concerned ; we, of course; allude to his solemn promise, that he would not again engage in the traffic of ardent spirits. We know it is said by some, that a brother can not be held responsible for acts committed before lie was a Mason, and we admit, that a man can not violate a Masonic law, or.be., amenable to it, before lie is under its influence.

 

But we have, in our arguments upon this subject. through the Signet, taken the ground, that lie who obtains admission by fraud or misrepresentation, is responsible, and should be punished as an impostor. One law requires, that every applicant shall give evidence that he believes in one Supreme Being.

 

But, most. certainly, we would vote to expel any Mason who, after making this pledge, proved himself to be an atheist.

 

But granting that our position in this is wrong, ".f3"

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE and that no man could be tried for an act committed before hismaking, the brother in question, in effect, reiterated his pledge after lie was made, for lie could not take the second and third. degrees without promising to obey the By‑‑Laws, and this, too, in such a manner, as to leave him no pretext for escape ; and he,. who could thus openly avow his total disregard of the solemn_ covenant which made him a Mason, and, especially, which made him a Master Mason, we should be forced to regard as too neckless of his honor to give testimony in any Masonic body, and we are, indeed, surprised that the Lodge did not expel him, rattier than grant him a demit, when, by so doing, it gives license to a disregard of that bond which constitutes us Masons., We say, then, to the firs question, that the Lodge has materially erred, and the remedy may be sought, and, we trust, ob‑, twined, through the Grand Lodge, any member having the right: to memorialize that body upon the subject.

 

2. Bro. B. is certainly released from membership, and all ‑ Duties growing out of that connection, until the final action of the Grand Lodge.

 

3. Bro. B. is only amenable to the By‑Laws of the Lodge, as are all non‑affiliated Masons, viz., responsible to it for his good. conduct, and subject to trial and punishment upon charges preferred.

 

4. Bro. B. has no longer a right to a seat in any Lodge; but not being under charges, his standing is good, and the Lodge. may permit him, as all other non‑affiliated Masons, to visit and join in processions, but, most certainly, any one member has the right to prevent either privilege.

 

CAN A LLABOIT BE A MEMBER OF TWO LODGES?‑CAN A LODGE U. D. AFFILIATE MEW BEETS?‑CAN A NON‑AFFILIATED MASON VLSIT MORE THAN ONCE?‑CAN A MASTER USE A DIAGRAM? WHEmom, TEass. March 1, 1854, BRO. MITCHFIL :‑Your answer, through the Signet, to the following questions will be thankfully received Can a Mason be a,member of two Lodges at the same time?

 

Can a Masta Mason affiliate with a Lodge under dispensation? Can a non‑affiliated Master Mason visit a Lodge more than once without becoming a member? Can a Mason use any sketch or diagram, whereby his memory may be aided in making Mason?

 

Yours respectfully,

 

Wm. L. Gior&  QUESTIONS OF ,MASONIC USAGE.

 

.589 :u reply to the first question, we say that a Mason can not 1A a member of two Lodges‑ at the same time. There are sew ‑,ral instances recorded in Masonic history, where a noble 'tnal , it would seem, was a member of two Grand Lodges. The thirst and fourth Dukes of Athol were, in turn. Grand Masters of Scotland, and, at the same time, were nominally Grand Mastors of the so called Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons of .ondor. But the Regulations of the Grand Lodge of England elcarly sh^w, that no brother could be a member of two Lodges at the same time, and this doctrine is, we believe,'universal in the United States.

 

We think there is no jurisdiction in this country where the contrary practice exists.

 

The second question has grown out of some precautionary measures adopted in the North during the Morgan excitement. Formerly, Lodges transacted all their business in an Entered Apprentice Lodge, where they have a Treasurer and Secretary 'and only opened above for work and lectures. But about the time alluded to, some over zealous and frightened Masons proposed to transact the business in a Master's Lodge, the more safely to guard our portals f:~~.: Intruders.

 

In 1843, an Assembly or Convention of Delegates from a majority, or a largo minority, of the Grand Lodges, met at Baltimore, to consult and advise together for the interest of the Order, ard, especially, in order to produce uniformity of work and lectures.

 

This Convention, not being clothed with power to enforce their edicts, failed to accomplish much good, but among other strange conclusions, at which they arrived, they decided, that although a dispensation was, in truth and in fact, a limited charter or warrant, they taught that the business of a Lodge should be transacted in the third degree, and that a Lodge under dispensation was not, in truth, a Lodge at all.

 

Bro. More, of Boston, was authorized to publish a manual, setting forth the said Baltimore Convention work, he to be entitled to all the profits arising from its sale, and, accordingly, he published the Trestle‑Board; and, however he may have differed in opinion with the Convention, it seems to have been natural for him to advocate their views, as thereby the sale of the Trestle‑Board would be increased.

 

Thus have we given, briefly, the origfu 590

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

of the doctrine, that a Lodge ‑ under

 

dispensation was no Lodge at all, that it could not receive new members, that only the original petitioners could be members thereof, etc.

 

In our first number of the 8th volume of the Signet (May, 1853), we examined this subject at length, and, we think, it is there clearly proved, that the custom of establishing Lodges under dispensation, without being constituted, is of modern origin.

 

In the lifetime of Dr. Anderson, author of the first publication of the English Constitutions, no instance of the sort is mentioned, and only in the last edition of Preston, by himself, does lie tell us anything about a Lodge under dispensation, and even when lie does so, lie informs us, that a dispensation was only per , mitted to run thirty days.

 

Even Dermott, the very prince of innovators, says, that a dispensation can run but thirty days, or, at the utmost, thirty days once renewable. And, in the examination of the subject, we could not fail to see, that the thirty days' dispensation was only given to authorize the brethren. to make preparation for their constitution, for they were not permitted to make Masons, or do any work until they were consti tuted.

 

Our ritual teaches, and every Mason knows, that Masons can be made only in legally constituted Lodges.

 

It follows, then, that if it is legal to make Nfasons, as is now the practice in the United States,' for twelve months or more, in a Lodge under dispensation, we are bound to look upon such Lodge as being legally constituted, and, therefore, in all respects competent to transact business, affiliate members, etc.

 

We say, then, that a Lodge under dispensation is competent to do all things, so !on‑ as the dispensation runs, that a permanently chartered Lodge may do, and, of course, it can affiliate members, grant demits, diplomas, etc.

 

We beg Bro. Gloss to take up the number of the Signet referred to, viz., May, 1853, and read our article on this subject, as we there quote authority In support of our opinions.

 

To the third question, we answer, that no brother has .the right, strictly speaking, to visit any Lodge. Each Lodge is' as a separate family, and has the right to say, who shall and wipe shall not be admitted into their midst.

 

But common courtesy av l general usage give every traveling brother the right Jo QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

591 expect that he will be permitted to visit.

 

As to the privilege of a resident non‑affiliated Mason, in this respect, it is exclu sively under the control of the local Lodges.

 

Some admit a brother once, some three times only, while others admit them at all times.

 

In some of the cities and large towns in the West and South, the population is so constantly changing, that no restrictions could be enforced, unless, indeed, traveling brethren were also excluded.

 

To the fourth question, we say, emphatically, that no brother can use sketch, diagram, or any other than the tables of his memory, to aid him in making a Mason. A correct knowledge of the first degree in Masonry forever settles this question, and while it is not new to us, we are, nevertheless, surprised that the question is mooted at all.

 

IINAN'IMITY Lv BALLOT._wrrnDRAWAL OF rEMON.

 

SHASTA, CALIFOuSTA, February, 1854.

 

Ban. MITCHELL:‑A gentleman presented his petition to our Lodge for initiation.

 

It was referred, and, at the proper time, it was balloted for, and be was elected.

 

Subsequently, a brother who was not present at the receiving of, or balloting for the petitioner. came forward, and objected to his taking the first degree.

 

What course ought we to have pursued?

 

Can a petition be withdrawn under any circumstances? To t'ie first question, we say, that there is no practice in Masonry batter established than unanimity in the election of candidates. The Ancient Regulation leaves the brethren of a Lodge at liberty to give their votes "in their own prudent way, either by a show of hands or otherwise, but the vote must be unanimous."

 

But there may be some who, though admitting the necessity of a unanimous ballot of all the ,members present, would nevertheless hold, that a member whose duty it was to be in Lodge and vote, should have no right afterward to throw obstacles in the way. We hold that ours is an exclusive Society, and its rules should be made known to every candidate before his petition is presented.

 

He should, know, that while we may entertain a high regard for him, we are still momsacredly bound to regard and protect the feelings of a brother ‑in short,. that, in all cases, it is our highest dnòy to do all tn ;5,92

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC 'USAGE.

 

our power to preserve' harmony among the members.

 

Thla being admitted, it will be seen that we have no right to insist on. the introduction of any man whose presence would disturb the harmony of the Lodge.

 

We are bound to fellowship and regard every member as our brother, and, should we initiate a man, knowing that one of our members would not fellowship him, the consequence would be, that the brother o4jecting would either demit or stay away from the Lodge; and, as before stated, it being our duty to prefer the ins, we should be violating one of our highest duties, to initiate a man against the expressed wish of a member.

 

We say, it is the privilege of any member . of a Lodge to arrest a candidate at any time before the actual making is commenced, and it is clearly the duty of the Master to refuse admission to a candidate, when particularly objected to by any member of his Lodge.

 

To the second question, our answer is, that a petition can not be withdrawn after it is fully in possession of the Lodge, viz., after it is filed and referred to a Committee. And yet, this rigid rule is made unnecessary by a late popular doctrine, which teaches that it is wrong to publish the names of rejected candidates. The only reason ever urged, we presume, for refusing permission to withdraw, a petition, is that it is the duty of every Lodge to protect the Fraternity, and every other Lodge, against the application of a bad man, and, hence, when a inan is known to be unworthy, the rule requires that he be balloted for and rejected, that other Lodges may know the fact, and refuse to entertain his petition, or be guarded against making him; but, if it is wrong to let other Lodges know of his rejection by a publication, we scarcely see the necessity of insisting upon a ballot, when we know the candidate will be rejected.

 

WHAT Is A DE3Mt MINE CRBEE, Any, March 26, 1554.

 

Ban. Mrrermm.‑‑A brother of our Lodge, in good standing, applied through another brother for a demit. The Lodge took action on it, and granted his request (the brother vouching for the payment of the dues;. It was some months before the brother called on the Secretary for the demit, or to pay his dues.. Some of the brethren were of opinion, that he'was a full member of the Lodge until QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

598 ts. w‑mit was written out and his dues paid, and that we should charge him with dues until such was the case. Now. what I wish to know ia, did the Lodge dis. charge the brother, or does it require the written instrument to discharge bhut You will confer a favor oil me in answering the above, either privately of through the Signet.

 

A. B. C.

 

We answer the foregoing, by explaining what is generally understood by the ternt demit. It is not an instrument of writing‑ setting forth the action of a Lodge, but it is the action of a Lodge releasing a brother from membership. The bro,her may or may not wish to have the written testimony of the fact, signed by the Secretary, with the seal of the Lodge.

 

If a brother obtain leave to withdraw from his Lodge, intending to remain under its jurisdiction, he will have little or no use for the written document, because the verbal testimony of the brethren, even if no record be made of it, is always at hand, that he is no longer a member, the Lodge by its vote having released him.

 

We say, then, the demit dates from the time the Lodge granted it, whether it be shown by written or oral testimony.

 

Now, if, in the case as put, the Lodge had .granted a demit to take effect at the time he paid his dues, then, oP course, he would have remained a member until he paid his dues: but, we understand that the Lodge was satisfied with the assumption of the Secretary, and unconditionally granted a demit, a withdrawal of membership.

 

FUNERAL CLOTInho.

 

‑, IOWA, May 11, 1854.

 

J. w. S. MITCHELL.‑Sir and Brother:‑As I am writing on business, I wish to make a few inquiries on Masonic law, and, also, for the general practice under the law.

 

Before I ask the question, let me say that I attended a Masonic burial, of a stanger, but a short time since, when the brethren dressed as suited their fancy. Some had white aprons and gloves, while others had fancy aprons. Some had white ones, with blue trimmings, while others had orange aprons and sashes, and another had a black apron and sash, and all the Master Masons wore blue sashes, some of which were trimmed with a rose of blue and white ribbon.

 

Is it law, that such a motley group should go in procession after a deceased brother? At the Raising of a Master Mason, none are present but Masters; or, if others of a higher grade be present, they act only as Masters, and are known only as Masters.

 

Is it right to appear only as Masters at a burial?

 

Should :hey be permitted, ò

 

as 594

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

to wear saxhes?

 

As Masonic practice should be everywhere the same. let me && what the practice generally is at Masonic funerals?

 

Do they appear as directed to Masonic Charts or Monitors, or in the fashion above described? Fraternally yours, We are often mortified at the great eagerness of some Masons to put on gaudy apparel in their public processions, but, in most instances, the brethren are excusable, because they do not, in fact, know what the true regalia is; indeed, some think they are at liberty to put on just what they please. This was not so before Oddfellowship appeared. Thirty years ago we never saw Masons in procession with any other than such regalia as they, by their highest degree, were entitled to wear; but now it is not uncommon to see richly ornamensed golden collars in Masonic processions, while Masonry never tolerated such ~egalia. But, as our correspondent alludes to burial processions alone, we will confine our remarks to that subject, and we state, that none but Master Masons, that is, none below that degree, can join in funeral processions; and, as Master Masons only are provided with funeral ceremonies, all burials must take place under the rules of the Master's degree.

 

The true and only Masonic regalia is a white apron (should be lambskin) and white gloves; none are at liberty to wear anything else. except the officers of the Lodge, who may wear their jewels of office.

 

Each Mason, in procession, should be clothed as above, and should wear upon his left arm black crape. and carry a sprig of evergreen.

 

If the brethren wish to show the highest degree they have taken, they are at liberty to do so as follows: The Master Mason may put a blue ribbon on the lappel of his coat, with a narrow black ribbon over it.

 

The Royal Arch Mason may, in like manner, use scarlet and black, and the Templar will use black, covered with white.

 

In our article on Masonic Regalia, we appealed to the Grand Lodges to regulate this matter. either by law, or by instructions given in open Grand Lodge to the Delegates, with a view that a stop may be put to the unmasonic practice of using improper regalia, and we now again ask attention to this subject.

 

We ask, that due inquiry be made by each Grand Lodge, as to what constitutes the regalia of Masons, and, when this is ascertained, to requerc all to conform.

 

We may be permitted to add, that there is, in QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

595 fact, no regalia for funeral processions, the members simply appear in Lodge clothing, and every Mason should know that white aprons and gloves constitute that clothing.

 

ESAMING TBM BALLOT.

 

Du GLSIZS, LA., April 26,185& BRo. Mrrcarm:‑Will you, if proper, answer the following question? How should the ballot‑boa be disposed of, after all the members have deposited their ballots?

 

Should the boa be taken to the Worshipful Master, Senior and Junior Warden, closed or open, or with the drawer out?

 

With a sincere wish for your euccess, I remain yours fraternally,

 

J. M. HiLLL1,RD.

 

We think it not very important whether the one or the other course is pursued, because, we think, no principle is involved. It would seem, however, from the very fact, that the ballot must be examined by the officers indicated, and by them alone, it is not strictly proper that the drawer should be opened, except by each of said officers. If the Senior Deacon may open the drawer, it is fairly inferable that he may, at the same time, see its contents, which is not the intention of the rule.

 

We say, then, that the ballot‑box should be presented to each officer with drawer closed, who will open and examine for himself. and then close it again.

 

RIGHT TO DEMrr.‑TRIAL OF NON‑RMDENT MMBEBB.

 

TATEsvILLE, Miss., April b, 1851 BRo. MrreffmL.‑Dear Sir.‑Will you be kind enough to answer the following questions through the Signed, or by private letter: 1. Can a financial officer of a Lodge receive a demit until he has made settlement with the Lodge as to his official acts and liabilities? 2. Is it in strict accordance with Masonic duty, for a brother to leave, owing another brother of the same Lodge, he acknowledging the justice of the debt, and fully able to discharge the same without pecuniary embarrassment to himself ur family?

 

fI.

 

WO think any member of the Lodge, whether a financial officer or not, about to remove, is entitled to a demit, unless charges are preferred against him; but, most certainly, the b8G

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Lodge may withhold its consent for good cause, and the indebt~ edness of a brother is manifestly good cause. We know the universal usage is, to require all dues to be paid before a. brother can legally ask for a demit, and a financial officer, into whose hands moneys of the Lodge have been placed, must honorably and satisfactorily account for the same, before he can legally ask to be discharged from membership.

 

To travel, to remove beyond the jurisdiction of the Lodge, or to join in forming a new Lodge, constitute the only grounds upon which a demit can be granted, according to the old usage, and for either of the above reasons a brother, as above remarked, is entitled to a demit, provided always, that he is in good standing, and not indebted to the Lodge.

 

It follows, therefore, that even should the Lodge unanimously grant a demit to a member who was not clear of the books, it would not only be the privilege, but the duty of the Master to withhold his consent, and refuse to sign the demit until all dues be paid.

 

But suppose, in the case referred to, an officer removes into another jurisdiction, before obtaining a demit, and while he is indebted to the Lodge, we are asked what course the Lodge should pursue?

 

We answer, that if he has not already obtained a demit, he is, of course, a member, and may be cited to appear on trial, giving him a reasonable time, provided his residence is known, and if not known, he may be tried ex parte, and suspended or expelled, for neither the Lodge, nor the Fraternity at large, can be expected to suffer wrong with impunity, because the offender can not be found. Had the Lodge referred to granted the brother a demit, it could have no direct control over him, and, in that case, all it could do, would be to make out charges and furnish testimony to the Lodge nearest the present residence of the brother, that Lodge having the right to try any non‑affiliated Mason within its jurisdiction.

 

The second question, it would seem, requires no answer from us; for, certainly, every Mason should know that our Institu; tion does not permit one of its members to defraud another and he who, having the ability, fails to pay his indebtedness to a brother, deserves to be dealt with, and his punishment should be proportioned to the magnitude of the offense.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

591 POWERS OF THE GRAND MABPM.

 

BATON ROUGE, LA., April 23, 1854.

 

Bso. MITCHELL :‑I shall try to obtain more subscribers here to your very valuable monthly, because I believe you are disseminating the true Masonk light, which I trust, in due time, will have its intended effect, and scatter to the four winds of heaven those foolish and injurious innovations upon the body of pure Ancient Craft Masonry. I am persuaded, Bro. Mitchell, that when those innovations and the designs of the innovaters shall be fully exposed‑(Mud I think you have done it pretty effectually)‑but I mean when the exposure shall ‑have bad its full‑effect‑‑then will there be a disposition to return to the pure, siuaole, and sublime teachings of Ancient Craft Masonry as it was taught and prac ticed by our ancient fathers.

 

Will you, at your earliest convenience, write an article upon the rights and prerogatives of a Grand Master, and from whence derived.

 

Their claims are professed to be derived from the ancient usages of the Order.

 

I have there looked in vain for any authority for the high preroga tives claimed.

 

For instance: the Grand Master claims the right to adjourn the sittings of the Grand Lodge at what hour and to what boar he pleases‑that the Grand Lodge may suggest but can not control this matter.

 

Now, my notion is, that this is pure assumption of authority.

 

If I am wrong; will you set me right, and oblige

 

Yours fraternally,

 

Axos ADASS.

 

Where the idea originated that Grand Masters enjoy prerogatives and inalienable rights above and beyond all law, we are at some loss to determine, but we suppose it took its rise in the spurious Grand Lodge of London, over which the third and fourth Dukes of Athol nominally presided. We are forced to this conclusion, because the doctrine was first taught in the United States by those Grand Lodges who derived their being from that quarter.

 

The Grand Lodge of New York has been most conspicuous in the advocacy of this doctrine of one‑manpower.

 

There it is unblushingly declared that the Grand Master is supreme, and can make Masons ,at sight, when and where he pleases, and, if he choose, without working the degrees, and without assistance from any one, and all this in the face of a hw at least as old as 1663, declaring that no Mason shall be mane, except in a legally constituted Lodge.

 

For a longtime, there was no respectable Masonic journal in the United States, except Bro. Moore's, of Boston, and that work falling in, to some extent, with the New York teaching, has had much influence upon the opinions of the various Grand Lodges. We are sometimes pained, as well as surprised, to fund intelligent men declaring that the Grand Master, by a we# 698

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

r known ancient usage, is supreme in authority, and yet, when called upon, they fail to show the slightest proof that any such ancient usage ever existed. We have read some of these declarations, clothed in such language as seemed to impute gross ignorance to all who might even doubt upon the subject.

 

We have, again and again, through the Signet, and once or twice in our reports as Chairman of the Correspondence Committee of Missouri, besought these knowing ones to point us to the old law, or to the writings of a single old author, who teaches the doctrine.

 

It is true that whenever a Prince of the Blood was Grand Master of England, he was permitted to do some things which implied his independence of his Grand Lodge.

 

We are referred to two or three instances where Masons were made by the Grand Master in occasional Lodges, and, hence, they draw the inference, that these makings were the exclusive work of the Grand Master.

 

Now, while we should probably have no great difficulty to show that these occasional Lodges were nothing more nor less than called meetings of regular Lodges, we do not esteem it at all important to do so, for, even granting that Grand Masters did make a few Masons without the assistance of regular Lodges, we can prove that they did just what they had no right to do, for the old law of 1663 revived, or collated and published by the Grand Lodge of England in 1722. declaring that no Mason could be made, except in a kgalty constituted Lodge, was staring them in the face.

 

The Grand Lodge of England failed to insert into the Book of Constitutions any provision for trying and deposing the Grand Master, and this has been seized upon as conclusive testimony that the Grand Master is supreme, while the old instrument, in so many words, declares that the reason of such omission was owing to the fact that no occasion for such a provision had ever occurred, but that, should such a thing be necessary, it could be controlled by a new Regulation, thus, not only declaring their right to provide, by law, for the trial of 'the Grand Master, but preserving that right to Grand Lodges in all suture time.

 

It follows, then, that the Grand Master was n+dt considered supreme, or above law, in 1722.

 

If we search‑for evidence of an older date, we shall find nothing which operator QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

5961 against the position taken by the Grand Lodge of E.igland, as above stated. We read of assemblies of Masons in England and Ireland, as far back as the tenth century, but nowhere do we learn that the Grand Master possessed prerogatives.

 

In. deed, it is a modern idea that an elective officer enjoys prerogatives.

 

Until recently, we were taught to believe that prerogatives belonged alone to hereditary princes. The king inherits prerogatives by virtue of his crown, but who would be so 7uixotic as to declare that the President of the United States possesses prerogatives ? He is an elective officer, and is clothed with just such powers as are conferred upon him by the Constitution, or given to him by Congress.

 

So, in like manner,.the Grand Master of a Grand Lodge, an officer called into being by that body, is given enlarged or contracted powers at its will and pleasure.

 

We deny that any Grand Master, since the days of Solomon, ever possessed unlimited powers; and, surely, no one will claim that a modern Grand Master has such powers because Solomon had, for it will be readily seen that the extraordinary powers exercised by him grew out of his office as king, and not as Grand Master. We suppose the mere name of Grand Master does not carry with it these extraordinary privileges.

 

We know that an effort is being made in England to consolidate Masonry under the government and control of the Scotch Rite, so called, and we believe it will be successful. There it is openly.published to the world that the Grand Master presides on his throne, and this is no inconsiderable step toward the introduction and establishment of the new American doctrine, that the Grand Master is an irresponsible officer; being above and beyond all law. If the Grand Master presides. upon his throne, then, we suppose, he presides as a monarch, and we must bow to his despotic rule, should he choose to assume despotic powers.

 

The efforts above alluded to are not without their advocates in this country, and we have good reason to believe that these advocates for the enlarged powers of the Scotch Rite degrees, would more openly declare their views, did they believe the American Masons were prepared to bow their necks to the rule of Modern Masonry, so called.

 

We humbly pray, that these lovers of high‑sounding titles and empty show, 600

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIV USAGE.

 

may never be successful in their strides for power; but if, unfor tun‑..tely, our ancient and venerated Institution must be tram pled under foot by an upstart of the last century, then we shah have thirty‑odd thrones in the United States. Zhis benig accomplished, one step more is necessary to give prerogatives to thirty‑odd Grand Masters, viz., to destroy the elective franchise in Masonry, and make the occupancy of the thrones hereditary.

 

We have said that the Grand Master, like the President c.t the United States, can do just what the Constitution and the Grand Lodge shall permit him to do, and if it can be shown that the Ancient Constitutions make the Grand Master elective. and yet confer upon him the extraordinary powers. recently claimed, we will admit the plausibility of the argument, that a Grand Master is independent of his Grand Lodge through his inalienable rights; though it would not be difficult to show. that even had ancient Grand Masters these extraordinary powers, the reorganization of 1717, under which all now act, clearly abrogated them, by declaring the supremacy of the Grand Lodge. The Grand Lodge of England, from its foundation to the present day, has again and again declared by law, that the Grand Master shall do so and so, and that he shall not do so and so.

 

From the foregoing, it will be seen that we, like Bro. Adams, have hunted in vain for the ancient law conferring inalienable rights, much less prerogatives, upon the Grand Master. We hold that the Grand Master is the creature of the Grand Lodge. and amenable to it for his official conduct.

 

Does it not seem to be inconsistent with common senee, to suppose that it is in the power of the Grand Lodge to create an office greater than itself, and wholly above all law.

 

By long established usage, Gravid Lodges clothe Grand Masters with extraordinary powers, to be exercised in vacation, and this we think necessary and proper for the well‑being of the Order; but let us not forget that no usage ever deprived the Grand Lodge of the right to restrict or abrogate those powers, whenever the well‑being of the Craft requires it.

 

Ancient Craft Masonry never had, and does not now require hereditary and irresponsible rulers.

 

It possesses: the power to elect its executive officer, and ‑define his QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

M) 1 duties. The Grand Lodge is a deliberative, law making body‑may choose its presiding officer, and, if it choose, may adopt Jefferson's Manual as the basis for its legislative government. The Grand Lodge can not alter or change an Old Landmark, it can not add to, or take from the rituals or teachings of the Order, but it can try its presiding officer for official misconduct in such manner as by law it shall establish, either in Grand Lodge assembled, the Deputy Grand Master presiding,* or, if it shall so determine, it may, as in Virginia, go into a committee of the whole. It is a law axiom, that a man must be tried by his peers, his equals, and is not the Grand Lodge the Grand Master's equal?

 

It is said. that the Master of a Lodge must‑be tried by Past Masters.

 

This, we deny, because, if his Lodge is not equal, Past Masters can not be, for we know the present Master is vested with more power than is cne who has passed the Chair.

 

We suppose this idea originated with the modern practice of conferring a degree upon the Master, and, hence, as he is supposed to be advanced one step further than the members of his Lodge, the claim is set up, that his peers are Past Masters.

 

But, if we grant this doctrine to be correct, it tends to show that the Grand Mastdr may be tried some where, and, if so, we ask, to be shown the place.

 

There being no degree for Grand Masters, it can not, on the same grounds, be claimed, that he must be tried by Past Grand Masters; in no sense of the word can they be regarded as his equals, because as soon as they pass the Chair they lose all power, and fail back as simple members of the Grand Lodge.

 

We hold, as stated, that there is no irresponsible officer in Masonry, and as the Grand Lodge is the highest power known to the Order, it clearly possesses the power to deal with its presiding officer But we have occupied more room on this subject than we if tended, and feel it to be our duty to close our remarks for the present.

 

We know, we stand alone in some of the views above expressed, but before we can renounce them, we must see something more than the. mere declaration of even distinguished men, that the Grand Master, by ancient usage, can do no wrong.

 

The Grand Master being under charges, ceases to be in good standing, and ncates his office, which is filled by the Deputy CO2

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

We have, on several‑ occasions, called upon these advocates iot the one‑man‑power to show us where the ancient law was tr be found, upon which they based their opinions, and as they have failed to do so, we again invite them to come forward with their proof, and failing to do this, we feel at liberty to ask that our opinion, sustained as it is by the proofs here referred to may be duly considered, and be received or rejected upon theit merits.

 

We can not, in justice to our feelings, close this article without tendering our acknowledgments to Bro. Adams, for the very complimentary manner in which he has referred to our humble, but zealous efforts to divest Masonry of the modern trappings, and gaudy show which are being thrown around it. We feel the compliment the more, because Bro. Adams has long been a close observer of our course, and his high standing as a talented and well informed Mason, is proof of his ability to ,judge, while his character for candor and plain‑dealing precludes the idea that his intention is to flatter.

 

Our utmost hope is, that our labors may tend to do the good which he anticipates, by calling up investigation upon the various questions involved, and though we, doubtless, love the ~laudits of men, we claim to love the truths of Masonry more ; "dud if it can be shown that we are teaching false doctrine, we should be unworthy the position we occupy, did we feel unwilling to have our errors exposed.

 

DEMTCPiNG ‑AMLIATI0N‑OPENING LODGE, ETC.

 

J. W. S. MITCHELL‑Ihar Sir, Brother and Gbmpanion.ò‑will you please answer the following questions, with such suggestions as you think proper to make. Does it require a majority, or a unanimous vote of a Lodge, to grant a brother a demit,‑and, in granting demits, does it require all the brethren to be present, or a majority of them?

 

Should action be taken at the time the application is made for a demit, and should it be at a regular meeting, or should notice be given, and the application lie over in the same manner as petitions? Can a brother or brethren vote against granting a demit, and not be required to prefer charges against the applicant, or make his or their objections known ?

 

Supp"o a brother removed without the State in which the Lodge was where he had membership, and, after two or three years' absence, writes to the Lodge of which se was a member, enclosing his Lodge dual, requesting a demit.

 

What ac" QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

603 should be taken by the Lodge, the Lodge not knowing the manner in which he has been conducting himself? Are demitted Masons entltled to the benefits of Masonry, unless they attach themselves to some Lodge as soon as convenient? Is living inconvenient to a Lodge an excuse, or a good reason for a brother to demit, and no other Lodge being near where he can have membership, the only reason seeming to be for wanting a demit, to avoid paying Lodge dues, and the excuse for not wanting to pay dues, that of not attending the Lodge regu larly ? Should a Lodge open regularly in all the degrees at stated meetings, commenoing at the first and close accordingly, or is it only necessary to open in such degrees, or Lodges as there may be degrees to confer, or work, or business to attend to? The excuse I have to offer for troubling you with the above, is a desire to have correct information, and that correctness must be expected from those who are devoting their time and talent to investigation.

 

Respectfully and fraternally,

 

C. T. BoND.

 

Snowing as we do, that the practice of Lodges, generally, in granting demits, is in open violation of the ancient usage, we propose answering the questions of Bro. Bond in such a manner as to leave no excuse for future errors of the kind. We have again, and again stated, through the Signet, that a brother Mason could only demit, or withdraw from his Lodge for three reasons. First, when he was about to travel into foreign countries; second, when about to remove beyond the jurisdiction of his Lodge; and, lastly, when his Lodge had become too numerous, and it became necessary to join in forming a new Lodge.

 

We have several times given the old law in the Signet‑and it has also been given in the Journal, and, therefore, it is not necessary to make the extract here.

 

But from the wording of the law, as also from the spirit of Masonry, it is very plain, that there is no such thing tolerated as that of withdrawing from Lodge membership, except for a short period.

 

The brother who obtains a demit and diploma, because of his intention to travel, is bound to connect himself with another Lodge so soon as he shall locate in the vicinity of one. The brother who removes beyond the jurisdiction of his Lodge, and settles within the jurisdiction of another, is bound to apply for admission, and as a failure to do so, anciently, released the brethren from all obligations to "give him work," so by a fail construction, the brother who now fails to comply with the old 604

 

QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAGE.

 

usage, ceases to retain his claim upon the Masonic charity, or courtesies of the Brotherhood. It follows, then, that the By= Laws of Lodges, granting their members the privilege of de.mitting, when, and for what cause they please, are in direct violation of the paramount law of Masonry, and, therefore, a nullity. There is no Masonic rule better, or more plainly established by the Ancient Constitutions, than that which perpet uates membership.

 

" Once a Mason always a Mason," and once a member always a member, is the doctrine of the ancient law.

 

Masonry really knows nothing of drones in the Masonic hive.

 

All are made equal, all are placed upon a level, and all are required to continue upon a level‑that is, all must do and perform their fair proportion of labor, and contribute a fair proportion to the Charity Fund.

 

It is known that when Masonry was neglected in England, because of the inability of Sir Christopher Wren to visit the Lodges in his advanced age, and because the Masons generally took umbrage at the manner in which the authorities of London treated their venerated Grand Master, very many of the brethren neglected to assemnle as they had done; and this lukewarmness, and inattention to Lodge duties continued to get worse and worse, until, in 1717, there were but four Lodges in London.

 

But there were, at that time, a large number of Masons not connected with either of the four old Lodges, and soon after the establishment of the present Grand Lodge of England, that Grand body, fully understanding the law defining the duty of Masons, passed an edict, requiring all Masons to come forward, and register their names.

 

Nor was this all that was required of them. The Grand Lodge, knowing it to be the duty of all to contribute to the Charity Fund, required each brother to pay a certain sum at the time of registering his name.

 

By this means the Grand Lodge raised a large amount of money, to assist in establishing their female school now in successful operation, and dispensing maintenance and education to a large number of the destitute children of Masons.

 

From the foregoing, it will be seen that a brother can only demit with the distinct understanding that he will speedily reconnect himself with another Lodge, and we hold than` no QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

6055 vote of the Lodge is necessary in granting a demit for the causes stated. The brother about to travel, remove, or to unite in forming a new Lodge, is entitled to a demit, provided he is in good standing, and clear of the books. We think the proper course would be for the Master to order the Secretary to make out a certificate, without a vote of the Lodge, for it could not deprive the brother of his right to withdraw under the circumlances stated.

 

But, viewing this subject as being governed by the modern practice (which is clearly: an innovation), we say that we think a majority vote should grant a demit. We think the application should be acted upon at a regular meeting, and only such a quorum is necessary for this as for any other business.

 

It is proper to state that, while we think a majority vote should be competent to grant a demit, any one member can prevent that vote, by filing charges against the applicant before the vote is ordered. We think an application for a demit, made at a regular meeting, need not lie over, unless it is desired by some member, in order to inquire into the Masonic conduct or standing of the applicant.

 

Bro. Bond asks if a brother can vote against the petition of the applicant, without being bound to file charges. To this we beg to remind Bro. Bond, that our ballot is a secret one, and, hence, it can not be the privilege of any one to know how another votes, and, of course, if you give each brother the privilege of voting as he pleases, you can not hold him account able, in any way, for the exercise, of that right.

 

But, suppose a brother openly says he voted against the applicant, he only tells the Lodge how he exercised his privilege, and, certainly, he. could not be held responsible.

 

Now, the brother who tells the Lodge that he cast a negative vote, and chooses to give his reasons for doing so, may be held iusponsible, provided he was evidently governed by unmasonic motives. We think the brother referred to by Bro. Bond as having removed, sent back his dues and asked a demit, was entitled to it, unless some brother objected, and filed charges.

 

It is certainly in accordaneo with the principles of Masonry, to presume the absent 606

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

brother has continued faithful, until proof is had to the contrary. We say it is not the duty of the Lodge to withhold a demit, for the mere purpose of inquiring whether the brother has continued faithful in his new home.

 

Living inconvenient to a Lodge is no excuse whatever for declining affiliation. If the brother can not conveniently attend often, his Lodge will not require it of him, and it is mockery all to object to affiliation, on the ground that he could not often enjoy Lodge privileges. We think the brother who is required to contribute only an equal amount, and get clear of taking an active part in the work of the Lodge, is the favored party, and, especially so, if, as is generally the cage with non‑affiliated Masons, he is better pleased with folding hie arms in retirement, than discharging his duty in the Lodge room.

 

The old and correct method of opening a Lodge of Master Masons is, to open regularly a Lodge of Apprentices, then a Lodge of Fellow Crafts, and, lastly, the Masters' Lodge, and close them down regularly. But, since the innovation, requiring all business, balloting, etc., in the 111 aster's degree, has been adopted, the Baltimore Convention, in 1843, gave it as their opinion, that it was proper to open almost any way agreeable, for, they said, it was proper to open all the degrees regularly, or it was proper to open any one of the degrees; and, lastly, it was proper to open the Masters' Lodge, and consider the Lodges below opened, and the closing of any Lodge, closed the whole.

 

They also said that, after the business, etc., of the Masters' Lodge was disposed of, it was proper to dispense with that Lodge, and resume labor on either of the degrees or Lodges below, and that the closing of said Lodge, closed the Lodge above.

 

These novel decisions grew out of their previous decision, that a Lodge of Entered Apprentices is no Lodge at all, and a Lodge of Fellow Crafts is no Lodge at all, but that a Masters' Lodge is a Lodge, and could, as a Lodge, open on a degree below.

 

We repeat, that each Lodge should be regularly opened, and that the Masters' Lodge can only be properly reached by regaiarly opening the Lodges below, and that they should be regularly closed down.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

607 POWER OF GRAND LODGES TO LEVY TAEFS.

 

LrrTLE RocK, ARK., September 15, 1854. DsaR SiR :‑I am glad that an occasion offers to address you by letter, with out seeming to intrude, and to hold out to you, in the spirit, my right hand, hoping that our discussion has produced as little feeling on your part as it ham on mine.

 

Your known learning in matters of Masonic history and jurisprudence, giving, in some sort, those who want light a right to ask you to dispense it to them, warrants me in addressing you.

 

Our Grand Lodge, a few years since, embarked in the undertaking of erecting and endowing a Masonic college.

 

Appropriating all its spare funds, and obtain ing many subscriptions, it yet found that a permarunt revenue was wanted.

 

This induced us to levy an annual tax of two dollars.on each affiliated Mason in the State, for the purpose of raisinó such a revenue, to be collected by the Lodges, who are required to remit to the Grand Secretary, every five months, one dollar for each of their members.

 

Some of our Lodges think this beyond the power of the Grand Lodge, and " a Temoval of an ancient Landmark." It is very important to us to maintain this tax, if we had the power to impose it, May I presume so far as to beg your opinion. on the mere question of power, bl letter, to reach me by the 9th November, when our Grand Lodge meets? If your engagements allow, I shall be glad to receive your opinion in full, a. it will have great and deserved weight with us.

 

Can you furnish me, for our Grand Lodge, a set of the Signet. complete, from the commencement? If so, and you will send them tome in a small box, by way of New Orleans, and to care of Armstrong, Starns & Co., at New Orleans, and a bill to me, by letter, I will immediately remit the price.

 

Please send me the same, from commencement of present volume‑I inclose the subscription.

 

Fraternally and truly yours, ALBERT FIEF.

 

III. Bro. J. S. Mrr=ELt, Marietta, Ga.

 

"SIGNET AND JOURNAL" OFFICE, MARIETTA, GA., Oct., MY DEAR BRo. PIKE:‑Your fraternal and truly complimentary letter of the 15th ult. is reed, and, while I beg to assure you that it excited in me the profoundest sentiments of gratitude, I may not conceal the fact, that the enviable reputation of the author of that letter causes me to approach the investigation of the subject propounded, with unfeigned diffidence. It is true, my brother (whatever may be the advantages derived), that very much of my time, for the last thirty‑four years, has been devoted to an inquiry into the true history, 608

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

and in the study of the primitive usages and principles of Masonry, and I should be dull, indeed, if, at this day, I were not better prepared than the casual reader, to sit in judgment upon mooted questions of Masonic law.

 

You will, doubtless, agree with me, that, in the absence of a flmdamental law to govern, we should next look for a custom, usage, or practice, the longest in use, and the most generally received.

 

'

 

You will, I think, also coincide with me in saying, that, all things considered, the usages and examples of the Grand Lodge of England should have greater weight with us, than the usages of any other Grand body, for the same period of time.

 

I proceed, then, to give you what I can remember, as bearing on the subject.

 

I have not time to examine authorities now, but I will state nothing that I do not know to be true.

 

There is nothing in the written Landmarks, regulating the manner of raising money, either for charitable or other purposes. ‑

 

' The first attempt, of wl ich we have any account, to raise a Charity Fund, was at a meeting of the Grand Lodge of England, in 1724, when Past Grand 1laster Dalkeith proposed raising a Charity Fund for the poor brothers, which was unanimously adopted ; and there was laid the fonndation for the creation of a Charity Committee, which afterward became celebrated for the dissemination of relief. This fund was, from time to time, kept up and increased, by various expedients and appliances, without the question of power ever being raised.

 

In 1768, Hon. Chas. Dillan, Deputy Grand Master, proposed to build a Grand Masonic Hall, by laying a tax upon the Grand Ofcers, and all who should apply for initiation or membership in the Lodges, which was adopted without a question of power. The fund, arising mainly from the foregoing tax, amounted, in 1774, to upwards of three thousand pounds: about which time the building was commenced, under an estimate that it would cost three thousand pounds, and yet, twenty years after, it was found that it had cost twenty‑five thousand pounds, and the tax was continued and extended to the subordinate Lodges. Much of the fund was raised by the sale of life annuities.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

609 If the above precedents be objected to, on the ground that they are not strictly applicable to the case in point, I answer that they are sufficiently so, to establish the power of a Grand Lodge to levy and collect taxes, for such purposes as, in its '`3tinlation, will tend to carry out the great ends of Masonry.

 

In the Grand Mastership of the Duke of Cumberland (1782), llie Grand Lodge, by edict declared, that no brother should wear a blue or red apron, unless the Grand Secretary would certify that his name had been registered, and the fee paid; that no brother should be'Master or Warden of a Lodger unless his name was registered, and.fee paid; that no petition should be entertained for charity, unless the applicant's name had been registered, and fee paid ; that each subordinate Lodge should bee that the brethren had all registered their names and paid the fee, and forward the same to the Grand Lodge; and a fail ure to report in obedience to this edict, subjected the Lodge to be stricken from the list of Lodges ; that ten shillings and six pence should be paid to the Grand Lodge for registering the, name of every Mason initiated in any Lodge under the Constitution.

 

That the Grand Secretary should lay before the Grandi Lodge, an account of each Lodge that had not registered ag their members, and paid the fee, to the end that they might be. dealt with. And that no Lodge could be represented in the Grand Lodge, until complying with this rule.

 

The foregoing resolutions were made with a view to answer two ends; first, that there should be no drones in Masonry ; no non‑affiliated Masons; and, secondly, to raise a fund for educational purposes. And, in 1787, Chevalier Ruspini, proposed to the Grand Lodge, to establish a place of refuge; a school for the maintenance and education of orphan female children of Jiasons.

 

At that period there was a strong party in the Grand Lodge in favor of diverting the fund raised by the registering fee, from the original purposes, and the Grand Lodge declined' the undertaking. But, through the energy and untiring exertions of the Duchess of Cumberland, the royal family and, gentry became interested in the project, raised a handson?e donation, and 'the Grand Lodge, through shame, yielded to the 39 610

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

beneficent design.

 

And thisis the Institution (still in a flourishing condition), as reported in 1850, that, from its establishment to that period, had never turned out a girl who had disgraced herself or the Institution.

 

The case above referred to is strictly in point, for, properly speaking, this female school is a college of learning. It is true, it is beneficiary only, and, thus far, differs from those Masonic Colleges, in which paying pupils are admitted, but this differ ence can not affect the principle involved.

 

As to the policy of adopting the collegiate in preference to any other system of education, I, of late, entertain serious doubts.

 

But this question is not directly involved.

 

We are only asked to determine whether, by usage or precedent, a Grand Lodge has the power to levy and collect taxes for purposes deemed to be charitable ; and, certainly, to feed the minds of the poor, is little less praiseworthy and benevolent, than to furnish their bodies with bread.

 

1 hope the foregoing undigested reply will prove in some degree satisfactory.

 

Fraternally,

 

J. W. S. MITCHELL. The foregoing is the rough sketch from which we drew up our private reply to Bro. Pike's letter.

 

HX'UL9ION AND REINnATEMENT.

 

GREENSBORO, ALA., September 26, 1854. EDS. " SIGNET AND JOURNAL," MARmrrA, GA.‑Dear Sirs and Brother a:‑As Seers. tary of Lafayette Lodge, No. 26, in this place, I take the liberty of asking your attention to the following questions: and, as they affect the Fraternity here, I hope you will give us the benefit of your opinions, in writing, so that we may use them at the next communication.

 

1. Is a unanimous vote required to expel? 2. Is it necessary for an expelled member to petition in writing for reinstalw went, or may he petition verbally, through a brother? When he has petitioned, should the Lodge appoint a Committee of Reference, and order the usual course?

 

Or may it get at once? S. Does it require a unanimous vote to reinstate? The point: we have a brother who was expelled Several years since on charge of intemperance‑he has completely reformed, and solicits reinstatement, which the Lodge is not unwilling to grant, but is not prepared to may, what *case ought to be pursued in the premises? QUEST10NS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

611 Zour reply immediately is respectfully solicited, and, if you think the subject would interest the readers of your journal. I have no objections to your using it there.

 

Very truly yours to command, T. C. Osuorw.

 

1. We answer, that although there is no rule of action laid down in the Ancient Regulations, by which we are bound to be governed, it is, nevertheless, quite manifest. that Lodges have ever been considered at full liberty to make their own laws for the government of such cases, and, hence, uniformity is not to be found. The By‑Laws of some Lodges require a two‑thirds vote to expel or suspend, and I think this practice is more general than any other. A few suspend or e pcl by a bare, majority, and,, perhaps, a still smaller number require an unanimous vote. We say, then, that while we think that two‑thirds . should concur in expelling, any other rule might be considered legal, if governed by a By‑Law of the Lodge.

 

2. An expelled 31ason stands cut of from all Masonic privileges. and, though lie, in common with those who are not Diasons, may petition the Lodge upon any subject, he can only be restored by a request or petition in writing, which must be laid before the Lodge at a regular meeting, and must take the course of a petition for initiation ; there must be a reference to a Committee; of Inquiry.

 

?Membership can only be obtained through a peti tion, and this rule applies in all cases.

 

The non‑affiliated 3fason, in good standing, must submit to this course. The charge administered to every Afaster clearly shows that be can. not admit any member except after due inquiry, etc.

 

3. Yes, brother, it requires a unanimous vote to reinstate. No one can be elected for initiation or membership except by a unanimous vote, and this rule does not depend upon the choice of the Lodges. It is the ancient law, and admits of no alters. tion, simply because its long use has established it as one of the permanent laws of the Order.

 

AUTHORITY TO WORK‑MAKMG NON‑x=EM Should an expelled Mason be published before the expiration of the time this it allowed by the By‑Laws for him to appeal to the Grand Lodge? Can a Lodge working under dispensation continue to work after the year expires for which it 612

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

was granted‑when application was made for a charter, and the charter was granted by the Grand Lodge, but not sent or delivered when applied for to tae. Grand Secretary. The dispensation still remaining in the possession of tom, Lodge.

 

A man from our county, who has lived is the same town where there was a Lodge, ten or twelve years after he was of lawful age, and never applied to be male a Mason, went on a visit to the North last summer, and has come back (as .'.a says) "a big Mason, belongigg to the upper tens." Nyw, are we compelled to, ec,ognize him as a Mason lawfully made, etc.

 

H. VD.

 

An expelled Mason snould not he published until after his. expulsion is finally pronounced. The suspended and expelled nave the right of appeal from the decision of their Lodge to the Grand Lodde, and, therefore, the action of the subordinate is not final.

 

If the accused takes an appeal, lie stands disgraced with the Fraternity, because he is charged with, and presumed to be guilty of unmasonic conduct, but he should not be disgraced before the world until after final action. Should he fail to take an appeal within the time prescribed, then the action of the Lodge becomes final, and there is no prohibition to the ppblication.

 

2. A Lodge can not continue to work under a dispensation after its term expires; it is a dead letter. and can only bA revived by the action o_'' the Grand Ladge, in session, or by the Grand Master, in vacation. The fact that a charter has been granted does not alter the case, for no Lodge can work without having the authority present, but, in the case alluded to, the Grand Master has clearly the right to authorize the Lodge to work until its charter be received, or until the next meeting of the Grand Lodge.

 

3. We hold that a Mason, made as above stated, is not entitled to the privileges of the Order, because, by a usage almost uni. versal, the making is illegal, as he should have applied to the Lodge nearest his residence, and because, before lie can enjoy the privileges of visiting, he must be healed. The Lodge that made him acted illegally, in bad faith, and clandestinely, for no Lodge can be.ignorant of its duty in this particular.

 

Tile well being and safety of Masonry require that men should be admitted to its altars where they are best known, and the Lodge. which tramples under foot this wholesome rule, deserves to. bo QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

618 striken from the registry, and should its Grand Lodge fail in this solemn duty, it should be held up as an object of derision to the Masonic world.

 

CAN A FELLOW CRAFT BE SUSPENDED OR FXPELL.M BRO. MrrcHELL:‑Tbrough the Signd, please answer the following questions of Masonic usage.

 

Can a Fellow Craft Mason, when guilty of unmasonic conduct, be arraigned for trial? Cast: A brother Fellow Craft Mason, courtpd'a young lady (not, however, the sister or daughter of a Master Mason), and got her consent to marry him, and also the consent of her parents, and a few days thereafter broke the engagement without giving satisfactory reasons for so doing.

 

Your answer through the Signd immediately requested. Yours fraternally, G. w. MORPBY,

 

Spring Hill Lodge, P. 11,. GOL)%BY,

 

U. D.

 

Any Mason can be tried and suspended, or expelled for unmasonicconduct. And is not an Entered Apprentice a Mason? Is not a Fellow Craft a Mason? We know that, according to the teaching of the Baltimore Convention, endorsed by one of 'the oldest Masonic writers in the United States, an Entered `Apprentices' Lodge is no Lodge at all, and that a Fellow Crafts' Lodge is no Lodge at all" in fact "‑and, if this be true, then it is not difficult to prove that a Fellow Craft Mason is no Mason at all, in fact, but a Mason, "in abeyance,'" for the paramount law declares, that no one can be made a Mason. except in a regularly constituted Lodge.

 

We say that every Entered Apprentice is a member of the great family of Masons, entitled to the brotherly kindness and fraternal courtesies of the Craft, and answerable to his Lodge for his Masonic conduct. We say that he should be, as was the custom a few years ago, a member, a voting member of the Lodge, that every Lodge should, as formerly, transact all their business in the first degree, where they have a Secretary to make a record, and that every Lodge should be, as originally, clothed with authority to suspend an E. A. not only from membership of the Lodge merely, but as the modern usage now obtains, the Lodge is compelled to suspend, if at all, an E. A., or F. C., from all the privileges of Masonry.

 

We beg to add, 614

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

what we have stated elsewhere, that the Grand Lodge of Eng. land, from which we derive all precedents under the system of chartered Lodges, etc., was instituted mainly by E. Apprentice Masons, and we suggest, that if we can not return to the original practice, we should at least perpetrate no more innovations, by making the Secretary and Treasurer officers of the Masters' Lodge, and do away with them in the first degree.

 

HONORARY SIEMHERSHn'.

 

CLINTox, ALA., Aug 30, 1854.

 

BRo. MTTCHFIX.‑I observe in the June number of the Signet and journal, that you, with others named, are elected lwnoraiy members of Lafayette Lodge. No. 24, and Murebisaw Chapter, No. 18, Lagrange, Texas.

 

As you seem to acknowledge it as a compliment, will you be so good as to explain the distinction ?

 

I have always been taught the equality of Masons in good standing, who rank equal in the number of degrees taken.

 

Yours fraternally, J. w. S. MITCHELL, Marietta, Ga.

 

D. IIdnrisox.

 

We do not believe it strictly proper to make any one an honorary member of a Lodge, not because, as Bro. Harrison intimates, it tends to elevate the brother above the others, but for the reason that, if the practice be admitted to be correct in principle, we can not limit its extent. If the doors of Lodges be indiscriminately thrown open to all non‑residents, evils of a serious character might be the result ; but we have an objection to it, aside from the impolicy of the practice. While, in a few cases in England, distinguished men have been permitted to hold membership in two Lodges at the same time, there can be no doubt that it was in violation of a usage as old as the establishment of subordinate Lodges; and, at this day, it is, we think, almost universally agreed that no one can hold member ship in two or more Lodges at the same time.

 

Thus it will be seen, that the practice of making honorary members of persons already members of other Lodges is in violation of constitutional law.

 

We suppose honorary membership exempts the brother so honored from Lodge dues, and all the usual duties of membership, but gives him the right to occupy a seat, and, if he thinks proper, to participate in the deliberations of the body, We remember that when we were a young man and Mason, it QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

615 was quite common, in some of the Western States, to make, by resolution, certain brethren, who resided some miles from the Lodge, what they termed honorary members; by which they excused those brethren from the obligation to attend all the regular meetings, but, in some cases, were only required to attend quarterly, and in such cases half dues only were required. But all this, we think, was wrong, except so far as to excuse from regular Lodge attendance.

 

As Bro. Harrison very correctly observes, all Masons should meet on the level, and pay the same dues, and he who can not regularly attend, or (as is most likely) will not attend, because he regards the work and business of the Lodge irksome, should not complain at being required to contribute an equal amount to the Charity Fund.

 

We hope, however, that after saying all this, Bro. Harrison will not consider us inconsistent in regarding it an honor to be distinguished, as an honorary member, when he remembers the intention, the motives which must have influenced the Lodge and Chapter. We do most sincerely thank those bodies. though, in the same breath, it becomes our duty to denounce the practice.

 

MASOM0 BADGE OF MOURNING.

 

Cimtrox, Miss., September 29, 1854.

 

Duo. Mrrcum.I.:‑There is a practice in use with us, which may be regarded by some as unimportant, and as being a mere matter of conformity to the custom la common use in this country, but I take a different view of the matter, and deny that the civil customs of our country have anything to do with establishing or changing our Masonic symbols, any more than our Masonic ritual.

 

I allude to the use of black ribbon in connection with blue, as the badge of mourning.

 

I am opposed to the adoption of the black ribbon surmounting the blue, as designating the mourning badge of the Order.

 

I do apt know that black has been abopted by any Grand Lodge as the Masonic badge of mourning, although some may have fallen into (what I conceive to be) the error of subordinate Lodges, and have used it as the badge in their grand processions on funeral occasions, without good authority.

 

You see, I do not regard every temporary action of a Grand Lodge as poed authority, but only such as have been adopted after due consideration, and then as a mere local authority, and as I do not think that the color belongs to what is called Symbolical Masonry, I have not used it, and shall not until I have better authority for it, than a mere desire to conform to the custom of the couatries in which they are located.

 

The modes of mourning are various in various countries.

 

In Europe, the ordinary color for mourning is black, in Turkey 616

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

blue or vio'.et, in China, it is wbite, in Ethiopia, brown,‑in Egypt, yellow. Each people pretend to have their reasons for the particular color of their mourning. White is supposed to denote purity. Yellow that death is the end of human hopes, as leaves, when they fall, or flowers when they fade, become yellow.

 

Brown, denotes the earth, whither the dead return.

 

Black, the privation of light.

 

Blue, impresses the happiness which it is hoped the deceased enjoys; and purple and violet, sorrow on the one side, and hope on the other, as being a mixture of black and blue.

 

I have been taught, and led to believe that when a resolution is adopted by the Lodge, requiring the members to wear the badge of mourning, the unform of the degree, that is, the peculiar color characteristic of the three ancient or ay‑1101i" degrees of Masonry was the badge alluded to, and the members thereof would wear a slip of blue ribbon‑and if the deceased was a member of a Chapter, and a aimilar resolution was adopted by that body, the members ‑thereof would wear a alip of red ribbon in the same manner; and I am yet to learn how, and by what authority the black ribbon was attached to either badge. My impression is, that it was first added merely at the suggestion of some brother, as seeming to be appropriate, because it was the color used in this country.

 

Now, I am opposed to engrafting anything on the parent dock, either as a form, ceremony, ritual, badge, or anything else, and suffering it to be abopted by dglaull, and then called Masonic usage or custom.

 

If black is the Masonic badge of mourning, it would nave been known and used many years ago.

 

My Masonic relations extend back thirty years or more.

 

I have associated on funeral occasions many times in other States, and I do not recollect to have seen black used in any Masonic body until within the last fifteen years.

 

If it is proper, it should be used universally, and if not, it should not be used by any, but should be cast off and thrown among the rubbish.

 

I do not ask to be informed what the practice of Lodges is, nor of the expediency of adopting black as seeming to be an appropriate color, but whether or not it is Masonic, as belonging pecmdiarly to Symbolical Masonry.

 

Now, Bro. Mitchell, do you know anything of this I

 

If you know anything of its beginning, let us have some light on the subject.

 

Gao. H. GRAY, Sa.

 

In answer to the foregoing, we beg to say that as early as 1820, we used and saw used black, as the Masonic badge of mourning. The custom then was, and, so far as our observation nas extended, has continued to be, for a Master Mason to place a blue ribbon on the lapel of his coat, and upon it a narrow strip of black ribbon, while the Royal Arch Mason used scarlet and black, in like manner, on all funeral occasions.

 

But does all this make it right?

 

Certainly not.

 

Black does not belong to Symbolical Masonry, but it is the peculiar badge of another degree, instituted long since Ancient Craft Masonry, and never would have been so adopted, if that color had constituted the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

617 Masonic badge of mourning.

 

We think Bro. Gray is correct in saying that the true Masonic mourning is the Masonic badge, and as there never was but one funeral ceremony in Masonry, we are to go there and nowhere else to learn the mourning badge.

 

We think. therefore, that blue is the only color that should be be used at Masonic funerals in any country.

 

The custom of wearing the badge of the higher degrees at the burial of a Master Mason, has grown out of a desire to make a display.

 

All who are buried with Masonic honors, must be interred as Master Masons only. The ceremony knows no degree above, and hence all who appear in procession, should appear under the badge of a Master Mason. * To admit the‑ correctness of any other custom. strikes at the authenticity of the legend of of Ancient Craft Masonry.

 

Like Bro. Gray, we are "opposed to engrafting anything on the parent stock," but, alas, Bro. Gray and ourself are likely to pass away long before the fripperies of modern progrressives shall be made to give place to the plain, simple, and holy teachings of pure Masonry. Within the week past, we have seen one of the most solemn and impressive scenes in the degree of Most Excellent Master, brought down and used at the initiation of a candidate to the first degree in Masonry.

 

What grounds of hope, then, have Bro. Gray or ourself, that our brethren will soon become willing to confine themselves to the simple and impressive rituals of pure Masonry.

 

As Bro. Gray is the first to moot the above question, we beg to thank him for his communication, and, should we be able to command the time, we desire to examine it more thoroughly.

 

REFUSAL To ADVANCE A BROTHER DOES NOT IMPAIR HIS STANDING.

 

‑‑, ALA., September 18, 1!153.

 

Buo. MrrcuELL.‑Dear Sir.‑Having full confidence in your Masonic know! edge, I submit to you the following questions, which, I hope, you will be king enough to answer for the benefit of an inquiring Mason Bro. A. B. has been regularly initiated as an Entered Apprentice Mason.

 

He becomes addicted to drink.

 

After indulging in this habit for some time, he Worms, and becomes a sober man.

 

He petitions to the Lodge to be passed to 513

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

the degree of a Fellow Craft Mason, and is duly rejected.

 

At the next reg% uiar communication, at which time there are but few of the brethren present, he being about to remove from the neighborhood of the Lodge, petitions for a certificate or recommendation.

 

Is he intitled to such certificate, provided there is no objection by the brethren present?

 

And if he is, should tfie facts of the case be stated in the certificate, or should he receive it as a worthy brother? How should the worshipful Master dispose of such a case?

 

Has he a right to decide, or should it be put to the Lodge?

 

Hoping to hear from you soon, I remain

 

Yours fraternally,

 

H. L. G A brother Mason is in good Masonic standing until charges are preferred and filed. The refusal to advance a brother to a higher degree by no means impairs his standing as a Mason. The brethren, probably, did right in refusing advancement to the brother named, for they would have acted unwisely and contrary to the principles of Masonry to advance a brother who was in the habit of violating or trampling under foot one of the four cardinal virtues in Masonry, nor will we say they did wrong in awaiting to bring charges against him, for they may have had reason to hope that he would, as it seems lie did, reform and become a temperate man, and, most certainly, he was, when about to remove, entitled to a certificate of good standiug as a Mason.

 

A NEW LODGE WITHOUT A JUNIOR WARDEN.

 

Alabama,

 

, 1854.

 

BRO. MITCHELL :‑I find. from the perusal of your Masonic Signd and rosrnal, that many questions of Masonic usage are propounded to you, and your answers thereto, thus far, being satisfactory to me, I take this occasion to state a case that came under my immediate observation some time since, and your opinion upon the same will give much satisfaction to many members of the Lodge. It is as follows, viz.: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. and II. petitioned the Grand Lodga of Alabama for a dispensation to work at the town of ‑‑, their petition being recommended by the nearest Lodge, No. ‑. The dispensation was obtained, A. being desig nated as Worshipful Master, B. Senior Warden, and C. as Junior Warden.

 

After the dispensation was obtained, there seemed to be a lukewarmness among the members in regard to organization, for some time ; during which time, C., the designated Junior Warden, had occasion to leave the State for some two months While be, C., was absent, the said Lodge was organized by the Deputy Grand Maser, and D. was installed as the proxy of C.

 

Upon his return home, he went forward and claimed his seat as Junior Warden.

 

The Lodge not only refused his scat as Junior Warden. lint denied his being a member of said Lodge.

 

The ob. Jeetion raised to C.'s membership was, that be, C., had gone to the Lodge to QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

619 which be belonged before signing the petition for dispensation, and made the above statement, and thereupon obtained a demit from the said Lodge. Now 7 wish to know if the Lodge acted correctly in refusing him his seat, if so, is C. a member of the Lodge, or does he stand as a demitted Mason ? Yours fraternally,

 

O.

 

When a dispensation issues to certain brethren to form and open a new Lodge, that instrument names the individuals who are to fill the three principal offices, and it is wholly beyond the power of the Inembers or signers of the petition to make 'a change. The Grand Master alone has the power to authorizo another to fill either of the offices.

 

A practice, somewhat general, prevails, of installing an officer by proxy, and, though we question the propriety of this course, it must be borne in mind that, if it is resorted to, the proxy is not the officer installed. It is, indeed, ridiculous to install D. as the prosy of C. and then claim that D. is the officer installed. But, in the case as put, the Lodge was wrong throughout:' First, in attempting to organize in the absence of one of the principal officers named, as appointed in the petition, for we hold that a new Lodge can not be formed in the absence of either of the three persons named. Secondly, in attempting to install the officers of a Lodge under dispensation, for, although we are satisfied that this wag the ancient custom and should be the practice at this day, the usage throughout the United States is not to install until a permanent charter is obtained, and such being the practice of Alabama, the brethren had no right to install the appointed officers.

 

Thirdly, even granting the right to install, we doubt the right to‑install by proxy.

 

Lastly, the Lodge, after it was thus improperly and illegally organized, acted very wrong in refusing C. the office of Junior Warden, after he had been installed as such. Surely, the Lodge did not believe that D., who acted as proxy for C., was truly the person installed! ‑This would be a perversion of the plain meaning of words, too ridiculous to be charged, seriously, upon a Lodge of Masons.

 

It will be seen that, taking the statements made by our cor. respondent as being true; the Lodge, in question, is not to thin clay, unless its acts have been legalized by the Grand Lode 420

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

a legally organized Lodge of Masons, qualified to work sa such, for C., being refused the office, the Lodge had no Junior War den.

 

JURMICTION OVER ENTEMED APPRE\'TICFS.

 

‑, GA., August IS 1M ' ED. "SIGNET AND JOURNAL"‑Dear Sir and Brother:‑There has arisen a question between our Lodge, U. D., and ‑ Lodge, No.‑, in regard to Apprentice Masons demitting or withdrawing by certificate (I do not know whether an bantered Apprentice can demit), but I believe that they can withdraw by certitlcafe, for the purpose of taking the other two degrees in a Lodge which is much nearer.

 

The case is this, Il‑, McL‑, and B‑ took the first, or E. A. degree, at ‑ Lodge, No.‑, before ‑ Lodge, U. D., was organized. They were citizens of this county, and much nearer to ‑ Lodge, U. D., than to ‑ Lodge, No.They applied to said Lodge for a certificate of withdrawal, and they refuse to grant a withdrawal until they have completed all‑ the degrees. Is this in accordance with Masonic usage or not? I believe that the Grand Lodge holds that a party must be Initiated, Passed, and Raised in the nearest and most convenient Lodge, in good standing, to their residence, etc. Your opinion is requested as early as practicable, as the gentle. men above named are very anxious to take the other two degrees.

 

We have another case before us, which has caused some discussion of opinion An E. A. Mason was blackballed for the second degree.

 

Is he entitled to a seal as E. A. or not ?

 

Yours, etc.,

 

I3. J. S‑.

 

Under the ancient usage, all Entered Apprentices were members of Grand Lodge, the only Lodge known in early times. One was said to be made a Mason when he was initiated ; and, had the doctrine been recognized then, that a Mason could, consistently with his voluntarily assumed obligations to the Fraternity, withdraw from participation in the common burthens and privileges, doubtless, lie would have been entitled to some written assent, on the part of his brethren, to stack withdrawal. But we have met with no evidence of sueb practice, but, on the other hand, with much that would conflict with such practice.

 

But, since the system of chartered or subordinate Lodges was instituted, the practice has grown up, of allowing the members of such to withdraw their membership from any particular subordinate Lodge, with the implied understanding, however, that it is the intent of the withdrawing brother to return, in due time, to the same fold, or connect QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

621 t him slf with some other. That such intent was implied, is appa ‑ent from the fact, that whereas early under this system, some were wont to withdraw themselves wholly from Lodge duties, the Grand Lodge of England, by Old Regulation,* declared such practice to be unauthorized, and contrary to the laws and usages. of Masonry.

 

We can not doubt but that, at all times, some did cease to affiliate with their brethren, and virtually withdrew from the Order; but there was no law, as there was then, and is now, no necessity for any, against such. They were, and are silently, regarded and treated as dead branches, and are quietly cut off as such, and left to rot among the undistinguishable weeds of the vineyard.

 

We do not know what is the practice of the English Lodges, but in this country, most, if' not all of the subordinate Lodges,, we believe, provide in their By‑Laws, that no one can become a member of the Lodge until he has been raised to thq..sublime Degree of Master. Under this system, an Entered Apprentice is not entitled to a demit, technically so called, but a certificate of withdrawal is granted him, which is virtually the same thing. This certificate is seldom asked for, and more seldom granted, except for purposes, and in cases like that made in your letter of inquiry.

 

No Lodge can be compelled to grant such. certificate, and, under the practice, they have the undoubted right to withhold it if they choose.

 

But, without good cause for refusal, it would seem more agreeable with Masonic, as well as ordinary courtesy, to grant it,

 

The Grand Lodge of Georgia, it is true, has, in effect, assigned all material to the jurisdiction of the nearest Lodge.

 

Indeed, this may be said to be common law in Masonry.

 

But since

 

Lodge, No. ‑ had, and has exer cised jurisdiction here, before

 

Lodge, U. D. had act aired even an existence ; and since, too, as it must be borne in mind, the latter, under our practice. has only an inchoate jurisdiction, at best, it is clear the former has the right to retain her jurisdiction over the brothers in question. You can not oust a Lodge of its jurisdiction, once vested, against its ‑ consent, ' 41d Regulations, Art. uii.

 

622

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Without the consent and recommendation, therefore, of Lodge, No. ‑, we would advise

 

Lodge U. D., to abstain from working up the disputed material.

 

Were we called on to' do so, however, we would, at the same time. advise ‑‑‑ Lodge; No. ‑, to give their consent and recommendation.

 

Thus much for the question of jurisdiction and the courtesy which may or may not be expected of, and between the Lodges in question.

 

But apart from these questions, the Old Charges contains a rule which would confirm and settle

 

Lodge, No. ‑, in her right over the material in question.

 

It is in these words : "None shall discover envy at the prosperity of a brother, nor supplant him, nor put him out of his work, if he be capable to finish the same; for no man can finish another's work so much to the Lord's profit, unless he be thoroughly acquainted with the designs and draughts of him that began it." In reply to the last case proposed :‑A blackball for a higher degree does not impair a brother's Masonic standing in the degree lie is possessed of, nor can it divest him of his privileges as such.

 

To do this, lie must be regularly charged, tried, and foqnd guilty of some Masonic offence.

 

LAWRENCE.

 

THE MASTER AND WARDENS MEMBERS OF GRAND LODGE TCMP, Am., ‑‑ J. N. S. DIITCHL^Li.‑Dear Brother.‑As Grand Lodges are chiefly composed of the Worshipful Masters, and Senior and Junior Wardens of subordinate Lodges, does not that fact make their attendance imperative? Have these officers any right to neglect to attend the annual meetings of the Grand Lodge? Has a subordinate Lodge the power or the right to say one or all of these shall not so attend? IIas a subordinate Lodge the power and right to appoint a Delegate to represent her in the Grand Lodge, unless these officers can not, or will not attend? Is it not the bounden, imperious duty of the Lodges to pay the expenses of all of these officers, necessarily incurred while attending the sessions of the Gran4 Lodge? Has a Lodge the authority and right to say she will have but one represenw Live in the Grand Lodge, and will not pay the expenses of more than one? By giving us tigtd on the above questions, you will oblige more than one BROwsm Old Charges, Art. v.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

623 To the first question above propounded, we say that, according to the oldest usage, a Grand Lodge is composed of its officers, and the Masters and Wardens of subordinate Lodges. Until after the union of the Grand Lodge of England with that spurious body, the Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons, in 1813, Past Masters were never granted a seat in Grand Lodge; and this permission, this innovation was tolerated by the Grand Lodge of England, through the influence of the royal brothers, who were selected to preside over each Grand body, that they might effect a compromise and union. If, then, the Grand Lodge be of right composed of the Masters and Wardens of subordinate Lodges, it is clearly inferable that it is the bounden duty of these three officers to be present at each Grand communication; and a usage, quite as old as the Grand Lodge system, makes it the imperative duty of the subordinate Lodges to be thus represented. Some of the Grand Lodges in the United States have, recently, made expediency the paramount law of Masonry, and these, or some of them, permit any one, whether Master or Warden, or anybody else, to represent the subordinate; and this, too, with the tacit understanding that the representative may go home when he pleases, and leave his Lodge represented only in part, or not at all.

 

The Grand Lodge of Georgia, deeming it inexpedient to have so numerous a body as three representatives would make, have absolutely stultified the ancient law, not by permitting the subordinates to send but one, but by declaring that the Masters alone should be entitled to seats in the Grand Lodge.

 

Our brother will readily see how little avail the opinions of individuals are likely to be, when Grand bodies, with the old laws staring them in the face, make everything yield to expediency.

 

We think we are not mistaken in saying that the Grand Lodge of Georgia issues charters, to constitute new Lodges, to A. B. as Master, C. D. as Senior Warden, and E. F. as Junior War den, and their successors; and yet, should either of the Wardens claim their seats, to answer to the trust committed to their joint charge, they will be told that they can be represented by their Master, who alone is entitled to be heard.

 

624

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

We do not deem it necessary to introduce the ancient law, which has ever made the Wardens members of the Grand Lodge, as every one, who has read either Anderson or Preston, will remember its substance.

 

We answer the second question, by saying, no subordinate Lodge has the right to say that either its Master or Wardens shall not represent it in Grand Lodge. They are all members of the Grand Lodge, from the moment they are installed; and, should the Grand Master convene his Grand Lodge, by a call upon its members, the Masters and Wardens are equally bound to obey the summons.

 

The third question is, in effect, answered in the foregoing; for, if the Masters and Wardens constitute the Grand Lodge, the subordinate Lodges can not make void the law, by superseding these officers. The Lodge, in fact, has no power over the members of the Grand Lodge, except so far as it may think proper to instruct its representatives how to vote in Grand Lodge; and should either or all three decline attending the Grand communication, each one so declining has the right to send his proxy.

 

The fourth question is, in our mind, more difficult to answer It is certainly true, that a very old, and, to us, venerated custom, makes it the duty of the subordinate Lodge to pay the expenses of its representatives;* but as it does not clearly appear that this custom has, as yet, grown into a common law usage ; we are not prepared to say that Grand and subordinate. Lodges may not regulate their fiscal concerns.

 

On the other.

 

'Our Bro. Mitchell, we think, has assumed too much in implying that the representatives of subordinate Lodges are, by the cuatom o/' our English brethren, entitled to any pay at all. We express the opinion, hastily, we confess, and tritbout investigation, but, we believe, the members of the Grand Lodge of Ear land all pay their own expenses.

 

Such, we know, is the case with the members of Parliament, and we do not remember to have seen any evidence of a contrary practice in a Masonic Grand Inquest.

 

The proceedings of the Grand Lodge of England, as we are permitted to see them, it is true, are by no means full, but, we think, it would not have escaped our notice, if pay were allowed its members by this Grand Lodge.

 

The dignities of that Grand body entail much personal expense, and this is one reason why representatives are sought of the nobility (who, it will be remembered, have affluence as well as rank) to wear them.

 

We: doubt if any but the Secretary and Tyler receive any pay.

 

LswitEam QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGN.

 

hand, we incline to the opinion that, while a Grand Lodge can not lawfully deprive the subordinates of three representatives, they may declare that the expenses of only one shall be paid out of its funds, and, a priori, if the Grand Lodge may, like the Parliament of England, " limit the supplies," subordinates may do likewise. Indeed, it may be well questioned whether the right to exercise this discretion, is not necessary to the well. oeing of the Order. It is very important that each subordinate shall be represented in Grand Lodge, and there are quite 'a number of Lodges unable to pay the expenses of three representatives.

 

The last question is answered in the foregoing.

 

St7SPENDING BY‑LAWS‑‑IMPROPER INSTALLATION, ETt! BOoNsBoBo, WAsuiNGToN co0NT7, ARC. BRo. Mrrcnpi.L:‑I have been a reader of the Signd for some time, and have never troubled you with any questions, but I must beg you to give us some light on one or two points.

 

Can a Lodge suspend any or all of its By‑Laws at pleasure? For instance, our By‑Laws say: "That no part of these By‑Laws shall be altered or amended, unless a proposition is submitted at a stated meeting, and lies over at least one month."

 

But it so happened that the Worshipful Master wanted the By Law, requiring the members to pay three dollars fee, as dues, altered

 

In order to have it done at once, he decided that the above By‑Law could be suspended, which was done, and the other law amended, so as to read one dollar, in the place of three.

 

When the By‑Laws require the officers to be installed at a certain time, can they be installed at any other time? Can a brother, who has never been installed as Master of a Lodge, preside? Can a Senior Warden, who has never served as Master of a Lodge. install a Master who has never before been installed?

 

What would be the condition of those receiving the degrees from a Master installed by the Senior Warden? The above is the condition of our Lodge at this time, and we ask informatieu of you from the fact, that some of us can not sit in the Lodge under such circum. stances.

 

Yours fraternally,

 

W.

 

Woo unhesitatingly say that a subordinate Lodge bas no right to suspend any part of its By‑Laws, unless a clause, sanctioned by the Grand Lodge, gives, this permissicn.

 

Strictly speaking, no By‑Law of a subordinate is legally oinding, Itntil it has been sanctioned by the Grand Lodge.

 

40 626

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

New Lodges are required to submit a copy of their By‑Lt we for Grand Lodge approval, and, when so approved, it wo‑dd be a work of supererogation in the Lodge, to make void, fo‑ a time, that which the Grand Lodge had declared should be the governing law.

 

And again, the policy of suspending By‑Laws is bad in all its features.

 

We have known Lodges broken up, mainly from the exercise of this indiscretion.

 

The By‑Laws declared that no brother should be qualified to vote at an election, who owed more than a given sum as dues; which clause was suspended to oblige one or two members, and the precedent being set, a few years sufficed to find a majority in debt, to a sufficient amount to render its collection ‑.possible.

 

To the second question, we say, that while every Lodge should endeavor to install their officers on the day set apart for that purpose, the right to do so at a time subsequent thereto, certainly exists. Indeed, any other view of the subject would, in certain cases, lead to the suspension of the Lodge labors, or force it to appeal to the Grand Master for authority to perpetuate its existence. To the latter course we should not object, if the Lodge had willfully neglected to do its duty; but it must be remembered that a variety of causes might prevent the officers elected from being present at the time fixed. They may be sick, absent from the State, or a flood may render it impossible or unsafe for them to attend the meeting. We think the spirit, and not the letter of the law should govern a Lodge in this case. True, it would be better to provide againbt accidents, by making the law read on "

 

day, or as soon thereafter as practicable." but, in the absence of such a clause, it is to be presumed this was the intention of the framers of the By‑Law.

 

The third question we answer affirmatively.

 

The elected Master of a Lodge under Charter must be installed.

 

Not that the installation ceremony in the least possible degree qualifies him to preside any better, but because the usage has grown into common law.

 

But surely it will not be contended that, in the absence of the Master, the Senior Warden can not preside, when the ancient law declares that he shall do so, and in the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

62'J absence of the Master and Senior Warden, the Junior Warden shall preside; and as neither of the Wardens may have ever been Master of a Lodge, it follows, that any Master Mason may take the Chair, if legally invited to do so.

 

Within a few years, great importance has been attached to the Past Master's degree, in certain portions of this country, and we have known some Chapter Past Masters claim the right to preside, in the absence of the Master, and where the Senior Warden was not a Past Master.

 

Virginia, knowing the ancient law, gave the Wardens the right to preside, as above stated; but, believing that only a Past Master should fill the Chair, passed a law requiring the Wardens to be installed, or take the degree, which is the same thing. Missouri also took this view of the subject, but her law remained upon her statute books but one year ; and its repeal was necessary to the harmony of the Craft, as but few Past Masters would consent to be present at the installation of Wardens.

 

But, if none but a Past Master should preside, Virginia and Missouri were right, for the ancient law eaplicity declares, that the Wardens shall preside in the cases above named.

 

But the fallacy of this doctrine is seen in the fact, that the ancient law nowhere makes it necessary that a orother shall be a Past Master, or take the Past Master's degree, in order to fill the Chair ; indeed, there could have been no such law thought of, for the single reason that no such degree as that of Past Master was ever heard of, until the the days of Lawrence Dermott.

 

The fourth question we answer negatively.

 

No officer, not even the Deputy Grand Master, can install, or be present at the installation of a Master, unless he shall have been himself installed.

 

Our answer to the fifth question may. at first view, appear inconsistent, but it must be remembered, that we have been Reeking after the spirit rather than the letter of the law‑we seek to obey the true intent and meaning of the law‑making power. Suppose the Master of a Lodge attempts to make a Mason, and, through ignorance, confers the degree improperly, we should not reject his work, as it is to be presumed the partle0 628

 

QUESTIMS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

believed they were acting legally.

 

We think the work of moll a Master is not illegal, and, most certainly, the brethren should not feel disinclined to sit in Lodge, simply because the Master may not have been properly installed.

 

Rtmr MAY A 13ROTEUM AFFMATT? CH&KSaa8 Cm=, ELLIS cooarrz, Taxes, August 20,185C Bao. Mrrcuar.L S‑I will trouble you by asking you a question in reference to the mode of affiliation.

 

If a member of a Lodge demits, can he affiliate without filing a petition t I will state the precise circumstances, so you may more easily understand the case. At a regular communication of Waxatchie Lodge, No. 90, November, IM, a brother asked for a demit, and our By‑Laws say, that upon the application of any member in good standing, by paying up his regular dues, and one dollar to the Charity Fund, he is entitled to a demit. The brother complied with the ByLaws, and remained a demitted member until November, 1853; at that communication he proposed to the Lodge, that if they would reinstate him, he would pay his dues from the time be demitted ; and, without reflection, the Lodge did am After that time there was some business of local character to transact, and the brother who had demitted wished to have a voice, and members that knew nothing of the action of the Lodge objected, and, consequently, it has created some excitement in the Lodge, and all the members are satisfied that the Lodge has got in error, but how to correct the error is what we would like to get at.

 

If you will take the trouble to answer the above question, by letter or through the Synd, it will be thankfully received.

 

Yours fraternally, '

 

Guy SToxae.

 

As the same question that Bro. Stokes propounds has arisen in the Lodge to which we now belong, and as our opinion has been asked in relation thereto, we desire that what we say here shall apply, as far as applicable, to both cases.

 

We set it down as a settled principle, that all non‑affiliated Masons occupy precisely the same grounds. The brother who has withdrawn from a Lodge in Texas, can have no sort of preference over a brother who has removed from Georgia, and located within the jurisdiction of the same Lodge in Texas Neither of them have any claims to a seat in the Lodge, unti their petition is sent in, has taken the usual course, and been balloted upon.

 

There is but one way of rejecting a candidate, whether for initiation or membership, and that is by secret ballot". There is but one way of receiving a candidate, whether, for initiation QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGN.

 

629 ,rr membershcp, and that is by secret ballot; and, in every case, the candidate must petition in writing, which petition must take the usual course. This we regard as in conformity with the general practice, and necessary to the well‑being of the Craft. We have been told that this opinion is defective in this, that it can not be necessary to require a brother who has heretofore belonged to the Lodge, to undergo the same forms of petition, reference, .and inquiry, that may properly be required of one but recently a citizen of the town or country. Now, if this reasoning proves anything, it proves too much, for, if a non‑affiliated Mason, who is well known, may be excused frgm submitting to the forms prescribed by our rituals, the candidate for initiation, who is also well known, must be excused upon the same grounds. The truth is, however, that if our rituals are worth anything,othey are worth living up to. We say, then, that the Lodge referred to by Bro. Stokes erred, and the more seriously, as it appears that she compromised a principle for dollars and cents; and to show how radically wrong was the action of the Lodge, we would ask the members then present, if they can say the candidate, would not have been rejected, bad his petition taken the usual course.

 

The second question is more difficult to answer than the first, and it is quite probable thatour answer will not be satisfactory to some well informed Masons. If a Lodge acts in violation of the laws of Masonry, it may be contended that her action is a nullity, and, in some cases, this may be true; but we take the ground, that neither the rights nor the feelings of individuals should be outraged, because of the errors of a Lodge.

 

In the case before us, no intentemal wrong was committed‑the Lodge `░ did not intend to compromise a principle for the sake of money, nor did the brother intend to become a member in an improper manner, and, therefore, we say he is, to all intents, a member of the Lodge; he has the records of the Lodge to prove it, and, we doubt not, while the Grand Lodge of Texas would reprimand the Lodge, for so loosely and improperly receiving a member, it would, if appealed to, confirm him in his seat.

 

We say, then, let the brother exercise the rights of a member, and all move on in harmony, and whether the Grand Lodge takes 830

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

notice of it or not, let the Lodge be more circumspect in future. We are, indeed, sorry to believe that this answer is, probably, too late to answer the purposes sought for, but we have been unable, as stated elsewhere, to attend to this duty at an earliei day.

 

IS THE LASS of s uxs A RAR To INITIATION? Can a man with but one leg be made a Mason, without doing violence to the ancient Landmarks of the Order? Please answer me through the &goal; and oblige,

 

W. W. B.

 

A man with but one leg, or one hand, can not be made a Mason, because the Old Charges, the written Landmarks, forbid fit.

 

The fourth article in the Old Charges, after speaking of other things, contains the following:

 

" Only candidates may know that no Master should take an Apprentice, unless he has sufficient employment for him, and unless he be a perfect youth, having no maim, or defect about his body, that Inay render him incapable of learning the Art‑of serving his Master's lord, and of being made a brother, and then a Fellow Craft, in due time, even after lie has served such a term of years as the custom of the country directs ; and that he should be descended of honest parents, that so, when otherwise qualified, he may arrive to the honor of being a Warden, then the Master of the Lodge, the Grand Warden, and, at length, the Grand Master of all the Lodges, according to his merit." Having several times answered the foregoing gdestlon, and explained the law at length, through the Signet, we will here add but a few words. The reader may see that the above law; as collated by the Grand Lodge of England, in 1722, is plaid and simple, and that the reason of the law is as plainly put forth. A man can not learn and teach the rituals of the Order, who has but one foot or one hand; who is deaf or blind; and, hence, such a man could never be an officer.

 

The old law, in this instance, plainly sets forth the doctrine, that all Masone must be placed upon a level, and he who, by nature or accident, . can not occupy this level, is disq,Lalified to become one among us.

 

Those who are governed by the garbled law, as laid down by Dermott, must require a candidate to "be perfect and QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

631 upright as a man ought to be," which would exclude more than half of the human race; but the true law simply designs, that the votaries of Masonry should all occupy equal grounds and equal claims to preferment, and, therefore, he who can not learn, and teach our rituals, can not be admitted. Every Mason knows that a man with but one foot or one hand can not teach or practice our rituals, and every Mason knows, that the blind or deaf must be placed in the same category, and, therefore, none of these can be admitted; and it appears to us equally plain that the spirit and intent of the law does not exclude the hump‑. shouldered, bandy‑shanked, or squint‑eyed.

 

No, if a man has one good eye, the loss of one does not exclude him.

 

If he can hear out of ONE ear, he is not excluded for want of perfection in the other.

 

niMrrIMATE CHUAREN OF MASONS.

 

A brother in Polk county, Texas, propounds the following question : "If a brother takes up with a woman, and raises a family of children, and never marries her, are Masons under obligations to those childeren." Masonry seeks, nay demands of its members, obedience to the moral law. Should a Lodge suffer any brother under its jurisdiction to live in adultery, without bringing him to trial for a violation oú the moral law, we may well begin to inquire what relation illegitimate children should bear to Masonry: We say, that the Lodge nearest the offending, brother's residence, or of which he is a member, and every member of that Lodge are living in open disobedience to. the known principle of Masonry, so long as they silently tolerate the immoral conduct alluded to.

 

Most certainly, in coming under obligations to a Mason's wife, we do not thereby take upon ourselves the future support, or maintenance of the mistress of a Mason. In like manner, our duty to the children of Masons, does not extend to the brother's unlawful children, for this would be making Masonry the encourager of vice and immorality.

 

Children born in lawful wedlock alone have claims, as the offspring of brother Masons.

 

 631  S$2

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

93 RGENT

 

4G8.‑x$co&NG uFatBMS FROM VOMG.

 

BRo. J. W. S. Mrrcexr.L.‑‑Dear Ser.‑Your answer to the following, in the Big", will greatly oblige Our Lodge, at its last stated meeting, considered a case of emergency under the following considerations, viz t Two entered Apprentice Masons, Initiated at that meeting, were desirous of being Passed and Raised before they went home as they resided soms forty miles distant, and, as they said, would be put to great inconvenience in traveling so far to take the degrees; and, further, they were desirous of establishing a new Lodge in their vicinity, and were sparse of Masons for that purpose. Under these considerations, the Lodge consented that they should take the degrees ; and, accordingly, Passed and Raised them the same day.

 

Was this in accordance with Masonic usage?

 

Further, can a Lodge excuse a member from voting upon a petition for Initiation, Passing, or Raising, if be ask to be excused Y

 

Yours fraternally, ALEX. Sxrrtt.

 

We think it probable that our answer to Bro. Smith's first question will surprise many intelligent Masons, but it is known to those who have been long reading our writings, that popularity never influenced our pen. We are aware that the popular opinion is, that any petitioner for initiation has the right 'to ask the Lodge to consider his cage one of emergency, and to set aside an established usage, that he may be hastily made, Passed, or Raised. We are also aware that Lodges, generally, fail to consider the subject in any other light, than how far the claims of the candidate are well founded.

 

In the case put by Bro. Smith, the inconvenience, not of the Lodge, but of the candidates, influenced the action of the members, while, in our view, no applicant has any sort of claim to an emergent meeting of the Lodge..

 

We think the original and true meaning of emergent meetings has been lost sight of, superinduced by an over‑weeping desire to make Masonry bend to the world, and thus become popular with the many.

 

We do not suppose there is a difference of opinion as to the meaning of the word emergent, as all will agree that it is sudden, unexpected; but we do mean to say that, as used in Masonry, we have lost sight of the proper intent and design of such meetings.

 

The Grand Master of England authorized emergent meetings to be held, soon after the organization of that body, but, in all such cases, the interest of ,Masonry, and not that of a petitioner caused these sudden TRwvroN, Mrss., April 8, 1864.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

633 meetings.

 

Such emergent meetings were generally held to make Masons of foreigners, in order that Masonry, as practiced in England, might be carried into foreign countries, and there become subordinate to the Grand Lodge of England. And this, in our opinion, is the proper use of emergent meetings to further the interest of Masonry.

 

We think a Lodge has the right to hold emergent meetings, whenever the interest of the Order calls for them, but. we utterly deny that it has the right to hold an emergent meeting for the accommodation of one who is not a Mason.

 

The settled rule requires a petition to lie over at least one month, and shall it be claimed that one who is not a Mason may cause this rule to be set aside? We know it may be said that it would have been hard to require the candidate spoken of by Bro. Smith to ride forty miles, in order to get the degrees; aye, and we know that the same, or a similar argument has been used, when men who have resided many years in the vicinity of a Lodge, and never made application until they were on the eve of starting to California; but how, we would ask, does this comport with the dignity of Masonry, much less with the known rules of the Institution.

 

The Grand Lodge of Mississippi has, we think, permitted more emergent meetings to be held, than any other in the Union, and yet, in most cases, a proper view of the subject was taken, and less evil done.

 

In that jurisdiction emergent meetings were held by order of the Grand Lecturer, and at those meetings candidates were prematurely Initiated; Passed and Raised, in order that the work of the Grand Lodge might be exemplified:

 

If the Lodge at Trenton hail given the degrees spoken of, for the sole reason that it was important that a new Lodge should be speedily established in the neighborhood of the candidates, we could not say their action was wrong, to set aside the known rules of Masonry, and perhaps, violate their own By‑Laws, for no other reason than the convenience of the candidates.

 

The second question we answer in the negative.

 

A Lodge can not excuse any member present from voting on a petition, for the sensible reason that the unanimous consent of all is required to entitle the candidate to admission, and the brother who asks to be excused, must be supposed to entertain some 634

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

well‑grounded objections to the applicant, and, therefore, it is the more important that his unbiased vote should be had, for Masonry seeks to protect the harmony of the Lodge, and can not receive a new member who could not be fellowshiped by all. In the fiscal concerns, in the ordinary business of the Lodge, many cases may arise where it would be right and proper to excuse a member from voting, but, certainly, not on a petition for initiation or membership.

 

OONSTTTUTION OF LODGES, EX VICKSRIIRG, MISS., December 4, 1854.

 

DR. J. W. S. MITCHELL.‑Dear Sir and Broth*‑.' esteem your periodical very highly, and have so recommended it, though I do not know that you have many subscribers here. There is a decision and fearlessness, together with ability, and Masonic knowledge, and earnestness, as I believe, which makes me appreciate it; . besides, you have done more to break down the spurious Constitutions of Dermott, and establish the glorious Constitutions of Anderson, than all other Masonic writers, as I believe, in the Union. I need not laud your magazine, however, for abler pens than mine have done you more justice than I am capable of doing.

 

Will you please give your views on the following questions: Has the Worshipful Master, after having bimself installed, a Masonic right t4 Install his officers, or should the ceremony be performed by the Past Master or Grand Lodge Officer who installs the Master? Can a new Lodge, on receiving itm charter, with the officers named therein, proceed forthwith to elect other officers, unless provided for by their By‑Laws, or otherwise authorized by the Grand Lodge? What is the "proper voucher" mentioned in the fifteenth charge of the installation service‑is it the test?

 

Your answer will be satisfactory.

 

Yours fraternally,

 

B. SPRINGER. The first question, propounded by Bro. Springer, is of practical importance, and it is to be regretted that no definite rule nas ever been settled upon.

 

We are inclined to believe that after the newly elected Master of a constituted Lodge is installed, he has the right to install his officers, but it is quite _ common for the Grand Master, or the Past Master, who commences the installation, to continue the ceremony until all the officers are inducted into office, and the charge delivered. The fact that it is believed to be of little consequence whether the one course or the other is pursued, is, perhaps, the cause of our having no settled usage upon the subject.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

635 The installed Master, it seems to us, is the proper person to install and deliver the charge to his oflicgrs, for while we regard the form laid down in our manuals as quite proper, we have never believed the presiding officer restricted to that language. The charge, we apprehend, is laid down, as are the prayers, to be used if the Master is not prepared to use more appropriate or impressive language; and, believing that each officer should be charged according to his character and disposition, we think, the Master of the Lodge is presumed to know better than others what' sort of address will produce the best effect.

 

In answering the second question, we shall doubtless disturb the preconceived opinions of many intelligent Masons. The impression prevails generally, that so soon as the officers of a new Lodge are installed, that Lodge is fully qualified to proceed to work and make Masons; while, if we are governed by ancient law, there is no fact better settled than that a Lodge must be constituted before it can legally make Masons; and, as neither the newly installed Master, nor any mere Past Master possesses the power to constitute a new Lodge, and as the ceremony of installation is a part of the ceremony of constitution, it follows that they are not the proper persons to officiate. The Grand Master alone possesses the power to constitute a new Lodge, which power he can exercise in person, or through any Past Master by him specially deputed.

 

After the usual ceremony of installation, the Lodge may be constituted by simply using a few words, viz.: "By the power in me vested, I do constitute these brethren into a regular Lodge of Ancient, Free, and Accepted Masons;" but it will be seen that this language can only be used by the brother having that power.

 

In our history of Masonry, and in answering questions through the Signet, we have, we think, shown conclusively, that Masons can only be made in regularly constituted Lodges. The thing called by Bro. Moore, of Boston, a Lodge in abeyance, is of modern origin, and directly opposed to the ancient law, which emphatically declares that only in regularly constituted Lodges can Masons be legally made, and every Mason must see that 636

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

this law is still considered binding, when he goes into the anteroom to examine, or be examined‑every brother must hail from a legally constituted Lodge, and, therefore, all Masons made in our Lodges under dispensation, are illegally made, for none of them are constituted.

 

In the days of Anderson, no such thing as a dispensation to form a new Lodge, was known.

 

In Preston's time dispensations were issued to run thirty days, and no more. And even the Athol Grand Lodge, under Dermott's spurious laws, issued dispensations to run thirty days, renewable thirty days longer, but no more; clearly showing, in each case, that it was not intended that the Lodge should do any work before it was constituted, but the dispensation was to enable them, or authorize the petitioners to prepare for the installation and constitution, and, perhaps, to give the Grand Master time to arrange his business, so as to be present at the time specified. The present system of issuing dispensations to run twelve months, and renewable during the pleasure of the Grand Lodge, and the making Masons in them, without installation or constitution, is a part truly of the American system, which seems to have been concocted by men ignorant of the ancient law, or reckless of its observance.

 

We say that every Lodge should lave its officers installed, and be constituted into a regular Lodge, by the Grand Master or his duly appointed Deputy, before any work can be legally done.

 

In answering the third question, we are forced to draw inferences which we do not know to be legitimate. We have no authentic testimony to show how and where these charges, now generally used, originated, but have long believed that Lawrence Dermott conceived the most of them, and Webb the remainder. The one under consideration was, doubtless, of English origin, as it was evidently intended to answer a local object, and pre vent a threatened evil which never existed in this country.

 

In the time of Dermott, there were in London two classes of clandestine Masons, viz., those made under the authority of the Athol Grand Lodge, and those made in taverns and beer houses for a shilling. The latter were repudiated by the Athol Grand Lodge, as well as by the G. Lodge of England, and both Grand bodies required testimony, aside from the usual examination QUESTIONS OF MASONIC BSAGN.

 

637 to show that the applicant to visit had been regularly made ; aid, we suppose, this requisition was, in substance, engrafted into the ceremony of installation, after Dermott instituted tile said ceremony for the benefit of all Masters holding under his Grand Lodge. But whether our opinion is well‑founded or not, it is evident that the Regulation was originally intended to answer a local purpose, and never was necessary in this country, and, as it is clearly not an Ancient Regulation, it should never have been copied into our form books.

 

It is to lie regretted that our Charts and Manuals have not been prepared by men better acquainted with the ancient history. and laws of Masonry.

 

Not a few of the laws by which our Lodges are now governed, have no sort of connection with the Old Charges, or the Ancient Regulations; and, though they were at one time in force for local purposes, they should not now con stitute a part of Masonic law. The charge under consideration evidently requires of every Master not only to examine applicants to "Visit, but, also, to require of them to show, by certificate or testimony, other than the evidence produced by an examination, that they were made in a regular Lodge ; and yet it is nowhere supposed to be the Master's duty to do all this, except under those jurisdictions where the certificate system has been adopted.

 

POWER OF GRAND Locruri

 

.

 

Bno. J. W. S. Mrrcaata. :‑I want to ask you one question of Masonic usage. Is the exemplification of the work by the Grand Lecturer legai authority from the Grand Lodge? If not, bow will the members of subordinate Lodges get legal Information?

 

M. A. w.

 

The Grand Lecturer possesses no powers except such as are delegated to him by his Grand Lodge, or the Grand Master and he, being duly chosen to visit and instruct the Lodges, his instructions are, in effect, the instructions of the Grand Lodge, and, of course, binding upon the members everywhere in the jurisdiction, and this, from the very character of his office, is the case, whether there be an edict to that effect or not, for it would be folly to send out a teacher, if his instructions are to beadopted or neglected at the pleasure of the Lodges or Masters.

 

638

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

SHOULD THE MASTER‑EI.ECr BE INSTALLED? DOUGLAS, January 20, 1855, J. W. S MrTCHELL, Esq.‑Dear Sir and Srother ~You will please answer the following questions :‑Where a Master of a Lodge is reelected, should he not be reinstalled? or, in other words, should not installation follow each election where the same person is elected? You will answer at the earliest convenience, as I look upon you to be good authority.

 

Respectfully and fraternally,

 

J. W. BAXTLòx.

 

The Master of every Lodge is elected and installed for twelve months, and until his successor be duly elected and installed. Now, suppose no election should be held at the time designated by the By‑Laws, would not the former election and installation make the acts of the Master legal for another year? Most clearly so, we think. And such'is the true policy and intention of the installation; for, otherwise, a Lodge would be liable to dissolution for the want of officers to govern and work.

 

A variety of causes are liable to operate against the practicability of holding our election at the time specified, and it is highly proper that the old officers should be clothed with power, until their successors are elected and qualified.

 

Several of the Grand Lodges in this country, who suspended work for years, were revived and put to work, legally we think, by the brother who presided at the time of suspension, and, in each case, the constitution required an election and installation annually.

 

But, in addition to the above, we beg to inquire whether any, man can be his own successor? If not, a reinstallation is wholly unnecessary, for, as before remarked, he has been installed until his successor be duly installed. We know the usual practice is to reinstall, and we can see no harm likely to grow out of it, but we can not suppose it to be Masonry.

 

HOW TO RESTORE AN EXPELLED MASON.

 

'

 

LITTLE PINEY, PULASKI OOUNTY, Mo., June 1, 1855, DEAR SIR AND BROTHER :‑Your answer to the following question will greatly oblige Can a brother, who has been expelled, petition any Lodge for reinstatement, of must he be regularly made, as though he had never been a Mason? The brotbef in question has been expelled some three years, and has lived, during that time, quite remote from the Lodge by which he was expelled.

 

Your immediate anew░.r is requested

 

J. P. R QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

639 An expelled Mason must petition the same Lodge that expelled him, for reinstatement, if it is still in existence; if not, then he can petition the Grand Lodge under which the Lodge was held. An expelled or suspended Mason can not be restored by any but the Lodge by which the trial was had, except by a special order of the Grand Lodge, and the reasons are obvious. The facts are presumed to be better known there, and there, on file, is to be found the testimony upon which he was convicted.

 

The idea of making an expelled Mason, de novo, is entirely new to us, for this would be, indeed, making a Mason under a tongue of bad report ; yea, more, with documentary testimony against his character. We confess, however, that this would not be worse, or more opposed to the spirit of Masonry, than to heal an imposter, which we have known to be done bv a brother occupying a high place in Masonry, and who had repeatedly declared his conviction that the brother was an imposter.

 

No, Bro. H., an expelled Mason can never petition a Lodge to be remade. He must remove the stain on his Masonic character, by obtaining reinstatement, and this being done, his good standing is restored, and he needs no other ceremony to entitle him to free fellowship.

 

IN THE A&SFNCE OF THE HASTIR, WHO SHALL PRFSIDEt ST. MARRs, FLA., August 7, 1854.

 

De. J. W. S. MITCHELL, G. H. P.‑Dear Sir and Brother.‑The question propounded in mine of the Ilth of April was: Whether, in the absence of the Master of the Lodge, the Senior or Junior wardens could properly preside, and carry on the work (confer degrees, etc.), neither of them having taken the Past Master' degree?‑and if those who had taken the degree (although never having been elected Master of a Lodge) could consistently remain under such circumstances, and assist in the work? A case of this kind having occurred in our Lodge, I contended that the Wardens, in absence of the Master, were fully competent to open the Lodge and proceed with the work, and although having taken the Chapter degree, conceived I was but doing my duty in remaining, and rendering such assistance in the work as I was able; while several degree Past gaiters left the Lodge. And our Worthy Master also thinks it was wrong, although, be was anxious the work should be attended to, and is necessarily absent much of his time.

 

I considered this matter settled in the June number of the Slgnd and Journal, under the bead of " Who shall Preside," etc.

 

G40

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Our Grand Master also entertains the same views as myself on this subjectout even that does not satisfy our scrupulous brethren. Will you please givò your views in full. and oblige Yours, fraternally,

 

A. B. Mevas.

 

We have so frequently given our views, directly and indirectly, upon the subject of the so called Past Master's degree, and not having the leisure to hunt up the several articles, we can scarcely hope that anything we may now say will be wholly new to those who have been readers of the Signet. But that the subject may be fairly presented for the judgment of all, we will give a brief history of such facts as have a bearing upon the subject presented by our correspondent. and add our opinion of what should constitute the present practice.

 

In the history of Masonry, from the days of Solomon down to the close of the seventeenth century, we read not a line upon the subject of Past Masters, or of Past Masters' rights. Nc such degree as that of Past Master, is anywhere mentioned At the reorganization of Masonry, in England, in 1717, when the Grand Lodge was organized, end the present system of government was instituted, the words Past Master, or Past Master'? degree, were nowhere used; but one of the Regulations for thi government of that Grand body provided that, in the absence of the Master, the last Past Master should take the Chair and preside.

 

This rule remained in force but a year or two, until it was repealed.

 

It was plainly acknowledged that it was con. trary to ancient usage‑that the Grand Lodge bad become satisfied, beyond doubt, that ancient custom gave to the Senior Warden the right to preside, in the absence of the Master‑and from that day to the present, the Grand Lodge of England has recognized the right of the Senior Warden to preside in the absence of the Master; and, in case the Master and Senior Warden are absent, the Junior Warden has the right to preside. If, then, we look to the Grand Lodge of England as the highest source of Masonic light, under the present organization, it would seem that the question is settled.

 

This would be universally conceded, but for the fact that twenty‑two years after, a few noble spirits in London snatched, as it were, Masonry from impending downfall, and placed it upon its wonted proud elevation, some malcontents withdrew their allegiance from the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

G41 Grand Lodge, and denounced the Grand Lodge as at war with the inalienable rights of all Freemasons, and uniting themselves with the expelled and suspended Masons. together formed a Grand Lodge. under the imposing title of the Grand Lodge of Jncient Masons, of London, in 1753. It is a fact, worthy of a passing notice, that among all those malcontents, expelled and suspended Masons. they had not a man of sufficient weight of moral character, to give respectability to the so called Grand Lodge, and, in this strait, they applied to, and prevailed upon the third Duke of Athol, then Grand Master of Scotland, to preside, nominally, as their Grand Master also‑hence, we find the third and fourth Dukes of Athol, in turn, presiding as Grand Masters in Scotland, and, nomiually, as Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of dncient Masons, of England.

 

This spurioup body was, for many yearn, actually presided over by Lawrence Dermott, for it is susceptible of proof, that neither the third nor fourth Duke of Athol gave either their time or attention to the office of Grand Master in that body.

 

As the Past Master's degree originated with this spurious body, and as Past Masters were honored witi life membership in said Grand body, we have felt it to be o.1r duty to present the foregoing facts, and to add that fron. the same source emanated the practice of giving the Chair (in the absence of the Master) to the oldest Past Master present. Dermott's instructions to his pets, throughout the wo1 Id (and he had several in this country) were, that while a W zrden inust conven the Lodge, in the absence of the Master, jet lie, the Warden, could not preside, but must call on the list Master who had passed the Chair.

 

Hence the origin of tl.is clamor about the right of a Past Master to preside.

 

But the idea of a Chapter Past Master having the right to preside, c r to say who ought to preside, did not originate with Dermo,,t, but is one of the progressive, movements of American Masonry.

 

We think no one, who will carefully examine the rise and progress of the Athol Grand Lodge, can for a moment doubt that the sole object in giving Past Masters seats in that body, was that it might win upon the favor of those who were desirous of forming new Lodges.

 

In the true Grand Lodge, Past Masters were 41 642

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

allowed no special privileges; and as, in those days, all eonsid cred it an lionor to be members of the Grand Lodge, it is but fair to suppose, a new Lodge would prefer holding a charter from that Grand body, whose rules permitted all its Mastery to hold life membership therein. And the effect of this cunuing stroke of policy, exceeded the original hopes of Dermott himself. We find that, in some instances. it corrupted some of the old and regular Lodges, so far as to induce them to surrender their charters to the true Grand Lodge, and reorganize under the spurious body.

 

At the union of the Grand Lodge of England with the Grand Lodge of Ancient Masons, in 1813, one of the articles of compromise permitted Past Masters to hold seats in the United Grand Lodge.* For this yielding on the part of the true Grand Lodge, the other party yielded all clgirn to be governed by Dermott's Ahiman Rezon, and, as far as I am informed, not a single other departure from the old laws was submitted to.

 

It will be seen, from the foregoing, that, by ancient usage, Past Masters were entitled to no privileges as such, and, further, that the Past Master's degree was unknown to the true Grand Lodge of England, down to the union in 1813; and we may add that, even at the present day, it is not considered a degree in Masonry, and is not given in their Chapters, unless the newly made Companion declares his intention of visiting America, in which case it is given as a side degree.

 

We do not consider ourselves at liberty to occupy the space it would require to give all the historical facts bearing upon this subject; fence, we beg to suggest to those who desire to see there in detail, that they may be gratified by examining our history of Freemasonry. We have there taken the ground, that the Past Master's degree is of modern invention‑that, so far from its being, in truth and in fact, a Masonic degree, it is wholly unlike Masonry‑that, so far from its qualifying the Master the better to preside, it more resembles a bacchanalian ruse, for fun and frolic. That an appropriate installation ceremony was used long before Dermott was Deputy Grand ' One Past Master from each Lodge.

 

QUESTIONS OF X ISONIC USAGE.

 

B!8 Master of his spurious body of Masons, we do not question, but emphatically deny, that any such degree as is given in this country, has, or ever had, any sort of claim to be considered part and parcel of Ancient Craft Masonry; and, hence, it will be seen, we can not admit tlmt a Past Master of the Lodge, or of the Chapter, has any, the most remote claim upon the Chair in the absence of the Master. We think the Ancient Regulations, as found in Anderson, clearly show that the Senior War den presides in the absence of the Master.

 

But, say the objecting Past Masters, the Wardens must first have the Past Master's degree‑and this is the Virginia doctrine; and, hence, in that Yirisdiction, the Wardens are, or were, a few years ago, made Past Masters: that is, they were made to pass the Chair without ever having accepted it, according to law.

 

But let us see how this doctrine accords with even the American system.

 

No one wedded to the American system of progressive Masonry, can consistently object to Webb as authority, and, though we can not, at present, quote directly from his Afonitor, the only copy we had having been burned in our library, yet we rely implicitly upon memory, in saving that Bro. Cross has given us the substance, if not Bro. Web 's language upon this subject. In the installation ceremony, the Senior Warden is charged that his regular attendance upon the meetings of his Lodge, "is essentially necessary,"‑and why? Because, "in the absence of the Master you are to govern this Lodge."

 

There is no intimation that the Senior Warden must first hunt up three Past Masters, or petition the Chapter for the Past Master's degree: nor is he told that he must pass the Chair, by a trick of modern progressive Masons.

 

We say, then, that in whatever view the subject is consid. ered, it is the Senior Warden's right and duty to preside in the absence of the lklaster‑and, in the absence of both the Master and Senior Warden, it is the right and duty of the Junior Warden to preside; and that, while thus presiding, the Lodge may legally do anything which it could do if the Master was present, and presiding. Of course, file Lodge can not legally do any business or work, if the Master and Wardens are all absent.

 

QUESTIONS OP MASONIC USAGE.

 

SOYAL ARCH MASONS ONLY CAN BE MEMBERS OF A CHAPTER. Ai.ABAMA, July 14, 1856. Dn. J. W. S. Mrr(mm.L.‑Dear Sir and Brother:‑I have long been thinking of askinó ynor opinion of Masonic usage, in a case in which I feel some solicitude. 4 reoelved the Mark and Past Master's degrees in a Royal Arch Chapter in Geer gia, and, on my removal to this State, of course let my condition be known to the brethren.

 

Shortly after, it was desirable to have an additional candidate for' the . Royal Arch degree, and I was solicited to make out the number. I was disposed to decline, until I could write to the Chapter at ‑ for a demit and permission to have the two other degrees of the Chapter conferred by the Chapter here. The High Priest insisted that it would be no violation of Masonic usage or law, and if it was, the responsibility would fall upon the Chapter, which it would will. ingiy take.

 

Now, I wish your opinion‑first, did the Chapter, knowing the facts, do rightt and, if not, secondly, am I a Royal Arch Mason? The established rule in all Royal Arch Chapters requires every brother to be Exalted before becoming a member of that body‑in short, none but Royal Arch Masons can be members of Chapters, and, therefore, you had no occasion to call for a demit‑indeed, a detuit could not be granted. The Chapter' in which you received the two first degrees, could, and, doubtless, would have given you a certificate, showing the facts, had you made the request. But, leaving removed beyond its jurisdiction, you were at full liberty to apply to the nearest Chapter for the other degrees, and while the Chapter to which you applied had the right to demand of you a certificate, or other testimony of your claims to be Exalted, it certainly had the right to confer the two remaining degrees, without consulting the first Chapter, if it was satisfied with your claims. We take it for granted, that the Chapter in which you were Exalted, was well acquainted with your moral worth, and, therefore, as stated by the High Priest, no law was violated‑you were regularly exalted, and now stand as fully entitled to fellowship, as any other Companion.

 

wmW ARV THE MOVARM AND IMMOVABLE JEWELS? BARTHOTA)MEw LonGE, No. 122, MonEHOUSE PARisu, LA., Sept. 15, 1855.. DR. J. w. S. Mrr0ttsL&‑D6ar Sir and Brother:‑I address you at this time; 61 order to obtain year opinion on a subject of Masonic teaching.

 

I am aware that a difference of opinion exists among Masons in places; but as I consider your *pinion on all Masonic subjects entitled to high respect, I am induced to seek It QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

645 Which are ;bo movable, and which the immovable jewels? Is the question.

 

1 have always been taught that the Square, Level, and Yluinb were the ire. movable jewels in our mystic temple, because they have their immovable stations assigned them, and without them in their several stations, no Lodge can be opened or closed. The Rough Ashlar, the Perfect Ashlar, and the TracingBoard, I take to represent‑the two former, individual brethren in different sabis of progression in Masonic knowledge, mystically representing stones in our temple ; the latter, the skillful Master laying down the designs and principles of Masonry. All these may. when found deticlent, and unworthy the place ‑for which they were designed, be thrown over among the rubbish.

 

Not so the three first‑they are never found defective, and never corrode.

 

You perceive that, although asking your opinion, I have given my own.

 

It I am wrong. all I desire is more light.

 

My attention has been drawn especially to this subject at this time, by Bro. J. C. Carpenter, of Mississippi, who, hasò recently traveled through this region, disposing of Masonic Carpets.

 

In occa. sional lectures, which he gave, he taught the opposite of what I have believed and taught.

 

(By‑the‑by, I take the opportunity to remark, that Bra Carpenter is a very bright Mason and fine lecturer, although differing, in some unimportant particulars, from our Louisiana work.) You will eoufi r a favor by giving your views, either through the f4nd, or In a private letter. If you answer through the Signd, you can merely state the question, without publishing this letter.

 

Fraternally, A. S. Wiisuavsx.

 

We have not followed the instructions of Bro. Washburn, viz., to suppress his letter, for the reason that lie uses some arguments which are to us new, and. strongly to the point, and because we had thought we stood alone in the West, in teaching that the Plumb, Square, and Level, are the immovable jewels. We have been content to say, that these jewels beloug to the pedestals, that each must be in its place, whenever the Lodge is open, or being opened; that if the officer leaves his I+edestal, lie must leave his jewel in possession of another, who nin0 wear it, if he occupies the seat.

 

That these are the fixed jewels of the East, South, and West.

 

If they are the movable jewels in any intelligible sense, then is it right and proper t<I" change them from place to place, alternately? and, truly, this would be a novel procedure: for example, to give the Square to the Junior Warden, and‑the Plumb to the Master.

 

Tlie Rough Asblar must've moved from place to place, in order to be made a Perleet Ashlar, and the Perfect Ashlar, if it ever reaches its Appropriate place, must be moved to, and be place l in the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

building, while the Tracing‑Board must be regarded as i board, to be moved, or handled at the pleasure of the lb tstef architect, to draw designs upon, and again to erase these designs, and draw others, for the use of the Craft.

 

These, with a few others, have been the reasons given by me, for be. lieving that Bro. Cross was wrong in his disposition of these jewels.

 

It is not strange, however, that Grand Lecturers generally‑ teach as Cross' Chart and other manuals do, for though a few do sometimes reflect, and reason upon the fitness of things, as laid down in the Monitors, far the larger number^' speak their speech as it has been given to them "trippingly on r the tongue."

 

And again, some Grand Lodges adopt someone ,'' of the manuals as a text‑book, and in this event the Grand' Lecturer has no right to be governed by any other guide. The, view taken of the subject by Bro. Washburn is, to our mind, worthy of the highest consideration; indeed, we can not see upon what grounds those of the opposite opinion can sustain themselves.

 

TPIAI. of PAM MAMdL4.

 

CLLN‑TO.,;, Mess., March 26, 1856.

 

Bao. MITcH$7.L :‑will you please answer, through the Signd and .7oeanal, ibs following questions L If a Past Master, who has regularly passed the Chair. and is now a member of the Lodge, Is guilty of unmasonic conduct, how and by whom shill ': he be tried? 2. If a present Master of a Lodge is guilty of unmmonic conduct, having as connection with his o_&ial dutiu, how, and by whom, shall he be tried? Gao. H. Gaav, 8% For several years past, we have been tempted to enter intp an investigation of the subject involved in the above questions, but were deterred from doing so, becuuse we were aware that ' our own views were in opposition to the settled opinion of all , the Masonic writers of the day; and now that we are called upon to speak out, and have resolved to do so, we do mostseriously regret that we are compelled to do it at a time whes the incessant hard labor of every day in the week, prevents us from doing the subject that justice which we could hope for, under other circumstances.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

647 We have never believed that the Master of a Lodge acquires, oy his office, any power except the government of his Lodge, in strict accordance with the established usages of the Order. On all subjects connected with the work, and involving the Landmarks or laws of the Society, his decisions are final, unless appealed to the Grand Lodge, and why? Because the harmony, business, and prosperity of the Lodge can only be secured, by lodging in the hands of the Master the power to interpret and, decide the law; and, hence,, his decision of what is, or what far not Masonic law, can not be appealed from. But here his high privileges cease. As the Master of the Lodge, he is only o Master Mason.

 

The Grand Lodge, that created the particular Lodge, is only a Lodge of Master Masons. They know nothing, as such, of any degree or order above.

 

If the Lodge be under dispensation, the Master chosen by the Grand Lodge is not required to be installed, and, hence, lie remains simply a MasterMason, until a charter be granted. And what then? Is the Master chosen by a council of Past Masters?

 

Is he elected by those who have necessarily taken higher degrees, and, hence, have the right to demand that he should come under further and higher obligations, in order to be equal to them?

 

Not so 1

 

He is elected by Master Masons, who have no power to make him greater than they are.

 

True, they place him over and above them, as an officer to administer the law, and, by his controlling power, to preserve order; but do they give him a carte blanche to practice immorality, to backbite, to slander, to steal, and commit any and all the high crimes known to our criminal code, for twelve months?

 

Can the Master of the Lodge, with impunity. put the charter in his pocket, and thus suspend the work of tho Lodge for twelve months, or until they can get new authority from the Grand Master? We say, No. The Master of a Lodge is amenable to the power that made him the officer. The Past Master's degree, so called, is no degree at all.

 

The Master of every Lodge should be installed, or, in other words, like the Governor of a State, take the usual oath of office; and, if he violates that oath, he should be held responsible to the power that placed him in office.

 

We know we are told that, according to the Parliament of England, a man must he 648

 

QUFSTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

tried by his peers‑his equals‑and, grant this to be so, does it follow that a Lodge of Master Masons, in its corporate capacity, is inferior to its executive officer, placed in power by the suffrages of its members? If so, then is the Grand Lodge his inferior also, for there is but one Grand Lodge in the United States, or in the world, we think, whose members are made up of Masters of Lodges only. The Masters and Wardens conBtitute the Grand Lodge, by a usage as old as the Grand Lodge system, and this usage is adhered to, except in Georgia, and the Wardens are nowhere, except in Virginia, required to be Past Masters.

 

But, suppose it be admitted that Masters can only be tried by those who have filled the same station, then we must work the rule through, and Wardens can only be tried by Past or Present Wardens; Treasurers and Secretaries, by Past 'I'reasurers and Secretaries; Deacons, by Past Deacons; and Tylers, yy Past Tylers.

 

We deny that the installation ceremony, or Past Master's degree, adds, in the most remote degree, to the qualifications of the Master to preside.

 

We deny that there is any Masonry, or even the appearance of Masonry in it.

 

We believe it was concocted by Dermott, at a time when bacchanalian frolic was the vice of the age, and, for the credit of Masonry, we would to God it could be expunged from our books, and hooted out of use; but so long as Grand Lodges recognize it, with its. degrading ceremonial, so long. will it be practiced upon the dupe who consents to serve as Master, and just so long will those who receive it claim dignity, as growing out of this very undignified innovation. Alas, for human frailty! these dignitaries claim, also, to be exempt from responsibility for unmasonic conduct, before the very body that elected them to office.

 

We are told, that a Master can not be tried for unmasonic conduct, because he could not sit as Master on his own trial. Now, if it were true that it was even his privilege to preside at his own trial, we would admit the objection to be a valid one; but it is generally conceded that, so soon as charges are filed, against any brother, lie ceases to be in good standing, until, by trial, his innocence. be established; and if charges be brought Q1JF';TIONA OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

649 against the Master, lie, in common with all other .Masons so charged, is presumed to be guilty, and, hence, can no longer enter the Lodge; and, being thus necessarily absent, it becomes the duty of the Senior Warden to take the Chair, and discharge the duties of Master, until the accused be acquitted, or until the 11ext election.

 

It will be seen, from the foregoing, that we believe the acting Master is amenable to his Lodge for any and all unrnasonic conduct. We think that, for a dereliction of his official duty, his Lodge is quite as competent to judge and determine as the Grand Lodge; for the particular Lodge will try a brother in the same degree, and can best judge of the motives which prompted the violation; and, for immoral conduct, we can see no reason for referring an investigation to the Grand Lodge.

 

On the contrary, we can readily imagine very important reasons why the Lodge should at once arrest a Ma.,;ter who, by his disregard of the principles of Masonry, may bring confusion into the Lodge, and discredit upon the Fraternity.

 

Having thus answered the second question of Bro. Gray, it' Sollows that the first is also answered‑for if the Lodge can try its Master, it is equally competent to try a Past Master. Indeed, it seems to us that, if a Past or present Master be exempt from trial, because his peers are not in the Lodge, Royal Arch Masons should not be held responsible before A Lodge of Master Masons.

 

Knights Templar, too, should claim to be tried by their peers.

 

If the Past Master's degree places the Master above the members, then are all who have taken the higher degrees still further above them.

 

If it be the office that gives the exemption claimed, then are all the officers of the Lodge exempt, for they all occupy higher stations than the mere members.

 

We repeat, that the Lodge knows nothing of degrees or orders above it; its officers and members are recog nized as Master Masons only, and, as such, are to all intents as liable to trial for unmasonic conduct as the members.

 

FOUND GUII.TY, BUT NOT PU.'dISRED.

 

GOLth1), TEXAS, August 14, ISK BRO. J. S. W. MITCHELL'‑It is Recording to the rules established by the Grand Lodge of our State, for trials for offenses to determine by ballot, whether tht 650

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

accused is guilty, or not.

 

If found guilty, then to determine the punishment, commencing. with the highest mode, and descending to the lowest; ‑expulsion being declared the highest, and reprimand the lowest.

 

A member of the Lodge at this place was charged with an offense, was found guilty; but the Lodge failed to assess any punishment, either expulsion, suspension, or reprimand.

 

Will you be kind enough to give your opinion, in the Signet and Journal. as to the condlò tiou of the case, and the Masonic standing of the brother! Fraternally,

 

F.

 

To the foregoing, we can give but one answer, viz., that th brother stands excused, and, therefore, in full fellowship.

 

Our correspondent, doubtless, thinks it strange that the Lodge would pronounce a brother guilty of unmasonic conduct, and yet fail to inflict punishment ; and, truly, upon its face it would seem so to any one. But having been once present when a brother was proven, positively, to be guilty of gross unmasonic conduct, and yet the Lodge failed to find him guilty, we are not so much surprised at the conduct above detailed, and especially as we can not say whether there were, or not, mitigating circumstances, which induced the brethren ‑to believe that the trial and finding of guilty would sufficiently punish and tend to reform the brother ; for, in this case, they were justifiable in declining to inflict either of the prescribed punishments. If, on the other Band, the accused clearly deserved to be punished, and escaped only because of a want of moral courage on the part of the members, we much fear they will see their error when it is too late to preserve the harmony of the Lodge.

 

CAN THE ACCTSED DROTHER DEHPrT BRO. MITCHELL.‑A circumstance has occurred in my Lodge, on which I should like to hear your advice. A brother is under charges preferred. and before a Committee of Investigation.

 

He requests further time to procure evi. deuce to clear him, which is granted.

 

Ho then comes before the Lodge, and asks a demit, which I, as Master, object to; the brethren call for a vote on it, and that vote is unanimous except myself.

 

Is the brother entitled to a demit?

 

I say, No._ There were three Past Masters present, who all voted in the affirmative. Fraternally, As long ago as 1848, we undertook to lay down the rule by which all questions like the foregoing should be determined (see Signet, vol. i., p. 380). It is understood that no brother is entitled to a demit, unless he is in good standing. The QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

651 question, therefore, turns upon the causes which deprive a brother of good standing in the Fraternity. By the criminal laws of our country, every citizen is heid to be innocent until he is proven to be guilty, in the proper court; and this is manifestly right and proper, because it is in the power of any one to accuse a man of any one or all the crimes falsely, and with malice, and the accuser is, in nowise, made subject to th# higher order of punishment.

 

For example, we may go before a Grand Jury, and with malice charge, on oath, that one whom we knew to be innocent, is guilty of murder ; and though it be clearly proven that we have falsely and maliciously made the charge, the law makes no provision for our punishment at all equal to that which would have been inflicted upon the accused, had it been proven that he was guilty.

 

The very reverse of this is the law in Masonry. If we, under the obligations of a Master Mason, charge a brother with unmasonie conduct, the penalty of which would be suspension, and it should be proven. that we had falsely and maliciously made the charge, the Lodge would promptly inflict upon us the very highest punishment known to our law, viz. expulsion from all the benefits and privileges of Masonry hence, it will be seen that the Lodge is bound to believe every brother so charged to be guilty, until his innocence be established. Nor is this a new doctrine in Masonry. The very principles upon which the Institution is based, lead inevitably to the above result. Ours is a Brotherhood, linked together by reciprocal and indissoluble ties; we are, bound to receive, as true, the asseveration of a Brother Master Mason. If it be asked, why we are not equally bound to receive, as true, the asseveration of the accused, we answer, that the fact of his being accused, discredits his testimony for the time, for the reason above given, that the accuser is subject to the very highest penalties for a false and malicious charge, while the accused is subject to no additional penalty by pleading not guilty, knowing the plea to be false.

 

 If the foregoing be correct, it follows, that the brother against whom charges of unmasonie conduct, or gross unmasonie conduct have been filed with the Lodge, ceases to be in 652

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

good Masonic standing, and is not at liberty to visit any Lodge until his acquittal. Let us take the case as put by our correspondent, and see whether the action of the Lodge may not lead to mischievous consequences. The brother stanlis before the Lodge, charged with a Masonic crime. Although lie has had due and timely notice, lie is not prepared for trial, and asks for further time, which is generously granted.

 

He now comes forward, and asks a demit, which demit must declare that the brother is in good standing and in full felloxaskip.

 

Now, can this be true?

 

Is lie either in good standing, or full fellowship? Some of the members certainly believe him to be guilty, or charges would not have been filed, and, surely, those who believe him guilty can not fellowship him. The demit, therefore, states a falsehood.

 

Again, this brother having a demit may remove from that ,jurisdiction, present his certificate of good standing, and become a member of another Lodge ; and thus is lie imposed upon that Lodge, by a certificate stating that which is not true.

 

But again, a doubt in our mind arises as to the power of the Lodge to try the accused on the charges filed, for the Lodge has, in effect, pronounced him innocent, by granting a demit.

 

Verily, this is a new, but, we think, a dangerous method of declaring the accused innocent, In almost every Masonic jurisdiction (we know not of single exception), the accused ceases to be in good standing from the time charges are filed in the Lodge, and so forcibly does this opinion prevail, that in most cases the accused is not permitted to enter his Lodge even for trial, and, hence, a committee is raised for the purpose of taking the testimony, to be read to, and acted upon by the Lodge.

 

CANDIDATES WHO CAN NOT WRITE_ *‑IS IT RIGHT TO MARE A MAN A MASON WHb CAN NOT WRITE HIS NAHNa NEw ORLEANS, September 2, 1856.

 

Dn. J. w. S. MiTcuELT..‑Right Worshipful Sir and Brother:‑Having thus freer end candidly referred to some of the reasons why the Craft should anxiously In the April number of the Signet and roornal, for 1855, we expressed our opinion. incidentally, on this point. and referred to the action of tha Grond. Lodge of England, which, in 1826, threatened to erase a Lodge from its register. for initiating candidates who could not write.

 

LAWRENCE.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

653  deAre the publication of your history, I need scarcely gay, that the value of your work will be greatly enhanced by a code of Masonic jurisprudence, founded on the true law. which you were the first to point out. and have since ably expound. ed. But whether your long and arduous labors shall ever be rewarded or not, 1 claim to say, that the Fraternity of this State owe more to you than all other Masonic writers; nor do I doulr: that other jurisdictions have been similarly bent. efl ted.

 

I close by propounding a question which I have not seen mooted. and, as I look upon it as an important one, allow me to beg that you will weigh well the subject before you answer, because error is likely to obtain a foothold, if sd'vocated over your signature.

 

Truly and fraternally yours,

 

P.

 

We do, indeed, feel deeply grateful to Bro. P. for the high estimate placed upon our ;tumble labors, and, though we do sincerely believe that lie overrates our opinions, we have, with great care, reexamined the subject involved in his question. Many years ago, our attention was called to this subject by the loose and unguarded manner of receiving and acting upon petitions in some Lodges. As early, indeed, as 1820, we had cause to feel deeply mortified that Masonry was sometimes in the hands of ignorant and unlearned men, for then we were required to‑ be initiated a second time, for the reason that, at the first, the word York had been left out, thereby leaving us only an Ancient, Free, and Accepted Mason, and, as such, the blaster refused to acknowledge us a regular Mason. But while we would not, if we could, confine Masonry to the truly educated, we unhesitatingly say, that no man, however intelli gent and otherwise well qualified, should be made a Mason, who can not write his name.

 

In the Regulations of the Grand Lodge of England, under the head " Proposing Members," the third Section reads as follows: " No man shall be made a Mason, in any Lodge, under the age of twenty‑one years, without a dispensation from the Grand Master. Every candidate must be a freeman,* his own master,. and, at the time of initiation, in reputable circumittances. Previous to his initiation, he must subscribe his name, at full length, to a declaration to the following effect: 'I, being a The Old Charges, the fundamental law, declare, that he must be fra b") @nd it thus reads now, as it ever has, in the English Book of GbnWudau.

 

654

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAG& freeman, of the full age of twenty‑one years, do declare tl.at, unbiased by the improper solicitations of friends,"' etc.

 

To the above is appended a note, that none might misconstrue it, in the following words: "Any individual who can not write, is, consequently, ineligible to be admitted into the Order." In the Book of Constitutions of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, tinder the head of "Particular Lodges," the thirteenth Section reads as follows: "Nor shall any candidate be initiated who can not read and write." The Constitution of the Grand Lodge of Scotland contains no clause upon the subject, but in a form laid down for granting certificates, upon which the Grand Secretary issues diplomas, the concluding clause reads as follows: "To this certificate the said Bro.

 

has, in our presence, adhibited, on the margin, his usual signature."

 

We admit, however, that the above extracts furnish nothing that can be considered absolutely binding upon Masons in other inrisdictions, as the Regulations of the Grand Lodges of En.and, Ireland, and Scotland are nothing more than By‑Laws, subject to amendment at the will of the several Grand bodies. But, while we have referred to these old bodies as fit examples, we will furnish other and still more important reasons for the position we occupy.

 

A usage, believed to be greatly older than the Grand Lodge system, gives to every brother, in good standing, the right to demand of his brethren, in case he is called to travel, a diploma, and that document is incomplete and worthless, if it has not upon its margin the signature of the brother who holds it .indeed, this is the only unmistakable evidence which it is in his power to produce to strangers, that his diploma is not a forgery. The Master and Wardens who grant the diploma, must certify that the brother has signed his name in the margin, and a stranger has only to require the holder to re‑write his name on a strip of paper, and compare it with the signature on the margin, thus proving the genuineness of the certificate of good standing. We need scarcely inquire whether any Master and Wardens, much less any Grand Master and Grand Wardens, would undertake to issue a diploma with none other than the orother's mark in the margin.

 

The law, as well as common QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

655 sense, requires one or more witnesses to prove that the party, in their presence, made his mark, and we at once see, that no brother could travel in foreign countries, and be expected to have his subscribing witnesses with him.

 

How, then, shall a brother, who can not write his name, obtain a diploma?

 

We may be told that, although a brother can not obtain a diploma, who can not write his name in the margin, it may, nevertheless, be proper that such a one be permitted to enjoy all the other advantages of Masonry, and we grant that it does seem hard to debar a good man, only because his parents or guardian oiled to do their duty toward him. But Masonry has ever been, and must continue to be exclusive in its rules.

 

The Old Chargos (our fundamental law) forbid us the privilege of admitting those who are so deformed and maimed that they can not practice and teach all our rituals; and the reason of the law is there stated to be, that any and all Masons may, of right, look forward to advancement in any and all offices, according to their merit;' and as it will be manifest that lie who has but one foot or one hand, or one who can not see or hear, could never become the Master and teacher of a Lodge, lie could not oe on a level with others. If, then, the fundamental law excludes all who can not enjoy the honors and benefits, as well as perform the labors of Masonry, we should be acting in open violation of the principle laid down, in initiating a man who can not write his name, for such an one would not only be deprived of one of the great advantages of Masonry, not being able to obtain a diploma, but lie could never grant, as Mastei or Warden of a Lodge, a legal diploma to another.

 

We are. aware that, in some ,jurisdictions, the foregoing question and our answer are likely to be considered uncalled for, on the supposition, that no Lodge would entertain a petition not actually signed by the petitioner; but knowing, as we do, that there are other jurisdictions where no sort of difference is made between those who sign, and those who, make their mark, and knowing, further, that some Lodges act upon petitions never signed at all, we are forced to agree with Bro. P., that the question is one of great importance, an(l only wonder that it has not been looked into before.

 

556

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

THE RIGHT OF THE MASTER TO ORDER A RE DAII=.

 

Mississippi, October 31,14152t.

 

BRO. MiTenFi.r.:‑Your answer, through the Signet, to the following will to thankfully received : A petition for the second degree was presented, and the ballot was cast, the Worshipful Master ordered the same to be exhibited, which was done‑the Junior and Senior Wardens declaring the same to be d(irk. tho Worshipful Ill‑aster refused to declare the result, but immediately order^d a reballot. The Lodge refused to vote a second time, upon the ground teat our BS‑Laws make it the duty of the Worshipful Master to announce the result. Did the Lodge do right in refusing to vote? or, did i:ie Worshipful Master do right In closing the Lodge? AN OLD SGRSC:UHFIC.

 

If the above case is fairly and fully stated, we are bound to say, the Master of the Lodge clearly transcended his powers. We think the custom very generally pravails, to order a second ballot, if the Master has reason to believe a mistake has been made in the first : and we think this much the safest course, especially if there be but one blackball ; bet if By‑La%vs allow of but one ballot, it is clearly the duty of the Nfaste, to declare the candidate rejected or‑elected, as the case may be. There is nothing in the ancient law regulating the number of limes the ballot may be spread, and, therefore. it is competent to control this by local law, and it is preposterous to suppose' the Master of a Lodge has the right to trample upon these Iota regulations. From the statement made, we think it quite probable that the members of the Lodge, in the case spoken of, were governed somewhat by a spirit of opposition, not absolutely called for, and that this was quite as improperly met by similar feelings on the part of the Master, but whether or not, depends upon the reading of the By‑Law, for by a fair construction of it were both the Master and members bound to be governed.

 

If we are to understand our correspondent as saying, that the Master refused to say whether the ballot was or was not clear, we say lie was wrong, without a pretest; but we prefer believing that lie only refused to announce the final result, claiming his privilege, under a fair construction of the ByLaws, to order a re‑ballot, to guard against the possibility of a mistake.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

6661 t21ARGES AGALM A LODGE.='ECREr BALLOT.

 

‑‑ PARiss, LA., November 5, 1856.

 

J. W. 8. MITCHELL, Eq. Dear Sir and Brother :‑I wrote you only last week,, but since then a question has arisen, on which I want your opinion‑or rather, two questions.

 

1. When a Lodge is under charges before the Grand Lodge, deiec "░ wrvin& of a copy of the charges, and citing the Lodge to appear and answer before the Grand body, suspend the working of that Lodge until tried, unless so specified at the time of such service? 2. Is the ballot on Masonic trials to be considered a secret ballot; and is a" brother guilty of violating the secrecy, of the ballot, in aòNwalo wasp, who states how he voted on a Masonic trial? Yours, etc., The questions propounded above being new to us, anal being pressed with other engagements, we much fear our answers will not prove satisfactory.

 

We have ever held that a brother against whom charges are preferred, ceases to be in good standing, because he is presumed to be guilty‑and he is presumed to be guilty, because' his accuser is subject, in all cares, to the highest grade of punish., went, should it turn out that the charges are false and malicious.. But can this rule be made to apply to Lodges charged with a dereliction of duty ? We think not; because there is no, general law, either ancient or modern, which can‑ be brought to bear against a Lodge making false charges.

 

The Grand; Ledge may find a Lodge guilty of a most glaring departure. from its well defined duty, and yet; the highest punishment ,which can be inflicted is, the arrest of its' charter‑‑‑expulsion of Lodges is unknown to Masonic haw.

 

Again, a Lodge does not lose its right to work by being. cited to appear before the Grand Lodge, because the Grand Master is at all times clothed with power to suspend a Lodge, from work, or arrest its charter, and this, too, without a triak and so long as this power is withheld, it is to be presumed the Lodge bas Pot forfeited its power to work ; on the other hand . the Grand Master' can in nowise interfere with charges against an individual brother.

 

We can rot hold Masonic intercourse with a brother who is. not in goad standing‑nor with a clandestine Lodge.

 

In the first case, the filing of charges destroys good standing;‑while .a

 

.

 

658

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

in the latter, even sentence of guilt does not make it claudestine. If guilt be pronounced in the first case, the Lodge can choose between reprimand, definite suspension, indefinite suspension, and expulsion; in the latter case, the punishment of expulsion can not be inflicted. But suppose the lightest punishment be inflicted, the standing and general Masonic privileges of the members are not thereby impaired, they not having been tried as individuals, but as a society.

 

In the above attempt to furnish reasons for boldin the opinion, that a citation against a Lodge does not, of itself, suspend the regular work, we rely mainly on the fact, that there is, in each jurisdiction, a legal guardian, clothed with authority to watch, over and, if need be, to suspend the work of a Lodge, or arrest its charter, until the meeting of the Grand Lodge. This special guardianship being provided to meet all emergent cases, and generally to supervise the well‑being of .be Craft, we are not at liberty to suppose a Lodge is deprived of its functions by incidental means.

 

The second question, though new, does not present to our mind so many difficulties as the first. While we regard the secrecy of the ballot for initiation, advancement, or membership, as essential to the harmony and well‑being of every Lodge, we can not attach the same importance to it in other cases.

 

We believe that it would be better for all concerned in trials, that the ballot should be strictly secret ; but so long as the general practice does not sanction it, and in the absence of a law making it secret, we could not censure a brother who chooses to divulge his vote. We have been accustomed to vote viva voce in trials, and this is, perhaps, the most general plan, because it is not to be understood that the law, which everywhere applies to balloting for initiation, should apply to eases of trial.

 

The mere praetiee of balloting does not presuppose secrecy as a duty‑for we all know, that most Grand Lodges elect their officers by ballot; and we further know, ,that it is quite common for members to show their ballots to .each other before depositing them.

 

The plan of balloting in rordinary cases, is adopted, as we think, to enable every brother, who chooses so to do, to keep his vote a secret.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

659 CANDIDATES WHO CAN NOT WRITE.

 

Sao. LAwaENcE..‑I rejoice greatly, that Right Worshipful Bro. Mitchell ha4 In your November. issue, cut up, so fully, the detestable practice of initiating men who can not write, into the mysteries of our Order. About five or six years ago, I happened to be present, as a visitor, at ' ‑ Lodge, Ga, and saw, with ineffable disgust, a man initiated, who could not write.

 

Its impropriety was eo apparent, that I wondered how intelligent men, as some of those Masons were, could ever have entertained a thought of bringing the poor fellow forward. Ever since that event I have ardently wished that something could be done to prevent forever such occurrences. And I now call upon Intelligent brethren everywhere, to lift their voices against the practice I

 

Let Bro. Mitchell's article be read in all the Lodges, and its cogent reasons against the practice sink down deep into the memory of every one who loves Freemasonry, and desires to see it transmitted in all its pristine beauty and strength to posterity.

 

Most fraternally,

 

WAt. I10IISBR.

 

WHO MAY CONSTITUTE AN ENTERED APPRENTICE LODGE? LA GaANGE, TERA9, February 24, 1857. BRO. MITCHELTä‑Dear Sir:‑We have long been accustomed to regard yoe as the highest authority upon all questions of Masonic jurisprudence, and I am, tuerefore, requested to submit to you the following, about which there is a contrariety of opinion among the Craft at this place‑viz.: Is it absolutely necessary that the indispensable number required in opening an Entered Apprentice Lodge should all be Master Masons, or may a portion of them be Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft Masons? Your answer to the above, at your earliest convenience, will greatly oblige many of your friends in this vicinity.

 

With great respect, I remain yours fraternally,

 

L. F. PRics.

 

SHREVEPORT, LA.

 

DEAR BROTHER:‑Your favor of February 24, asking what grade of Masons constitute a Lodge of Entered Apprentices, was forwarded to me at this place. Should I withhold an expression of my high appreciation of the compliment you confer in re. garding my opinions as high authority, I should do violence to the feelings of a breast ever grateful for marks of approbation.

 

When you have learned that I am en route through Louisiana, stopping but a short time at each town, you will at once see that my answer is not likely to be so satisfactory as it would be, were I able to refer to authorities.

 

Regarding your question of the highest importance, as con. nected with the history and legends of Masonry, I must call efu

 

QUESTIONS; of MASONIC: ussOM attention to some recorded facts; and allude to some of the tra. ditions of our Order, which have a bearing upon the subject. If we attempt to go beyond the dark ages for information touching any subject, we are lost in conjecture,, except so far as the history of Moses furnishes light; and as that history was! designed' to be partial and limited in extent, we must look elW where for knowledge of many things, and especially in relation to Freemasonry and its primitive. laws. We know that the:. Egyptian Mysteries became corrupt long before the reign of David, King of Israel, and' that they were cultivated and sought, after by every people except the Jews, and, althoug% we knowthat everywhere they taught a plurality of gods, we can not regard the Heathen Mythology, as transmitted to us, in any other light than a system of romance.

 

Having, then, neither holy nor profane records on which to rely, we are thrown back upon the best systematized and most rational tradition which was found ,to exist when mankind merged from the dark ages, and began to. throw off the shackles of ignorance and superstition.

 

And. here, with great confidence, I seize upon the traditions of Ma. sonry, as furnishing the most reliable information, because they are in strict conformity with the teachings of the Bible, and' because they alone are capable of explaining many passages in, that holy volume, which otherwise must ever remain mysterious. In this view of the subject, I proceed to say; our traditions teach that King Solomon received superior wisdom, not alone nor mainly that lie. might erect the House of the Lord ; on the contrary, lie who "received wisdom to work all manner of cunnin‑ work, and to solve all difficult questions," was, in truth and in fact, the Master builder, while Solomon's. superior wisdom was employed in bringing into being a secret Society, intended to. counteract the teachings of the Egyptian Mysteries, by teaching the doctrine of one God, and thus to bring back the heathen nations to a knowledge. of the great Jehovah, and ultimately overturn and destroy the heathen worship of many and tangible gods.

 

I think these facts are clearly established by our traditions, and confirmed by the Bible; but it will be seen that I can not furnish the proofs here,having only the space. to refer to such facts as are necessary to elucidate the subject under discussion.

 

QITr*ITIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

Our traditions most clearly show that, during the building od' the Temple, King Solomon communicated a complete knowledge of his holy mission to but two men, viz., Hiram, King of Tyre. and Hiram Abiff, that they, and they only, were made Master Masons; they and they only were made acquainted with the great secret, the.doctrine of one God, which was to be taught to the wise men of all nations after the Temple was completed. Our traditions further teach, that during the building of the Temple, therewere many Fellow ‑Crafts and Entered Apprentices, and that they held Lodges in the :quarries and in the foresis; and can any one suppose that Solomon or Hiram left their thrones, in order to be present at every Entered Apprentices' Lodge, or that both were present at every Fellow Crafts' Lodge? I think not, nor can it be supposed that the Master builder bad even as much leisure as either of the kings.

 

But let us come down to a later period, where we are not driven to rely alone upon our traditions. In the ;days of Sir Christopher Wren, the last Grand Master of Operative Masons, Entered Apprentices', and Fellow Crafts' Lodges were held sil over London, both before and after the great fire. in 1666.

 

At that ds.y there were no warrants or charters: Masons met where and when they pleased, and made Masons, but not Master Masons.

 

A Masters' Lodge was held Only by the special order id' the Grand Master, and few, if any,: except the most distinguished :artisans, received that honor.

 

How, then, could it be expected that there were two Master Masons present at every Felloaiv Crafts' Lodge, or one at every Entered Apprentices' Lodge? But this question is put to rest, I think, by simply calling the fact to mind, that neither of the Lodges could have been in posses`sion of such information as would enable them to know when a Master Mason was present.

 

They could not know who was a Master Mason.

 

The Old Charges, which, it is known, we regard as the written Landmarks of Masonry, declare that a brother mudt be a Warden before be can be Master of a Lodge, and Master of a Lodge before he can be a Grand Warden; but a Follow ,Craft Mason may be Grand Master, provided he be a nobleman by birth, or a distinguished personage.

 

This Regulation ‑wst 662

 

QUESTioNS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

wisely framed to guard the Institution against the evils of filling the important offices with unskillful brethren, and, at the same time, enable the Brotherhood to keep up its reputation, by placing at its head a man of elevated character, though but a Fellow Craft.

 

Nor was there any wrong in this, because all . the business of the Lodge and Grand Lodge was transacted in an Entered Apprentices' Lodge, where alone they have an officer to keep the money, and one to keep the accounts.

 

It will be seen, from the foregoing, that the present practice of transacting the business in a Masters' Lodge, is a modern innovation, and it is equally apparent, that when the Old Charges were collated, and, for aught we know, in all time before, Lodges, or private assemblies of Masons, could only confer the two first degrees, and, hence, it was lawful for a Fellow Craft to preside over the Grand Lodge, the constituent members of which were only Entered Apprentices, or, at most, Fellow Crafts.

 

Thus are we driven to the conclusion, that, anciently, an Entered Apprentice could preside over an Entered Apprentice Lodge, and a Fellow Craft could preside over a Fellow Crafts' Lodge, without the presence of a Master Mason; and while all will agree, that what was Masonry anciently, is Masonry now we are, nevertheless, involved in a dilemma by means of the introduction of a modern innovation, now almost universally adopted.

 

I allude to the modern practice of transacting. the business of a Lodge in the Masters' degree.

 

Formerly, and within the recollection of the writer, a Lodge of Fellow Crafts, or Master Masons, was never opened, except for work, or lea ture, the trial of a Master Mason, or for burial ceremonies , but now, the business of a Lodge being transacted in a Masters' Lodge, it follows that all officers of said Lodge must be Master. Masons.

 

In conclusion, I have to say, that though it is apparent that by the ancient and paramount law only Entered Apprentice. Masons were competent to form and open a Lodge of that degree, the present usage renders it absolutely necessary that all officers of a Lodge shall be Master Masons, and the regular. ly installed officers of a Masters' Lodge must needs constitute QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

663 the officers of an Dntered Apprentices' Lodge.

 

True, it might be asked, how this can be, when there are but three officers in a Masters' Lodge, and seven in a Lodge of Entered Apprentices? but I answer, that this only tends more fully to expose the innovation alluded to ; for, though we must all admit the incon. sistency, yet it is true that, at the present day, a Treasurer, Secretary, and two Deacons are installed as officers of a Mss= ters' Lodge. I say then, that, under the present organizesCon, the officers of a Lodge of Entered Apprentices must be Master Masons, or, in other words, the officers installed in a Masters' Lodge constitute the officers of Entered Apprentices; nor do I know of any remedy for this and many other growing evils, unless a World's Grand Lodge could be assembled with full power to restore the primitive usages of the Order. Fraternally yours,

 

J. W. S. MITCHELL.

 

CAN A LODGE, OR CHAPTER, BE OPENED IN THE ABSENCE OF ALL THE PRINCIPAL OYPICERS4 In the absence of the Master and wardens, can a Lodge be opened legally by a Past Master, and business transacted? In the absence of the High Priest, King, and Scribe, can a Chapter be legally opened, and business transacted, by a Past High Priest? I should be glad if you would write me your opinion. upon the above questions, and if you bave heretofore answered them, refer me to the place. A pretty full answer, with reference to authority, would be thankfully received.

 

Fraternally yours,

 

Amos ADSys. We believe that a Lodge can not be opened, for any purpose, in the absence of the Master and both Wardens, except by dispensation from the Grand Master.

 

A Masters' Lodge is composed of three, viz., the Master, the Senior Warden, and the Junior Warden. It follows, then, that all other officers or members are but the subordinates, the assistants of the said three.

 

There is no other officer recognized by our ritual, and, until within the last thirty years, there was no apparent necessity for more, certainly not for a Treasurer, or Secretary, as all business was transacted in a Lodge of Entered Apprentices, where such officers exist.

 

The dispensation or charter is issued to, and placed in the keeping of the Master and Wardens, and not the Master alone, 164

 

QUESTIONS Ok MASONIC USAGE.

 

as some believe. The Grand Lodge nolds the Master ana Wardens responsible for the performance of all Lodge duties. Should the Lodge be guilty of violating a known Landmark, or edict of the Grand Lodge, and thereby lay itself liable to prosecution, the Grand Lodge will issue its summons, not for ail who may belong to the Lodge, but for the Lodge itself, viz., the Master and Wardens, to come forward and show 4%Luse, if any they can, why their dispensation or charter ehall not be arrested. If, then, these officers are responsible for what the Lodge does, or fails to do, it would be a palpable wrong to authorize or empower any one else to take charge of their Lodge in their absence.

 

~, We know it may be said, that the late Grand Lodge Regulations have declared, that a dispensation or charter shall not be issued to a less number than seven Master Masons; but while this fact is admitted, it must be seen, that this new Regulation can not do away with the immemorial law. We do not euppose the ancient law intended to limit the number of associates, or enrolled members to the three officers, but they being the smallest number, and the recognized head, they could call to their aid and association such others as they chose, or as their Grand Lodge might think proper.

 

But whatever maybe thought of the Grand Lodge Regulation, or of the transfer of the business from a Lodge of Entered Apprentices to a Lodge of Master Masons, the ancient law, the ancient ritual must remain unchanged, and, therefore, the Master and Wardens must ever constitute a Masters' Lodge.

 

So far as relates to Past Masters, we deny that they have any claims to preside over and above any other member of the Lodge.

 

There is no ancient law recognizing any such claims, privileges, or powers.

 

It is true that one of the Regulations of 1722 did declare, that a Past Master should preside in the absence of the Master; but it is also true that the Grand Lodge soon after acknowledged this to have been an error, having since found the old law, which gave the power to the Senior Warden in the absence of the Master, and in the Absence of the Master and Senior Warden to the Junior Warden ‑ and such is the settled law of Masonry.

 

Dermott's ~aw QUESTIONS OF MASONIC 'USAGE. ~

 

6613 gives the Chair of the absent Master to a Past Master, but requires the Lodge to be convened by a Warden,; but this spurious law can have no weight or influence, where the true law is known and acknowledged.

 

To render the matter still plainer, we will suppose that the Master and Wardens of a Lodge in Albany are in attendance upon their Grand Lodge, sitting in New York City.

 

Will any one contend that a Past Master can open the Lodge?

 

So far from this, we hold that the Lodge is, for the time being, not iu Albany, but in attendance upon the Grand Lodge, by its order. The charter does not constitute the Lodge, but it does constitute the Master and Wardens into a Lodge of Master Masons, and one of them, accompanied by his authority‑the dispensation or charter‑must be present, or the Lodge can not be opened, and it can not be opened, because neither of the persons, in whom the powers exist, or through whom the Lodge :Ias being, are present.

 

We say, then, that there is no such thing as a Lodge under warrant, without the presence of the Master, or one,of the Wardens.

 

As the system of separate Chapters of Royal Arch Masons is of modern institution, there can be no ancient law which was made for its government; but as the Royal Arch degree is part and parcel of the Masters' degree, and, therefore, of Aucient Craft Masonry, it is proper that the ancient laws and usages should be made to apply as far as possible. Therefore, we think a ,Chapter can not be opened in the absence of the High Priest, King, and Scribe, and especially so, as the warrant is issued. to them with similar powers, and under similar restrictions to those of u Masters' Lodge.

 

CAN A LODGE ORDER A NEW EIXMON?_IS THE J. DEACON A IFAALOFFICER, IF TIM S. WARDEN WHO APPOINTED HIM HAS NOT BEEN INSTALLED? CHATTANOOGA, July 17, 1856. DEAR Sin AND $norRicR :‑Without a previous personal acquaintance, I have taken the liberty to address'you, asking you to do Chattanooga Lodge, 198, the favor to answer, or rather to inform us what coarse to pursue, in reference to our present dilernaia. The case stands thus: 666

 

` QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

At our last annual election, we elected a Senior Warden, who, since that time, bas been in feeble health, so much so. that he bas not been able to appear in out Lodge, even for installation, nor was he installed by proxy, and he now informs his brethren that it will be impossible for him to perform the duties of his office. Question‑Caa this Lodge again elect. or can a dispensation be granted for that purpose? Again, we have no one in our Lodge competent to 811 the office, except it be the S.:cretary or our Senior Deacon, from the fact, that our worshipful Master has moved out of our city, and the Senior warden will have, in most cases, to preside. Question‑‑‑Is there any mode in Masonic usage, by which either of these officers can be mach eligible to the office of Senior warden, as they can not hold two offices in the same Lodge? 3. Is the present Junior Deacon holding his appointment legally, the Senior Warden not having been installed in his office? Almost all our brethren are acquainted with you by reputation, and are very desirous to hear your views in reference to the above, and could you find it convenient to reply in time for our next regular meeting, on Monday, it would confer a great favor, for we are at a lose what to do in the case.

 

Fraternally yours, etc., Cads. BBNN& To the R. W. J. W. S. MrrcHELL, Marietta, Ga.

 

To the first question we say, that all officers of the Lodge are installed "for the ensuing twelve months, and until their suecessors shall be elected and installed." From which it will be seen, that so long as a newly elected officer remains uninstalled, the incumbent can not be released, but must continue to fill the office and perform its duties.

 

As the By‑Laws fix a time for the election, and as at the time appointed the Lodge, in the case referred to, did elect a Senior Warden, it is no longer in, the power of said Lodge, in accordance with the By‑Laws, or the usages of Masonry, to order a new election; but it is in the power of the Grand Master to authorize, by dispensation, a new election, if lie should deem it for the good of the Craft.

 

To the second question we say, that the well‑being of Masonry makes it the iinperative duty of all who accept an office in the Lodge, to fill that office during the term for which he was installed, and, consequently, usage does not sanction his resignation, and, therefore, neither the Secretary nor the Senior Deacon are eligible to the office of Senior Warden, until the regular election, But, here again, the brethren have theit remedy in the Grw,4 Master, who ha% the power to permit the QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

667 vacation and refilling of any office, and, therefore, by dispensa. tion, may authorize either the Senior Deacon or Secretary to resign, and become a candidate for the office of Senior Warden, to be chosen by election, as he shall direct.

 

To the third question, there can be but one answer, viz., if the brother has been installed, he is as fully and legally the Junior Deacon as though the newly elected Senior Warden had been installed, and it matters not whether he was appointed by the old, or the newly elected Warden, for though the newly elected Warden had no right to make the appointment before he himself was installed, the Lodge, by installing the Junior Deacon, elected and qualified him to fill the office, the regular term.

 

TO ORGANIZE A GRAND LODG& The Grand Lodge of England was organized by the representatives of four particular Lodges ; but the question was not then mooted, whether a less number could legally have done the same thing. There were then but four organized Lodges in the South of England, and, we suppose, had there been but three, the same good purpose could. and would have been effected. But when Dermott's Grand Lodge came into being, and he became the law‑giver, it is not wonderful that he would teach, that five Lodges were absolutely necessary, to take the initiatory steps to form a Grand Lodge. Dermott, it would seem, took pains to make the teaching of the Athol Grand Lodge differ as widely as possible from the doctrine of the true Grand Lodge.

 

We have seen that Dermott's Ahiman Rezon not only found its way into this country, but soon became the standard of Masonic law, and Hence Smith's Ahiman Rezon of Pennsylvania, and Dalcho's of South Carolina. taught that at least five Lodges were necessary to form a new Grand Lodge. But notwithstanding all these influences, one of the New England States (Rhode Island, we think) organized a Grand Lodge, through the representatives of only two particular Lodges, and no serious objections were made to its legality; but with this exception, we think, no Grand Lodge in 668

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

the United States has been organized by a less number of Lodges than three, and, we think, this should be regarded ‑as the common law, at least of this country.

 

We say, then, that whenever three or more chartered Lodges, in any State or Territory where there is no Grand Lodge, ‑desire and agree to organize a Grand Lodge for said jurisdiction, they shall meet, by their Masters and Wardens, in convention, and simply declare said Grand Lodge organized, and forthwith proceed to elect and install their Grand Officers. Neither a custom, nor any good reason, makes it incumbent on the Lodges to obtain the permission of the Grand bodies from whom they derived their charters.

 

UFFICER3 AND MEMBERS OF A GRAND LODGE.

 

In 926, 1663, and 1717, all Freemasons, including Entered Apprentices, were members of the Grand Assembly or Grand Lodge, and this usage continued until 1721, when the Grand Lodge of England in its " Thirty‑nine Articles " declared, that "the Grand Lodge is composed of the Masters and Wardens of all the regular particular Lodges upon record, with the Grand Master at their head, and his Deputy on his left hand, and the Grand Wardens in their proper places." From 1717 to 1721, the Grand Lodge, it would seem, had no Deputy Grand Master, though Sir Christopher Wren appointed and continued to have a Deputy.

 

As early as 1725, the Grand Lodge commenced giving seats to Past Grand Officers, Grand Treasurers, Grand Secretaries, and others, and this improvement has been so improved upon, that now we are not prepared to say who may not be made members of a Grand Lodge, by a new Regulation.

 

POWER OF THE GRAND LODG& We think a Grand Lodge has power to make any and all laws for the perpetuity and well‑being of the Order, provided always that no LANDMARK CAN RE REMOVED, nor an estaUixitd usage be diswegarded.

 

QUESTIONS, OF MASONIC USAGE'.

 

Got ORGANIZATION OF‑ A SU13ORDINATE LODGE.

 

At the present day, a regular Lodge can only be formed by authority of a Grand Lodge, either directly or through such Grand Officers as may be clothed with authority.

 

Formerly, Entered Apprentices could petition for a warrant to form a new Lodge, and a Fellow Craft could be the Master; but now, at least seven Master Masons are necessary to constitute a 1 Lodge, and, of course. all. the officers must be Master Masons.

 

CONSTrTDTIUN OF A‑.I.ODGR To constitute a new Lodge, the Grand Master in person, or some brother authorized by him, must assemble the members. and install the officers. This simple ceremony, accompanied by the declaration, "By the power in me vested, I constitute you a regular Lodge of Ancient, Free, and Accepted Masons," embraces all that is essentially necessary.

 

As we have stated before, we think the officers of a Lodge under dispensation should be installed, as by this means alone can it be constituted a regular Lodge, and Masons can be made nowhere else.

 

CONSECRATION OF A LODGB The ceremony of consecration is not at all necessary to the legal organization of a Lodge.

 

The ceremony is performed by the Grand Master, or a Deputy by him appointed'.

 

The Lodge being opened, must receive the acting Grand Master with Masonic honors, and yield him the Chair, when he orders a procession formed, which moves around the room.

 

The Lodge (which, in this sense, is a painting, or other representation upon canvas, of the interior of the Lodge room, and the im. plements of Masonry, placed in the centre of the room), is then uncovered, and the Grand Master pours upon ‑the Lodge corn, wine, and oil, and says, " By the high powers in me vested, I consecrate this Lodge to the honor and glory of the God of our fathers," when the brethren give the secret Grand honors,, acid respond, " Glory be to God in the highest=‑on earth peace, and good will to men." 670

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

DEDICATION OF THE LODGE BUILDING.

 

We doubt the propriety of dedicating any Lodge building that does not belong to the Fraternity, for the reason, that we think, as does the Church of England, when an edifice is dedicated and consecrated, it should not be used for any other than holy purposes. The ceremony of dedication is generally performed in public, and is as follows The Lodge being assembled and opened, the Grand Master, or his appointed Deputy, is introduced by a Committee, when be is received by the Lodge with Masonic Grand honors (the members all standiwg), is conducted to the East, and he assumes the Chair and control of the Lodge. A procession is formed, and moves to the building, and with such preliminaries as may ne deemed proper, at the proper time, the Grand Master pours upon some portion of the edifice corn, wine, and oil, and says "By the high powers in me vested, I dedicate this building to Freemasonry, to Morality, and to Universal Benevolence, which is followed by prayer, and, generally, an oration; after which the procession returns to their Lodge room, and it is made t1le duty of the Secretary to record an accurate account of the whole ceremony.

 

We have no reason to believe, that either the ceremony of dedication or consecration originated with, or ever was peculiar to Freemasons; on the contrary, we know that not only the Jews, but the Heathen nations also, dedicated and con secrated their edifices set apart for public worship.

 

LAYING A CORNERSTONE.

 

The ceremony of laying a corner‑stone should be superintended by the Grand Master, or his Deputy. The Lodge being opened, and the Grand Master, or his Deputy, being received with Masonic honors, a procession is formed, which moves to the place where the building is being erected, when, after prayer, the acting Deputy Grand Master presents the Grand Master with the Plumb, the Square, and the Level.

 

The Grand Master then orders the stone to be lowered to its place by the principal Architect.

 

While the stone is being let down music QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

671 is performed,* and any other demonstrations of rejoicing may be indulged in by the spectators, if they choose so to do. The stone being put in its proper place by the Master Builder, the Grand Master descends and applies the Square, Level, and Plumb, and exclaims: "I pronounce the work Square, Level, anyd Plumb, and both true and trusty." The Deputy Grand Master then hands to the Grand Master the corn, the Senior Grand Warden the wine, and the Junior Grand Warden the oil, when he pours each in turn upon the stone, and simultaneously the brethren prepare, and. at each stroke of the gavel, give the public l_xrand honors ; but the words which accompany each stroke of the gavel are never spoken in public.

 

The ceremony of lavinä a corner‑stone originated with, and is peculiar to Freemasons.

 

We have no evidence that any Church or other society ever laid a corner‑stone with ceremony, until during the anti‑Masonic excitement in the United States, when a Bishop of New York (himself a Mason) felt unwilling to see his church edifices erected without the use of this time‑honored ceremony, and not being able to get the services of the Masons in public, took the Masonic ceremony, and by slight alterations and additions, made it appear to be a Church service, and thus prepared, he actually laid the corner‑stones of several churches in Masonic form, though the public supposed it to be a religious form. For example, while he could well think of, and use the secret words which accompany each stroke of the gavel upon the stone, he', allayed the prejudices which would at that time have been openly expressed against the Masonic ceremony, by simply substituting for the true words the following, which lie spoke in a loud voice: "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of ‑the Holy Ghost." Since the period above spoken of, corner‑stones have been and are still being laid by different Churches and societies, not one of whom are capable of giving the true reason for the most simple portions of the ceremony. We do not, nor are Masons generally, likely to complain, because other societies lay corner stones; on the contrary, it is more a subject of mirth than of complaint.

 

In England, at this point of the ceremony, a cannon is Gred three times, and the Wctators shout buzz&, three or more times.

 

642 It is matter of deep regret that the teaching is so various in relation to opening and closing a Lodge. In some jurisdictions the Lodge is "opened up," that is, a Lodge of Entered Apprentices is opened first, then a Lodge of Fellow Crafts', and, finally, a Lodge of Master Masons, and they close down in reverse order; and this, we think, is strictly correct. Until very recently all the business was done in the first degree, and, hence, when there was no work for a degree above, no further opening was required.

 

Then, Apprentices were members, and voted on all questions proper to come before that Lodge, including a ballot for a candidate for the first degree; but now, the business is 11' done in the Master's degree, where, in truth, there was no formerly, nor is there properly now, either a receiving or dis. burring officer. In 1843, the Baltimore Convention gave it as their opinion, that an Entered Apprentices' Lodge was in fact no Lodge at all, and they said the same of a Fellow Crafts' Lodge, but that they were the Masters' Lodge, opened in those degrees; and this decision was made in the face of a secret or unwritten Landmark, known to every Entered Apprentice, and which will be understood when we say, that we never were nor ever can be at liberty to receive and acknowledge any man as a regular Mason, unless he has first satisfied us ins manner, the most i::1Pmn known to Afasonry, that he had been initiated into a just and regularly constituted Lodge of Entered Apprentice Masons.

 

After the above decision, the Convention was so far consistent as to give it as their opinion, that Lodges were at liberty to open up, or to open directly in the Master's degree, and in closing that Lodge the others were closed, or considered closed, and, hence, in some jurisdictions this method is pursued: And we notice that Bro. Mackey, in his instructions to Secretaries, teaches, that when a Lodge is opened in the first degree and desires to open in the second, that they are to close the Lodge of Entered Apprentices, and. open a Lodge of Fellow Crafts; and in like manner he directs this Lodge to be closed Wore opening in the third.*

 

It is true, we have seen thie QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAG9 OPENING AND C1.l)STSU A IADG& 0 See 11 Principlot of Masonic Law," p. 151 QUESTIONS OP MASONIC ugACR.

 

673 evnrse pursued in a few instances, but, we confem, that wo thought it very inconsistent, and especially a.g we are taught to go up, step by step, from the lowest to the highest degree, and now, that we have arrived there, Bro. Mackey remover all the steps below, and leaves us ‑to get back as best we may. We have found the Baltimore plan of opening and closing very convenient, and especially so, if the Lodge was pressed for time:; but we noticed an evil growing out of it in Missouri, of toe serious a character to be overlooked. We have seen there some of the most expert *orkmen totally, at a loss; Vhfi calltA upon to open a Lodge of Entered Apprentices. They had bem so long accustomed to open and close in the Master's de~rea, 'and, if they had work for the first. the Master's degrees was die. pensed with, and labor resumed in the first, that they liad for gotten the ceremony of that degree.

 

We think the old and correct plan is to open in the first‑dispense with labor in that degree and open the second‑dispense with labor In that and open in the third.

 

Here we have the three Lodges or degree* regularly opened; and when the labor and business of the Masters' Lodge is disposed of, we think it should be regularly closed, and then proceed in like manner to close the others. We are bound to open and close in due form, and, we confes% we know of no other way of doing so.

 

QUAOIMATION of CANDMArer.

 

Before any brother takes charge of a petition for a friend,

 

h6 should apprise him that it will be expected that his character stands fair in the community, as Masonry permits none to become members except they are believed to be honest and honorable men, with moral principles, and who believe in ilia existence of one Supreme Being. Physically, the candidate must not possess the defects pointed out as objectionable by the fundamental law.

 

But how shall the brother know what that law is, so long as the compilers of the law differ from each other? Bro. Mackey, who, in 1853, denied that he had ever quoted a line from Dermott's .4himan Rezon, or in any way 43 67òll

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

given credit to its author, in 1856 uses the following language in his Principles of Masonic Law: He (the candidate) must be a man of at least twenty‑one ears of age, upright in body, with the senses of a man, no't deformed or dismembered, but with hale and entire limbs, as a man, ought to be."

 

Neither this language, nor its import, is anywhere to be found in the true law, as collated by Ander$on, but its substance may be seen in all the editions of Dermott's .f1himan Rezon.

 

It is true, that the language is not precisely the same in all the edition,;.

 

In some, the language fa: "Perfect and upright in body, as a man ought to be," which is the language used above, except that Bro. Mackey left out the word perfect, in this connection.

 

We have before us an edition of the ghiman Rezon, purporting to be " the first American, from the third London edition," published in New York, in 1805, in which we find the following "No Master should take an Apprentice that is not the son of Honest parents, a perfect youth, witliont maim or defect in his ,body, and capable of learning the mysteries of the Art" (see page 82). On a careful examination of the language in all tho editions, it will be found that the teaching is the same as that of Bro. Mackey, as above quoted.

 

They all require the candidate to have nq defect about the body, that may hinder him from learning the Art, but, in addition to this bodily perfection, he must be capable,of learning the Art, that is, he must be perfect and upright in body, and he must have mind enough to learn the Art.

 

From which it will be seen, that no man with the slightest deformity, or blemish of body or limbs, can be made a Mason.

 

If he is stoop‑shouldered, or has croaked legs, or has lost a toe or finger‑nail, he can not be made a Mason.

 

In short, he is subjected to the same law which pre. scribed the qualifications to enter the priesthood in olden times. We now ask the reader to turn to the true law, as contained in the fourth of the Old Charges, as given in this volume, and he will see that the intention of the framers of this law was tt. exclude all who were so deformed or dismembered, as not to be ò Page 159.

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

676 able to learn and teach our rituals, and the reason of the law is given to be, that all Masons should be upon the level, equally eligible to fill any and all the offices. r1 man with but one foot, or one hand, could never fill an important office, because he could not teach our rituals. A man who can not see or hear, could never fill an office, because he could not truly either learn or teach our rituals; and, hence, such men. if admitted, would be subjected to the mortification of being passed over and excluded from positions of distinction.

 

The law does not leave us barely to infer that these are the reasons of its wording, but it plainly sets forth the fact, by adding : "That so, when otherwise qualified, he may arrive to the honor of being the Warden, and then the Master of the Lodge, the Grand Warden, and, at length, the Grand Master of all the Lodges, according to his merit." We say, then, that the true law excludes only. such as are so deformed or maimed as not to be able fully to learn and teach our rituals; and we still hope we may live to see the day when this will be the teaching of every Grand Lodge in the United States, though, we confess, it appears to be hoping against hope. while so prominent a writer as Bro. Mackey devotes thirteen pages of his Principles of Masonic Law,* to an effort to prove that Dermott's teaching is correct, and is the law. We are the more surprised at this, because he took offense at us, in 1853, for saying he regarded Dermott's Ahiman Rezon as authority, and denied, out‑and‑out, that lie had ever regarded him, or his Ahiman Rezon, as authority. But, in 1856, in the article referred to, lie quotes Dermott's Ahiman Rezon, of 1764, South Carolina Ahiman Rezon, of 1807; the Ahiman Rezon of North Carolina and Tennessee; a resolution of the Grand. Lodge of Missouri, passed in 1823; the Correspondence Committee of Georgia, New York, Maryland, New Jersey, and Florida, all tending to prove that the very language used by Dermott is the true law, and, withal he attempts. to prove the propriety of that perfection required by Dermott's law, for he says "In the ancient Temple, every stone was required to be See 11 Physical Qualifications of Candidates," p. 163.

 

616

 

4VkNtI6* br wk9okic ITShbk perfect. far a perfect eitdde vats the symbol of truth ;" Mid adds, that the candiddte "is required to present himself, like the perfect stbtie in the material Temple‑a perfect null in the spirttual building." It is true, that 16. Maekey says in this article, that Dernioti'4 Ahimah Rezoin " possesses no legal an. thority among tlia Oraft," but; nevertheless, lie urges Dermott's law of perfection, snd does not quote the l6W as found in AndersaiL IIwnOY OF OFFICERS OF A LOWR The fundamental law‑the Old Charges‑_ar* silent in relation to the mariner of choosing officers; diid; therefore, the whole subject is clearly open to be regulated by the Grand Lodges.

 

The Regulations of the Grand Lodge bf England early provided, that a Master and Treasurer should bo annually elected. The Wardohs were formerly appointed by the Master. The usage in the United States is, to elect all the officers of a Lodge once a year. Some of the Lodges keep up the old custom of permitting the Master to appoint his Deacon, and the Senior Warden his.

 

The usage, from 1717 to the present day, has been, to regard the Master gnd Wdrden5 as constituent portions of, and, in donjunction with the Grand Officers, to compose the Grand Lodge; but, through the inhovations of the Athol Gfdrid Lodge, dud Dermott's teaching, Post Masters have been admitted to seats, and, in one instance in the United States (Georgia), an opposite course has been pursued, and the Wardens have been, and still are deprived of iNelubership in the Grand Lodge. While we admit the right of a Grdrid Lodge to make a Regulation, admiring to seats in said Grand body any Mason in good standing, we deny the right of a Grand Lodge to exclude the Wardens from seats as menibers.

 

A: Lodge of Master Masons is coal posed of a Master; 13eiiidr and Junior Wardens; the Lodges eonstltutd the Grand Lodge, and no Lodge earl be present in Grand Lodge unless these three officers are present, or unless they have jointly or severally transferred their rights to a QV,Wtxovs of MASONIC W"_#.

 

&?4 proxy, or proxies.

 

If a, Grand Lodgq lzas he .right: to exclud*.

 

the ~Wardeus, it clearly has the right~taa e

 

igde the Mqster, and may make the Grand Lodge coasisL of Oiq Sperptaries.

 

If long usage, universally acquiesced i4, .may a ,, lish any law ate fundamental, Wurdeas clearly have a4 iu~a}ienablo right to seats in Grand wgo.

 

POWERS "D WW OF raM *W= Although the Master is aq electivq

 

qas, lie

 

in aa4e sew, placed above responsibility to cogst t#enAL

 

A para,uwunt last of the Fraternity commands that, under pq *At s of t)king8, shall a Landmark be removed, whether that Landuaark he‑written or secret, and it is made the special duty of gie *aster aot only to give instructions to his Lodge, but a4o to prevent the removal of a Landmark. It is his duxy to direct ag4t control the work and lectures. and, from the Very nature of his regon‑, sibility to his Grand Lodge, and to the Fraternity at large, he must be left at liberty to determine what is and what is not Masonic law.

 

The Master's decisions, therefore, upon all subjects touching the laws of the Order, or the rituals of the Lodge room, must be final, nor can he be held amenable to charges for erroneous decisions. But, neyertbel.", as Lhe Grand Lodge is the appellate power of the Brotherhood, the brethren array appeal to the Grand Lodge, to say whether ;heir, o,r the *aster* opinions are correct.

 

But beyond the ,confaugencies above rcpferred to, we hold, that the Master is amenable is his Lodge,His decisions touching the fiscal concerns of the I$odge, and all matters not involving Masonic law, may, oú right, be appealed to the Lodge for final decision.

 

We also hold that the Ms~ster may be impeached for malfeasance in office, before the Grand Lodge; but that, for immoral conduct, he may, and should 1k. ,charged and tried by his Lodge, they being better agqqainted with, and the best judges of the facts. In,such .cases, :the charges, ,when filed, so far impair his standing as a Ma,so4, that 4e, h no longer a right to his seat, and the ~S oigr Warden becowos the Master. until he is acquitted, or until tire next regular gleq,tion.

 

We know ,our views are not in, accordance witlt t4r 678

 

QIIESlibNS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

generally received opinion.

 

We are told that the Master can only be tried by his peers, and that the brethren who elected and placed him in office are not his peers, not his equals, but that the Grand Lodge, of which he is a member by his office, alone constitute his equals.

 

We think differently.

 

We think the members of his Lodge are his equals, and certainly so, unless' the creature is greater than the creator.

 

He is the creature of the Lodge, vested only with such exclusive powers as are absolutely necessary for the well‑being of the Order, but in all things else on a level with the members.

 

But the generally received doctrine proves too much.

 

If the Master can only be tried for gross unmasonic conduct by the Grand Lodge, who are his peers, because he is there a member, then the same rule must apply to the Wardens, neither of whom can be tried any‑" where else, and, as all Past Masters are members in some jurisdictions, they, too, must be tried in Grand Lodge; and; further, all Past Grand. Officers, including Past Grand Lecturers, Chaplains, Deacons, Sword Bearers, Stewards, etc., etc., must be tried only there.

 

We hold that this would be wrong in every sense, and, especially, because the principle is settled, that no Mason shall be expelled for immoral conduct from any Lodge, without the right of an appeal from that decision to a higher tribunal, and it will be seen that an appeal could not be taken from an original trial in Grand Lodge.

 

We think the members of a Lodge are the equals‑the peers, of the Master and should try him for immoral conduct, and, we think, the Grand Lodge is his superior, as, also, the superior of the Lodges, and appeals may be taken to that body for final decision. Having elsewhere discussed this subject, we deem' the foregoing sufficient.

 

POWERS OF WARDENS.

 

The Wardens are subordinate to, and co‑workers with the Master, and in his absence preside‑the Senior Warden first, and in the absence of both Master and Senior Warden, the Junior presides, with all the power, for the time being, that is possessed by the Master when present. These three officers constitute the Lodge, together with such others (by . the old QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

6.

 

ungel as they choose to admit.

 

If the Lodge is summoned td appear before the Grand Lodge, it becomes the duty of the' Master and Wardens to take charge of the charter and books of the Lodge, and with them repair to the place designated in the' summons.

 

The Wardens are, of course, members of the Grand Lodge.

 

Every Lodge must have a Tyler, for the time it is' open, but it is not necessary that he should be a member, and, 'therefore, he is not considered by the old usage an,officer.

 

We think it useless to speak of the duty of other officers of a Lodge at the present day, as things are fully explained in the various Lodge manuals. , A REGULAR LODGE.

 

Since 1717, no Lodge has been regarded regular, unless it had obtained a warrant or charter from some regular Grand Lodge,,{ and, in addition thereto, said Lodge must be constituted by having its officers installed. We think a Lodge can not legallt open or do any work, until it is constituted by the Grand Mas ter, or his Deputy. We think so, because we dare not acknowledge any man as a regular Mason, unless he can satisfy us that he was made in a just and regularly constituted Lodge. Until after the middle of the last century no such thing as a dispensation to form a new Lodge was heard of, nor was there duriiik the entire century such a thing known in England as a Lodge' working under dispensation.

 

Preston tells us that, in his day, the Grand Master issued dispensations to form ‑new Lodges,' which instrument was limited to thirty days, and, of course, was ` not intended to empower the brethren even to open a Lodge, much less to do any work.

 

It was evidently intended as an' earnest to the petitioners that, if they would procure a suitable` room, and other things necessary, within thirty days, the Grand' Master would, in person, or by a Deputy, have them constituted a regular Lodge, by installing the officers.

 

The Athol Grand Lodge, or rather Lawrence Dermott, as its Deputy and acting Grand Master, went a step further, and issued dispensations to run thirty days, once renewable; and, of course, in neither was it intended that any work could be done until the Lodge wad' BBD

 

QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAM constituted.

 

The making of Masons in a Lodge not constituted arigiuated in the United States, and the only way by which we .can acknowledge Masons made in our Lodges under dispensae Lion, is to suppose the Lodge was constituted a regular Lodge, by and through the instrument, the dispensation or warrant. To us it appears self‑evident. that our Lodges under dispensation re either regularly constituted, or else the Masons trade in them are irregular, and can not be acknowledged.

 

TOWER of A REGULAR LODGE.

 

A Lodge has power and authority to make Masons, sod do all other things authorized by the warrant, together with such ethers as universal usage has sanctioned. On the contrary, it can do nothing which will either set aside a Landmark, or violate an edict of the Grand Lodge under whose jurisdiction it, i$ held.

 

UEMBERS of A LODGE.

 

The members of a Lodge may instruct their Master and Wardens how to vote in Grand Lodge, provided said instructions do not demand a violation of a paramount law. It is the duty of the members to obey the Master when in his chair,, and "put the Wardens and fellows to worship," that is, treat all with that reverence and fraternal regard which their positions severally demand, and no brother has permission to do or say anything calculated to disturb the harmony, or wound the feel inp of the . brgthren.

 

In short, it is their duty to " be good men and true, and to obey the moral law." " No member can be admitted but by a unanimous vote, nor should, as we think, any be permitted to demit without the same unanimity, unle,~s $or.the purposes specified in the written Land ,,, in which event, it is the province of the Master to order tb8 Secretary., to give him, upon the payment of his is sa 1?Qwrable discharge.

 

RULES of ORS We think Lodges have a right to make their own r

 

41 order, subject to the approval of the Grand Lodge.

 

QVESTIONS of UASONIC USAQ.

 

801.

 

CALISNG OFF.

 

The term adjourn is objected to, aid very property, wa think, when applied to working Lodges; but the question is of no practical importance, as by calling off, every object is effected that could be by an adjournment. A Grand Lodge is a legislative body, outside of primitive Masonry, and, we think, it is legitimate and proper for it to adopt such rules for its own government, as may seem lit and proper; nor is it liable to the charge of making, by so doing, a greater innovation upon Masonry than is the Grand Lodge system itself.

 

No deliberative body ever was, or ever can be well governed, without appropriate rules, and we know of none more appropriate to a Grand Lodge, than some of the Parliamentary rules, though it may be well, in order to allay the clamor upon this subject, to give said rules Masonic names.

 

We think calling off does away with the necessity for any rule for adjourning, but the experience of every Grand Lodge has shown that, in some ‑natances, it is absolutely necessary to resort to some established rule, not laid down in Masonry. For example, when could amendments to amendments be pronounced out of order by any Masonic rule? Particular Lodges, however, can well transact all their legitinnate business, without traveling out of Masonry for rules; and members should not forget that it is not their :privilege to call off, or close when they please, because, for the reasons heretofore named, the Master is clothed with power to say when the Lodge shall be called to refreshment, or be closed, and the Old Charges make it the imperative duty of the members " not to desert the Master till the work is finished." ADVANCING CANDWATM Candidates should be balloted for is each degree, and x* brother should be permitted to advance until, by examination in open Lodge, he proves himself to be reasonably well skilled ip the degree. This doctrine is clearly taught in the Old Rweg* lations,, and though these wholesome rules have been shamefully overlooked, in this particular, we are pleased to know that, o 682

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

every quarter, there seems to be a determination not to make or advance candidates, with imprudent speed. We would not, as some able writers have done, urge a necessity for keeping candidates a long and specified time on each degree.

 

We admit this was the practice, and a safe and necessary one, when Masonry was Operative as well as Speculative, but no similar good reason can now be given for a return to that practice. W e presided at the raising of a brother, who, on the following night, was well qualified to fill, and did fill an important office in raising another brother.

 

He had learned more of the rituals in twenty‑four hours than some Masons ever learn, and we would not hold such men back to serve a given, lengthy probation.

 

Let the Masters of Lodges see to it that no man, under any circumstances, be permitted to advance, until be proves him= self qualified, in open Lodge.

 

But, in saying this much for the benefit of industrious and zealous Masons, we do not wish to be understood as saying, we would give a second degree within twenty‑four hours after the first, simply because the candidate could, parrot‑like, repeat his lesson.

 

We think a sufficient time should elapse between the degrees to enable the candidate to converse with the members, and make himself somewhat acquainted with the principles taught in the degree he has taken, and, except in very extraordinary cases, the time between degrees should not be less than one month.

 

RIGHT OF VISIT.

 

Although we have answered a question in which the right to visit is involved, we will add a few words here. It is true, that one of the oldest Regulations known to the Order, makes it the duty of every Mason to "receive and cherish strange fellows, when they come over the country, and set them on work," etc., etc., but we think it equally true, that this law has no reference whatever to the right of visiting a Lodge; on the contrary, it is a provision for the giving of aid to strange brethren who may be destitute, and in need of assistance.

 

We look upon a Lodge as a private family‑housekeepers in the great family of Masons, who, while they will be expected to receive and welcome, all QUESTIONS ON DftA50NIC USAGE.

 

689 / true brethren, on the principles of fraternal courtesy, may not be forced to do so. If all Masons have the right to visit all Lodges, they have that right at all times, and may demand admittance when the Lodge is engaged on business not proper to be witnessed by strangers.

 

Again, if all Masons have the right to visii, men, known to be unworthy, may enter and disturb the harmony of the Lodge, and be it remembered that this could not always be avoided by the institution of charges, for one Lodge may not prefer charges and summon to trial the members of another Lodge.

 

All the brethren present in the Lodge are bound to fellowship, and call each other brother, or fellow, and, therefore, it is absolutely necessary that each Lodge should have the power to prevent the admission of any one whose presence would disturb the harmony of the meinl)ers. Deprive a Lodge of this privilege. and you take from it the last and most important safeguard to its peace and prosperity. We are bound to fellowship every brother in the Lodge room, and if you admit one against our expressed wish, and to whom we can not extend the right hand, we are left to but one alternatiye, and that is to withdraw. Will Bro. Mackey urge a practice which leads to such results?

 

The same reasons that would favor the right to visit, will equally apply to the right to become a member of any Lodge, and they should apply with the more force, because, while no law makes it the duty of a brother to visit, the oldest, the paramount law commands every brother to be a member of a Lodge.

 

We say, in conclusion, that while Masonry is a social Institution, and its members, generally, will ever delight to receive and welcome visiting brethren, aye, and members, in their Lodges, they, nevertheless, have the right to say who shall visit, and who shall become members;. nor does the exercise of this right inflict a wrong upon any brother.

 

The standing of a Mason, with the Fraternity at large, is not affected by his having been refused the privilege of visiting, or of becoming a member of a particular Lodge.

 

No charge of immoral conduct is.implied thereby; but he is‑simply informed, that the particular Lodge applied to are banded together by private family arrangements, which, it is feared, his presence might disturb.

 

6SI

 

QUESTioxs of )$ASoxic USAGE.

 

Bro. Mackey says, the right to visit any Lodge is secured to every brother who is affiliated, key the Ancient Regulation,. Here we join issue, never having seen any such law, and .believing he relies upon an old law, ats noticed above, having no bearing upon this subject.

 

EXAMINATION of vmTOSS.

 

The written Landmark, the sixth Old Charge, reads as follows "Behavior toward a strange brother.

 

"You are cautiously to examine him in such a method pp prudence shall direct you, that you may not be imposed ‑upoa by an ignorant, false pretender, wham you are to reject with contempt and derision; and beware of giving him any hints of knowledge," etc.

 

The above constitutes the.sum and‑substance of what we had heretofore felt it to be our privilege to write; but, since tlkp appearance of the Principles of Xasonic Law, we feel it to our duty to say more.

 

Brother Mackey says " Every visitor who offers himself to the appointed committee of the Lodge for examination, is expected, as a preliminary step, to submit to the Tyler's obligation; so called, because it .14 administered in the Tyler's room. As this obligation forms up part of the secret ritual of the Order, but is administered to every person, before any lawful knowledge of his being Q Mason has been received, there can he nothing objectionab4 in inserting it here; and, in fact, it will be advantageous to have the precise words of so important a declaration placod beyond the possibility of change or omission by inexperienced brethren.

 

The oath, then, which is administered to the visitor, and which he may, if he chooses, require every, one present to take with him, is in the following words " ` I, A. B., do hereby and hereon solemnly and seriously swear, that I have been regularly Initiated, Passed, and Raised to the sublime degree of a Master Mason, in a just and legally constituted Lodge of such; that I do not now stand suspende4 QVESTIONS 0P' itASflNIC USAGE:

 

696 or expelled, and know of no feason why I should not hold $Iasonie communication ivith my brethren."' We will not stop here tv argue the impropriety of writitng tind sending forth to the world the foregoing reference to a portion of our peculiar forms ; but it is, we think, our duty to lay, that Bro. Mackey's words are not very likely to be adopted 4s " the precise words." If a Master Mason applies to visit, $ro. Mackey's words will tint be found objectionable, except sb fat as the concluding eland requires a roan to give evidence against himself, to the extent th4t would, in'sotne oases, require hi4 brethr'eit to prefer chases ikgainst him, when known to be Mason.

 

The brother whti sees profane language, gets drunk, of who is guilty of any other immoral conduct; does know of a f0ason why he should be suspended, or expelled, and thus Bitit ated, :Masonry does not requite any mail to expose his foibles. We would, certainly, never take such an obligation.

 

But there is a defect in Bro. Mackey's oath that must be amended before RA adoption. We allude to its making no provision for the Visit of an Entered Apprentice, or Fellow Craft; and those who contend that an Entered Apprentices' Lodge is no Lodge, and that a Fellow Crafts' Lodge is " in fact no Lodge at all," bfb consistent in making no provision for the visit of any below the Master's degree; but it happens that Entered Apprentices land Fellow Crafts have ever been regarded as Masons=as fully so, in their sphere, as Master Masons; and it happens, tliA_t iii all ages, since the institution of the Order, Entered Apprentices have had the same right to visit an Entered Apprentices' Lodge that Master Masons have ; and whenever work is to be done on the two lower degrees, .these brethren have a right to ask permission to visit, and, according to the doctrine of Bro. Mackey, they would have air inalienable right to do so.

 

It the fdrln of an oath for a Master Mason is correctly given by Bro. Mackey, he should have, we think, furnished something like the following for an Entered Apprentice: " I, A. B., do hereby and Wfoon solemnly and seriously swear; that I have been t gltlarly initiated in a just and legally constituted Lodge of Entefed Apprentice Masons, and that I aril not now suspended, of ex pelted."

 

And the same, with a slight Change, Would ansWe' rot 686

 

QUESTIONS of MASONIC USAGB.

 

a Fellow Craft Mason.

 

We suppose that the only ol~lection to the form last suggested that could be raised. is, that it acknowledges the existence. at the present day, of a Landmark as old as Masonry itself, viz., that there ever was, and still is, such a thing as a "just and legally constituted Lodge of Entered Apprentice Masons;" and it would further seem, that if Master Masons have the right to declare the non‑existence of such a Lodge, and require all to be Master Masons, before they can be looked upon as Masons at all, the Royal Arch Chapter has the right to declare, that there is no such thing as a Mason with Masonic privileges, until he has taken the Royal Arch degree; for, truth to say, the Master's degree, as now given., is much less complete than is that of Apprentice. We think a mistaken notion prevails,. generally, with examining committees its to the rights of applicants to visit. While we hold that great care should be observed on all such occasions, taking nothing for granted, but demanding correct answers to the prescribed questions, etc., we think the rights of the committee and of the applicant are reciprocal and equal, that neither knows the other to be a Mason, and, therefore, each should be equally cautious and mutually at liberty to a share of the ques tions.

 

It is said, that they do not stand on a level, because the applicant may demand to see the charter; but this written document is no higher evidence of its being a Masonic Lodge than the visitor's diploma is that he is a Mason; neither of which cau be regarded as more than collateral evidence.

 

VOUCHING FOR e BROTFIF.a.

 

The exercise of the right to vouch for a brother is a very important and responsible privilege, and should never be resorted to until after that law has been complied with, which declares that you can only be at liberty to vouch that apy man is a Mason, except by "strict trial, due examination, or lawful information;" of course, no one can make strict trial f.‑ad due examination, except he be himself qualified to make tho exam iuatiou, and none other should presume to do so.

 

, QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGF.

 

GR Lawful information is derived, first, by having sat with the t,rother in open Lodge, and, second, from having received the pointed and positive assurance from a known brother Mason. The abuse of the right to vouch for a brother has been made so manifest, in many instances, as to lead some Grand Lodges to prohibit any other vouching than that of having sat in open Lodge with the brother. This latter rule is evidently an innovation, though not in all cases a hurtful one, so long as Masons remain so reckless or ignorant of their duty, as to be satisfied with any testimony, short of that Iioticed above.

 

We commend the careful reading of Bro. Mackey's judicious remarks upon this subject.

 

RIGHT OF A BROPIIER TO RELIEF.

 

Masonry is, strictly a benevolent Society.

 

No brother has a right to demand or ask for a dollar from the Charity Fund, unless he is, to some extent, in distress and thereby becomes an object of charity.

 

We have, strictly speaking, no relief fund, ours is a Charity Fund, and, therefore, belongs only to those who, through misfortune or old age, become unable to supply themselves with the necessaries of life, and we can give no better instructions for its bestowment, than that indicated by the language contained in one of the Old Charges, viz : " But if you discover him to be a true and genuine brother, you are to respect him accordingly; and if he is in want, you ‑must relieve him if you can, or else direct him how to be relieved. You must employ him some days, or else recommend him to be employed.

 

But you are not charged to do beyond your ability, only to prefer a poor brother, that is a good man and true, before any other people in the same circumstances." From the foregoing, it will be seen that Masonry does not contemplate the division of its funds into equal shares, there being absolutelv no shareholders. The brother who contributes to the Charity Fund, retains no claim whatever in that fund, ,except in the contingency''of his falling into distress.

 

The old law above extracted, requires that the brother shall prove him. self worthy and in distress, before it becomes his privilege'to ask, or our duty to administer relief.

 

0$

 

QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAa9.

 

RIGHT of MASONIC $i RIAL Tire Old Charges make no allusion to funeral ceremonies, nor do the Old Regulations, as collated by Anderson, in 1722, etay anything upon the subject, but there is every reason to believe, that Masonic burials took place in olden times. It further seems probable, that no Regulation was deemed necessary upon the subject, until about the middle of the last century, when an anti‑Masonic excitement was gotten up in London, superinduced and encouraged by the dissenters who withdrew frown the Grand Lodge, in 1739, and *]to formed a spurious Grand Lodge, in 1753. During this excitement, mock processions were gotten up in ridicule of Masonic processions, funeral as well as others.

 

These mock processions, composed of anti‑Masons, and suspended, expelled, and dissenting Masons, wore generally arranged to follow, and, as far as possible, bring into ridicule the processions of regular Lodges. To protect the Institution against this mortifying annoyance, the Grand Lodge, in 1754, passed an edict, prohibiting Masonic proces. sions of all kinds, unless aytlrorized by the Grand Master, or his Deputy.

 

Preston was the first English writer, we think, who mentioned the subject, and who laid down rules for the government of funeral ceremonies.

 

But as there is no ancient law at all binding at this day, we think, with the exception of a few rules grown into universal use, the whole subject is within the control of Grand Lodges, and, hence, we need not quote from Preston. It must be considered as settled that none but Master Masons are entitled to funeral honors, and that none but Master Masons can participate in the ceremonies. Again, it appears evident that there never were funeral ceremonies adapted to any other degree in Masonry but the Master's, and, hence, no Masonic burial can take place in any other degree; nor can any regalia, other than the Lodge clothing (white gloves and aprons), be worn on such occasions.

 

Tire foregoing constitute, we think, all the rules, which may not be disregarded, and it would be well that Grand Lodges should further regulate Masonic burials, and, especially, see to it that all the gaudy trappings of modern societies are not used on these solemn occasions.

 

Preston says that no brother can be QUESTIONS OF MASONIC USAGE.

 

689 interred with Masonic lionors, unless the brother has expressly requested it before his death, but he leaves us without a reason for its adoption; but we suppose it was instituted at the time processions were unpopular, and for the purpose of lessening their number.

 

In any, event, we bold it to be unjust and un necessary.

 

Unjust, because the remains of the very best Maeons would often be carried to the grave unattended by those honors instituted for all the good and true men, who, when suddenly and severely attacked with disease, are not likely to, make the request; and, besides, we think they should not be subjected to the mortification of asking, as a boon, that their remains be attended to the grave by their brethren‑theilr Lodge, whom, it may be, they had been mainly instrumental in building up.

 

We say, let every brother Master Mason, in good standing, be permitted to look forward to the certainty, that if he shall remain true and faithful, his family and friends will be gratified at seing the last sad honors of Masonry paid to his memory.

 

CLAIMS OF THE WIDOW AND FAMILY OF A MASON.

 

The family of every Mason is under the protection of the Brotherhood. It is the duty of all Masons to defend and protect the character of the whole family of a brother, to the extent, and as long as they can do so without violating the laws of truth and honor. And in an especial manner is the family of a deceased brother under the guardianship and pro tection of the Fraternity.

 

It is a source of the purest consolar tion to the dying Mason, that by his own fair and upright walk, as a Mason, he has secured for his distressed wife and weeping children, a host of friends, who will ever prove as true to them as they have been to him. It is the duty of the Lodge, and of all the individual members, to exercise a watchful care over the family of a deceased brother, and endeavor to protect them against wrong or injustice in the affairs of the world; and should they be destitute, and in need of pecuniary aid, their hands should be ever open and ready to give.

 

But this duty should always be performed with an eye to the necessity and 44 QUMION8 BP MASONIC USAGS.

 

propriety of the deed.

 

It is not our duty long to help those who make no effort to help themselves.

 

Masonry comes in aid of the honest and industrious poor, but it does not command us to feed and clothe the idle or the profligate.

 

. We have already said that the claiips of the family of r brother are based upon his claims upon the Fraternity, and hence, if a‑Mason so far departs from the line of rectitude a to compel the Brotherhood to denounce, disown, and forever #ever the mystic tie that bound him to them, by expulsion, ho' not only loses all claims on the Fraternity for himself, but also for his family. The family of a suspended or expelled Hason has no claims for aid at our bands; and, hence, are they 1hus situated, should he die while under expulsion or em* msiou.

 

rat DICTIONARY OF MASONIC TERMS.

 

A$13REVIATT0ft9 A. Inv., Anna InventloW&

 

fn the year; of the discovery.‑The 4Ms amd ii Royal Arch Masonry.

 

A. L., Anno Lucis

 

In the year of light, or of the creation.‑"Fht date meet hj 4ncient Craft Masonry.

 

A.ò. L:. G.. D.. G:. A.‑; D.ò. L'U.ò. (Ilmeh), A la globe An Grand ArebiteaNb de l'Univem To the glory of the Grand Architect of the Universe. The ca010i oS all French Masonic writings.

 

A L'O: . (French), A 1'Orient.

 

At the East.‑The seat of'the Lodge. D.ò. G.‑. M.‑., Deputy Grand Master.

 

E.ò. A.ò., Entered .Apprentice.

 

F:. or FF.ò. (French), FrPre on Frtrm

 

Brother or Brothers F.ò. C.‑., Fellow Craft.

 

G.: M.‑., Grand Master.

 

J.. W.., Junior Warden.

 

' M.‑. M:., Master Mason.

 

M.‑. M.ò. (Piwoh), Mois Masonique. Masonic Month.‑The French UssomiVs the year with March.

 

M.ò. W:., Most Worshipful.

 

. R.ò. A.%, Royal Arch.

 

. R:. W:., Right WorablpfuL '$:ò. S:.,'Sanctum Sanctorum.

 

5.‑. S.. S.. (French), Trois fois Salut

 

Thrice greeting.‑‑Common on g'resch Ussonic certificates.

 

8.. W.‑., Senior Warden.

 

V.. (French), V8ndrable.

 

Worshipful.

 

V.: L:. (French), Vrale luiniare.

 

Tract light V.ò. W:., Very Worshipful.

 

W.ò. M.ò., Worshipful Master.

 

M:. W.ò. G.. M:., Most Worshipful Grand Master.

 

R:. W.‑. D... G.. M.‑., Right Worshipful Deputy Grand Master R.ò. W.‑. G.. S.ò. W.ò., Right Worshipful Grand Senior Warden. R:. W:. G.. J.ò. W.‑., Right Worshipful Grand Junior Warden. R.. W.‑. G.‑. T.ò., Right Worshipful Grand Treasurer.

 

R.ò. W:. G:..S..., Right Worshipful Grand Secretary.

 

R.ò. W.ò. G:. S.ò. D.:, Right Worshipful Grand Senior Deacon. R.ò. W.. G:. J:. D.:, Right Worshipful Grand Junior Deafen. W:. G.‑. M.ò., Worshipful Grand Marshal W:. G:. C.:, Worshipful Grand, Chaplain. .

 

892 ABS‑ACT W: . G.: P.ò., Worshipful Grand Pursuivant. W:. G... S.ò., worshipful Grand Steward. W.. G:. T:., Worshipful Grand Tyler.

 

W.. D.. D.ò. G.‑. M.ò., Worshipful District Deputy Grand Master.

 

ABSENCE.

 

The old law obliges every brother to attend the meetings of big Lodge, unless unavoidably prevented; but fines can not be inflicted for any dereliction of Masonic duty.

 

The penalty for absence is censure or reprimand.

 

ACACIA.

 

There is some difficulty attending the explanation of the sprig of cassia, and in assigning the true reason why it was introduced into the system of Freemasonry.

 

Some say it originated in the Jewish custom of planting a branch ' ot acacia vera (gum arabic plant) on the grave of a departed relative; others in the custom of mourners bearing a branch of it in their hands at funerals.

 

But no writer of any authority mentions either of these customs, and it is doubtful whether they ever existed among the Jews.

 

The cassia is not indigenous to the "boil bf Palestine, and is only mentioned in Scripture as a fragrant herb or spice, the, bark being used in ungents, and sometimes employed for embalming; and, therefore, if the legend refer to the branch of a real tree, it could be neither the cassia nor acacia; and this has given rise to an opinion that the branch or sprig is analogous to that alluded to by Virgil, in his description of the mysteries; and consequently was the olive.

 

Others again doubt whether our acacia (axaxsal has any reference to a tree or shrub at all, but means the texture and color of the Masonic apron, which those brethren wore which were deputed by Solomon to search for ‑‑, and simply ,refers to their innocence.

 

If this conjecture be correct, they add, it corroborates the accuracy of the legend which says‑"they took a sprig of cassia in their hands (with them) ; " rather than the version which marks the place of interment by it. I am rather inclined to think that the choice of the cassia, which is a kind of laurel, was founded on some mysterious. refereuda which it was supposed to possess, either mythological or symbolical.

 

There are, however, great difficulties to be surmounted before the truth can be ascertained.

 

ACCEPTED. See Free and Accepted.

 

ACROSTIC.

 

M. Magnitude, moderation, and magnanimity. A. Affability, affection, and attention.

 

S. Silence, secrecy, and sincerity. O. Obedience, order, eoconomy.

 

N. Noble, natural, and neighborly.

 

R. Rational, reciprocal, and receptive. Y. Yielding, yearning, and yare.

 

The elucidation of this acrostic having been published in many Masonic works, and, consequently, being ,well known, it is unnecessary to introduce it here.‑‑Oliva.

 

ACTING GRAND MASTER. It was the custom and practice of the old Masons, that kings and princes, being Masons, are considered Grand Masters, by prerogative, during life; and, in that ease, they had the privilege of appointing a ADM‑ALL

 

h93 Deputy to preside over the Fraternity, with the title and honors of Grand Maoter. And. in the year 1782, a motion was made in Grand Lodge, that whenever a prince of the blood honored the Society by accepting the office of Grand Master, he should be at liberty to nominate any peer of the realm to the office of Acting Grand Master.

 

ADMISSION. Brethren desiring to affiliate must petition in writing, and can only be admitted to membership by a unanimous vote.

 

ADVANCED.

 

When a candidate is invested with the Mark Master's degree, l_e is said to be`" advanced"

 

The term is very 8ppropriately used to designate that the Master Mason is now promoted one step beyond the degree of ancient Craft Masonry, on the way to the Royal Arch. Yaekey.

 

The Marli degree is the completion of the Fellow Craft, and the Royal Arch it the completion of the Master's degree, and surely all these are parts of Ancient Crafj Masonry‑therefore, the candidate referred to has advanced a step in Ancient Craft Masonry, not out of it.

 

AFFABILITY.

 

The ancient Lodges were so many schools or academies for teaching and improving the art of designing, especially architecture; and the present Lodges are often employed that way in Lodge hours, or else in agreeable conversation, though without politics, or party feeling; and none of them at'e ill employed; have no transaction unworthy of an honest man or a gentleman; no personal piques, no quarrels, no cursing and swearing, no cruel mockings, uo obscene talk, or ill manners, for the noble and eminent brethren are affable to the meanest; and these are duly respectful to their betters, in harmony and proportion; and though on, the level, yet always within compass, and according to the Square and Plumb. Eudid.

 

AGE.

 

A candidate must be at least twenty‑one years old, and, on the other hand, he must not be in his dotage.

 

By the Scotch and French Rites, the Hon of a Mason, called a Lewis, may be made at eighteen years old, but true Freema, sonry makes no such distinction.

 

AHIMAN REZON.

 

From the Hebrew achi man ration, the opinions of a trge. brother.

 

This name was given by Lawrence Dermott to the Book of lbnsiauttorw for the spurious Grand Lodge of London, in 1756, and all the editions down to the union, in 1813, retained the same name. Several Grand Lodges in the. United States, having formerly been governed by those spurious laws, still retallb the name of Ahimm Rezon, for their Book of tb"itutiona.

 

ALLEGORY. The two eons of Abraham, Ishmael, born of Hagar, his handmaid, and Isaac, born of Sarah, the free‑woman, contain an allegory, in whieb the name is put for the thing signified, or represented by it ; for these two women and their children are. by representation, the two covenants; the one covenant being that from Mount Sinai, gendering to bondage; which is, by representation, Hagar the bond‑woman, and so hearing a child which also was in bondage. for that wbieh is signified by Hagar, from whom Ishmael doFcended, is Mount Sinai, in Arabia, whence the law was given ; find this Hagar answers to Jerusalem that now is, and is in bondage with her children to the law, ALL‑ANO: ‑so the bond‑woman and her child were to Abraham; but the Jerusalem whitAk lr above;,le by representation Sarah the free‑woman, whose son was born, a" ,wording to the flesh, but 11 according to the promise."‑ " i e, then, brethreat we we ò not the children of the ‑bond‑woman, but thetree."‑ Whitby.

 

ALL‑SEEING EYE.

 

Whom the San. Moon, and Stare obey, and under who"e ,watchful care even comets, perform their stupendous revolutions, beUohlAthe. inmost recesses of the human heart, and will reward;. to according tovur wotks.f~sotnree.

 

ALPHA AND OMEGA. The first. and the last of the. Greek alphabet‑the ,beginning and the: end. Words used to the true lecture of the Royal Arch, but, ' In America, are confined Dow to the Royal Master's degree, eo called.

 

ALTAR.

 

An altar must be a most holy place to every Christian,,and more especially to every true worshiper of God.

 

It was so to the first nations who conceived the idea of the Most High Being.

 

High above all. the stars they con jecture was His most elevated seat.

 

They fell upon their knees when they worshiped Him, as more emblematical of the.. immense distance they were removed from Him; and they built altars, upon which. they offered fruits and 'other things, that the smoke might wise towards Him, as a proof of their gratL .tutle,

 

We, as enlightened Christians and Freemasons; make,no. offerings of fruits upon our altars, neither are there any amore, to be found‑ upon the tops of moue: ‑ twine, or in the depths of the: caverns, bat under a cloudy canopy, as emblematò ‑iaaai of the heavens, and our offerings are the hallowed obligations of a grateful aed piouo:heart.‑GadfaU AMPLE FORM. When the Grand‑Lodge is opened by the Grand Master it person, it is said to be opened in " ample form; " when by the Deputy Grand ,1flaater,lt Is in " due form," and when by any other officet~ itis.sald to be simply in firm." ANCIENT CHARGES. See Old Chargoe: ANCIENT MASONS. . In the year 1739, aTew ~rethreny having.violated the laws. of Masonry, were expelled from the Grand Lodge, and‑ adopted the bold measure, under the fictitious name of the Ancient York Constitution, of eonstitud.na Lodges, which were pronounced independent of the Grand Lodge. And the latter, for the purpose of producing' & marked distinction between the two sys. ` terns, resolved at length to adopt the expedient, apparently rendered necessary by the emergency, but extremely ill‑judged, of introducing, a slight alteration Into the system, which might have the effect of detecting the sehiamatfca, and ‑thus excluding them from the orthodox Lodges. The resolution was unfortunate, and produced the very evil it was intended to avert.

 

It proved a source_ of exit, nation and triumph to the seceding. brethren.

 

They loudly exclaimed against ‑.what they called an alteration of the Landmarks, as: an unprecedented and un. òsonatitutlonal proceeding ; accused the Grand Lodge, of having deviated from ‑ancient usage,. and conferred upon all its members and. adherents the invidious .eplthet of Modem Masons, while they appropriated to themselves the exclusive ,and honorable title of "Awieat Masons, acting under the old York Constitutiam ANC‑‑ARC 89 cemented and consecrated by immemorial ‑observance."

 

Taking. adnatop:of this popular cry, they proceeded to the formation, of. an independent Grxad Lodge, drew up a code of laws for its government, issued warrants for the Qw stItution of new Lodges " under the true ancient systom of Freemasonry;ä from the fees arising out of these procecdipgs, they succeeded in establishiag.A fund of benevolence, besides defraying the ourreut expenses of the Ieatltullga.‑.

 

ANCHOR. The hope of glory, or of, the AMlmeut of All God's pmmisee,1* our souls, is the goldou,.or:precious .anchor, by w‑b As we mast be kept stwf*i is he faith, send encouraged to abide in a}T.preperatotinn, gt cl0.khe storwAf temptation, alllietloa, and perwutiop.‑* ANCHOR AND ARIL The ark, and anchor are emblems of a well grounded hope, and a well‑spent life. They are emblemaxical of that Divine Ark whirl, triumphantly bears us over this tempestuous sea of troubles; and that anchom which shall safely moor us in a peaceful harbor, where the winked cease from, troubling, and the weary are at rest.‑Lcdure.

 

ANNIVERSARY. The two anniversaries of Symbolic Masonry are the fee* vale of St. John the Baptist and St. John the Evangelist, 24th of June as 27th of December.‑Oliver.

 

These anniversaries are peculiar to Christian countries, but not universal eves here, for the Masons of Scotland observe more generally St. Andrew's Day, ead iguglish Masons, St. George's.

 

APPRENTICE, or first degree in the Order.

 

An Apprentice Is respected In every Lodge as a brother, equally as much as an older member, and he bas not, as might be supposed, any especially derogatory work to do. He learns Masonic wisdom as far as it can be taught in the first'deegree, and he is, therefore, called on Apprentice.

 

His clothing in the Lodge is very little different from that of the others; and the older brethren dare not place much value in their being able to wear an ornament or two more than he doe.‑044r& APRON. See Badge of a Mason.

 

ABCANO. In a private place‑‑% bidden mystery. ARCANUM. A secret.

 

ARCHITECTURE. The~ art of building. From the days of Solomon, archl.

 

lecture was almost exclusively in the hands of Froemesons‑Solomon's buildersuntil some time after the building of B lwInning, is the fourteenth century ;‑cad, indeed, down to near the close of the seventeenth century, we find Sir Chri*or pher Wren, as Grand Master, controlling a large portion of the rebuilding of London.

 

Wren's style of architecture has not yet been surpassed.

 

ARCHIVES.

 

Our traditions state that the hollow of the cylinder of these. oillars (J. and B.) was used as archives of Masonry, and contained the sacred rolls which comprised the history of the Hebrew nation, their etvil and religiew polity, the works of the prophetical and inspired writers, and the eemplete s* tem of universal science.‑aenanisW.

 

696

 

ARR‑BEH ARRANGEMENT.

 

The appointment and arrangement of a Masonic Lodge room to the eighteenth century, were very different to our present piactlce.

 

A long table was extended from one end of the room to the other, covered with s green cloth, on which were placed duplicates of the ornaments, furniture, and jewels, intermixed with Masonic glasses for refreshment. At one end of this table was placed the Master's pedestal, and at the other, that of the Senior Warden, while about the middle of the table, in the South, the Junior Warden was placed, and the brethren sat round as at a common ordinary.

 

When there was a candi. date to be initiated, the candidate was paraded outside the whole; and, on such occasions, after he had been safely deposited at the Northeast angle of the Lodge, a very short explanation of the design of Freemasonry, or a brief portion of the lecture, was considered sufficient before the Lodge was called from labor to refreshment.

 

The song, the toast, the sentiment, went merrily round, and it war not until the brethren were tolerably satiated that the Lodge was resumed, and the routine business transacted before closing.‑Oliver.

 

ATHEIST.

 

One who does not believe in the existence of a God.

 

Masons; looking to the dangerous tendency of such a tenet, have wisely discouraged it, by declaring that no atheist can be admitted to participate in their Fraternity, and the better to carry this law into effect, every candidate, before passing, through any of the ceremonies of initiations, is required publicly and solemnly to declare his trust in God.‑Hackey.

 

BADGE.

 

Johnson defines a badge. as 1░ a mark of cognizance, worn to show the relation of the wearer to any person or thing."

 

The badge of a Mason is his apron‑an emblem of innocence and purity.

 

It was originally a skin or plain white leather. In 1730, it was regulated in Grand Lodge that the Grand Officers should "wear white leather aprons with blue silk; and that the Masters and Wardens of particular Lodges may line their white leather aprons with white silk, and may hang their jewels at white ribbons about their necks."

 

At present a Master Mason wears a lamb‑skin apron with sky‑blue lining and edging, one inch and a half deep, with a rosette on the fail or flap.

 

No other color or ornament is allowed, except to officers or past officers of Lodges. who may have the emblems of their office in silver or white in the.centre of their apron.‑Olives.

 

BALLOT. All applicants for degrees or membership must be balloted for, secretly, and one blackball rejects. To avoid bad feelings, no brother should say how he voted, nor has any brother the right to inquire how another votes.

 

BANNERS.

 

In the Royal Arch degree the banners borne by the four princl~ pal Tribes of Judah are referred to, viz., Judah, a lion; Ephraim, an ox; Reuben, a man; and Dan, an eagle.

 

BANQUET.

 

In one of the Encampment degrees, a banquet constitutes a part the ceremony.

 

13EIIAVIOIL A Mason should be always cautious in his words and carnage, *best the most penetrating stranger may not be able to discover, or find out what is not proper to be intimated: and sometimes he should divert a discourse; aad amanage it prudently, for the bonor of the worshipful Fraternity.‑Old Chary~L BET, ‑‑BRI

 

697 BLLIEF. A candidate meat believe in the existence of one Supreme Being, Jehovah.

 

This is the only religious test known to Masonry.

 

BIBLE.

 

Amongst the great lights of Freemasonry the Holy Bible is the greatest. By it we are taught to rule and govern our faith. Without this sacred lfgbt we find no Masonic altar.

 

Without it no Lodge is perfect; neither can any one be legally initiated into the Order without it. In other than Christian countries, other supposed divine books are used, which, in like manner,, constitute their bible, their book of holy law.

 

BLAZING STAR. We think this symbol was introduced by Christian Masons, since the Christian era, for the purpose of holding in view the star which appeared over the birth‑place of Christ. This view of the subject is ridiculed by Scotch R:te Masons, who, it seems, connect Freemasonry with the I&athen Mythology, and, hence, make the blazing star of the Lodge room a representa tion of Anubis, or Dog‑Star of the Nile.

 

, BLUE MASONRY.

 

Ancient Craft 1lfasonry‑the only Freemasonry ever known.

 

Formerly there were but three degrees, and blue was the color of the highest.

 

These three degrees have been variously divided and subdivided, until, to the United States, nine degrees are required to obtain a full knowledge of the original.

 

The Royal Arch, together with the lecture of the Royal and Select degrees, complete the Master's, or third degree, and, hence, the scarlet color adopted by Royal Arch Masonry is without authority.

 

Blue is the symbolic òcolor of Masonry‑of all Masonry, if things could once more have their appro+?riate names.

 

Blue is the symbol of Truth, Friendship, Fidelity.

 

BOOK OF CONSTITUTIONS.

 

The Book of Gbnstitutions contains the Rules and Regulations of the Order, an exposition of the duties of officers, the rights of members, the detail of ceremonies to be used on various occasions, sach as conseorations, installations, funerals, etc., and, in fine, a summary of all the fundamedtalprinciples of Mmoory. But no law can be binding, either upon Grand or subordinate Lodg^s, which is not in conformity with the Landmarks of Masonry, and, hence, in every Book of CbndUutians should the written Landmarks‑‑the Old Charges be inserted, that all may know what the fundamental law is.

 

BOOK OF THE LAW. The Holy Bible.‑The Book of the Law that was lost, and was found and brought to light by three Freemasons, after having lain concealed four hundred and seventy years, was the five books of Moses.

 

BRAZEN PILLARS. See the Lecture.

 

BREAST‑PLXTE.

 

The breast‑plate of the High Priest was a square of nine inches, made of the same material as the ephod, and set with twelve precious stones, three in each row, on which were also engraved the names of the Twelve Tribes.

 

The colors of the banners were indentified by these stones, each tribe bearing the same color as the precious stone by which it was represented in the breast‑plate.‑Oliver.

 

s BRIGHT MASON.

 

Only a few years ago, a Mason was considered bright, If he could repeat, parrot‑like, the work and lectures or the degrees, but now, a 688

 

ERO‑CAU bright Mason is one who is somewhat familiar with the history, laws, and, usegee of the Order.

 

BROTHER.

 

A mark of confidence, esteem, and affection. The Old Charges make it the duty of Masons to call each other brother, or fellow.

 

BURIED TREASURES. We have a tradition that Ring Solomon concealed certain treasures. beneath the foundation of the Temple, which were found when they were opened to build the second Temple. It was common, in ancient times, to secrete treasures in such vaults and caverns.

 

CABLE‑TOW. According to the ancient laws of Freemasonry, every brother must attend his Lodge if he is within the length of his cable‑tow. The length Sf an Entered Apprentice cable‑tow is three English miles, or 15,840 feet.‑Gadictt.

 

We think the length of the cable‑tow is not ascertained by miles or feet, but by the reasonable ability of the brother. There are cases where it becomes the duty of a Mason to travel scores of miles to perform a duty.; and he may be so situa" that it is not his duty to leave his family fire‑side.

 

CANDIDATE.

 

A candidate for initiation into Freemasonry, is a person.who has been proposed by a brother, and whose name is written upon the tables, of the Lodge, that the brethren may be reminded to make the necessary inquiries into his moral and social character; for which purpose four weeks is generally allowed.‑Gadicke.

 

CANOPY. In the Masonic processions of the Continent, the Grand Master walks under a gorgeous canopy of blue, purple, and crimson silk, with gold fringes. and tassels, borne upon staves painted purple and ornamented with gold, by eight of the oldest Master Masons present; and the Masters of private Lod" walk under canopies of light blue silk, with silver tassels and fringes, borne b3 four members of their own respective companies. The canopies are in the farm of an oblong square, and are in length six feet, in breadth and hight three that, having a semicircular covering.

 

The framework, should be of cedar, and. file silken covering ought to hang down two feet on each side.‑OUoer.

 

CAPE‑STONE. The topmost stone in. a building; the last laid, as the foundation is the first. ò' To celebrate the cap"tone 11 is to celebrate the completion of the edifice, a custom still observed by Operative Masons.‑Mackey.

 

CARDINAL VIRTUES. These are Prudence, Fortitude, Temperance, iwd Justice. They are dilated upon in the first degree, and the practice of them urged upon the candidate, by certain striking allusions to part of the ceremonies of taitiation.‑Mackey.

 

CARDINAL POINTS. The explanation belongs to the Lodge room. CATECHISM. A summary of teachings of Freemasonry‑learned in. tb Lodge, room.

 

UAUTION.

 

I1 lesson taught to an Entered Apprentice.

 

CEN‑CLO

 

609 C1pNTENARY.

 

The revolution of a hundred years

 

It is ‑usual for Lodger. obich have‑ been established for that long period to celebrate the emuiwteary by s commemorative festival.

 

CENTRAL POINT. A point within a circle.

 

CHALK Chalk, charcoal, and clay; explained in the Lodge. 0"MBFB. Chamber of Reffeetion‑belonging to in Encampment. t

 

CHAPTBR. A convocation of Royal Arch Masons.

 

CHARITY. This is the brightest ornament of our Masonic profetlriat. nappy it the brother who bath sown in his heart the seeds of benevolence,. the produce of which will be Charity and Love. He envieth not his neighbor, be believeth not a tale when reported by a slanderer, he forgiveth the Injuries 4f men, and blotteth them out of his recollection.‑Qld Ledwr.

 

CHERUBIM. Represented in the Select Master.

 

CHISEL.

 

One of the working tools of a Mark Master.

 

CIRCLE. The circle has ever been considered symbolical of the Deity ; ft as it circle appears to have neither beginning nor end, it may be justly considered a Type of God, without either beginning of days or ending‑of years. It also re. ininds‑us of a future state, where we hope to enjoy everlasting happiness. and joy.‑Old Ledurea.

 

CIRCLE AND PARALLEL LINES. See Entered Apprentice lecture.

 

CLANDESTINE LODGES. All assemblies of Masons, or pretended Masons; meeting in Lodge capacity to confer the degrees, or teach Symbolic Masonry, without authority of a legal Grand Lodge, enavlaudestipe bodies Symbolic Lodges can only be established by Symbolic Grand Lodgss;wnd; hence, if Councils, Consistories, or any other foreign Rite plant Lodges, to confer the Symbolic degrees of Masonry, such Lodges, and the pretended Masons. made therein, must be held to be clandestine by all Ancient Craft. Masons.

 

CLOSING.

 

When it is proper time to close the Lodge it is always high mid. night, and the brethren then go peaceably home, remembering that the high midnight of life may overtake them without a moment's warning.‑Gadicke.

 

Dermott's dhiman Remn directs the Lodges to close at 9 o'clock in the winter, and 10 o'clock in the summer.‑The true law is silent upon the subject, and wisely go, It is believed, as every Lodge should be left at liberty to exercise a sound'‑discretion, bearing in mind, however, that they should endeavor to close as early, sa the usual bedtime of the members. Masons' wives will never‑ approve of Into hours in the Lodge rood.

 

ULOTHING.

 

It was ordered by the Regulations agreed by the Grand Lodge, March 17, 1771 that none but the Grand Master, his Deputy and Wardens, who were the only Grand Officers then in existence, shall wear their jewels in gold, pendant to blue ribbons about their necks, and white leather aprore. with blur 700

 

COL‑COP ilk.

 

Masters and Wardens of particular Lodges may line their white leather aprons with white silk, and many hang their j,;wels by white ribbons about their necks.

 

Master Masons now are clothed in white, sky‑blue, and silver; Grand and Provincial Grand Stewards in white, crimson, and silver; and all other Grand and Provincial Grand Officers in white, purple, and gold.‑Olimr.

 

The Regulation above named was an innovation upon ancient usage, and; therefore, is neither good in precept nor example. The clothing of sn Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft is a white lambskin apron, and white gloves.. .The clothing of a Master Mason is the same, except that the apron should be lined with blue. The jewels of officers should be pendant to blue ribbon.

 

COLLAR.

 

An ornament worn about the neck, to which is suspended a jewe# appropriate to the office, which the wearer occupies in a Lodge.

 

The color varies according to radk‑Olives.

 

We think collars belong to modern societies. There is no such thing as a Mer sonic collar. Formerly, the Grand Lodge of England forbid the use of anything but narrow blue ribbon, to suspend jewels to, but, latterly, even that great fountain of Masonic light is becoming modernized, and we shall expect soon to learn that they have become as fond of tinsel and show as the Masons of the United States, or the modern societies of France and Germany‑yea, we may expect, ere long, to see Masters and Grand Masters walking in Masoni4 processions under rich and costly scarlet velvet canopies, literally covered over vith golden ornaments, hung with golden tassels, and carried by young damsels, COMMON GAVEL.

 

A settipg mall.

 

See Entered Apprentice lecture.

 

COMPANION.

 

A title bestowed by Royal Arch Masons upon each other, and equivalent to the word brother in Symbolical Lodges.

 

It refers, most probably, to the companionship in exile and captivity of the ancient JeKv, from the destruction of the Temple by Nebuchadnezzar to its restoration by Zerubbabel, under the auspices of Cyru&‑Olives.

 

Brother or Fellow are the only terms of endearment known to Ancient Crab Masonry.

 

The Old Charges make it our duty to use one of these terms, and nowhere mentions Companion.

 

The Grand Lodge of England, though it confered all of Ancient Craft Masonry, including the teachings of the Royal Arch, never used this term, nor was it used by any of the adherents of that body, until they adopted Dermott's Royal Arch dVree, near the close of the last century.

 

We think the term Companion originated with, and belongs, properly, to the Inefble degrees, as does the degree, but not the teaching of the Royal Arch.

 

COMPASSES.

 

See Entered Apprentice lecture, for their moral teachings.

 

COMPLAINT. See Old Charges.

 

CONSTITUTING. See Installation Ceremony, p. bii COPE‑STONES.

 

The cope‑stones are represented by the three Principals of the Royal Arch Chapter, because, as a knowledge of the secrets of the vaulted chamber could be only known by drawing them forth, so the complete knowledge of this degree can be obtained only by passing through its several offices.‑‑Olipr.

 

COR‑DEC 701 We think the learned author has lost sight of the true use and meaning of this term.

 

Cope is a covering for the head, a sacerdotal cloak with a hood ; or it was sometimes used to signify a contention, or struggle.

 

Our ancient brethren used the term cope‑stone to signify the cap, or :overing‑the cap‑stone, the last stone.

 

CORNER‑STONE.

 

The first stone in the foundation of every magnificent building is called the corner‑stone, and is laid in the Northeast, generally with solemn and appropriate ceremonies. To this stone formerly some secret influence was sttributid.

 

In Alet's Ritual, it is directed to be " solid, angular, of about a foot square, and laid !n the Northeast"

 

Its position accounts, in a rational manner, for the general disposition of a newly initiated candidate, when enlightened, but uninstructed, be is accounted to be the most superficial part of Masoary: Olwer.

 

CORN, WINE, AND OIL.

 

The corn of nourishment, the wine of refreshment. and the oil of joy, used in laying a corner‑stone.

 

COWAN.

 

Worthless fellow, a harpy, a dog, an eavesdropper.

 

CRAFTSMAN.

 

As a Craftsman, you are to encourage industry and reward merit; supply the wants and relieve the necessities of brethren and fellows, to the utmost of your power and ability; and on no account to wrong them, or see them wronged, but timely to.apprise them of approaching danger, and view their interest as inseparable from your own.

 

Such is the nature of your engagements as e Craftsman, and these duties you are now bound, by the most sacred ties, to observe~Charge, second degree.

 

Anciently, all the Masons, while at work, were called Craftsmen, except the overseers, who were called the Master Masons‑Masters over the Masons; indeed, this was the case in the time of Sir Christopher Wren. We think the misapplication of the term has led, in modern times, to an. error in reference to certain fifteen Craftsmen, spoken of in the ritual of the third degree.

 

We think they were Craftsmen of the Temple, but that they had advanced above the Fellow Crafts in instructions that qualified them to oversee the work.

 

DEACONS‑‑SENIOR AND JUNIOR. Their duties are to be learned ia the Lndge room only.

 

DECLARATION.

 

Every candidate, previous to his admission, must subscribe his name, at full length, to a declaration of the following import, viz. : " To the Worshipful Master, Wardens, Officers, and Members of the Lodge of ‑‑‑, No ‑. I,

 

, being free‑born, and of the full age of twenty‑one years, do declare that, unbiased by the improper solicitation of friends, and uninfluenced by mercenary, or other unworthy motive, I freely and voluntarily offer myself a candidate for the mysteries of Masonry ; that I am prompted by a favorable opinton conceived of the Institution, and a desire of knowledge, and that I wilt cheerfully conform to all the ancient usages and established customs of the Order.

 

Witness my band, this

 

day of

 

.

 

Witness.‑Cbnatitutiwu.

 

DED‑EAV DEDICATION. Lodges were anciently dedicated to Ring Solomon. the 7ous& or of .Masonry and the first Grand Master, and the Israelites continue eo to deli~ cafe. But, in Christendom, Lodges have been, for many centuries: Mewled ft St. John the Baptist, and St. John the Evangelist, because, as we think, %Wywere eminent teachers of Christianity, for there is, certainly, no well‑defined vadition, or other reliable evidence that they were Masons.

 

DEFAMATION. To defame our brother, or suffer him to be defamed, wltho" interesting ourselves for the preservation of his name and character; thers.ia scarce the shadow of an excuse to be found. Defamation is always. wicked.1pivood.

 

REMIT.' A Mason is said to demit from the Order when he withdraws ft** all connection with it. In the Regulations of the Grand Lodge, dated, 25th of November, 1723, it was provided, that if the Master of a Lodge is deposed; of dcmite, the Senior Warden shall fill the Chair until the next appointment of a* oers.‑Oliver.

 

We think a Mason can never withdraw from his connection with the Order; on the contrary, all Masons must ever remain amenable to the laws of the Institution, unless they be expelled. A demit is a release from membership in a particular Lodge, and can only be granted to those who are about to remove beyond its jurisdiction, or who desire to join in forming a new Lodge.

 

DIFFERENCES. For the manner of settling differences, see the Old Charg" DIPLOMA. A sealed certificate of good standing; signed by the Master, War, deal, and Secretary of the Lodge, and countersigned by the Grand Secretary; with the seal of the Grand Lodge.

 

The brother's signature must be on the twigs..

 

DISPENSATION.

 

Is an instrument which legalizes an act of ceremony, sued as opening a Lodge without a warrant, forming a Masonic procession, etc., which would be illegal without it. The power of granting dispensations is very properly vested in the Grand and Provincial Grand Masters, or their Deputies, who we the best judges on what occasions it ought to be exercised.‑Oliver.

 

From the above, it appears that the Grand Lodge of England does not, io this day, hisue dispensations for new Lodges.

 

DRESS.

 

At the revival in 1717, it was directed‑and, that there might be no mistake about the matter, the canon was inserted by Anderson and Desaguliers, in the earliest Bode of lectures known‑that the symbolical clothing of a Master Mason was" skullcap and jacket yellow, and nether garments blue."

 

After the middle of the century, he was said to be '1 clothed in the old colors, viz., purple, crimson, and blue;" and the reason assigned for it was, ░' because they are royal, and such as the ancient kings and princes used to wear."‑Oliver.

 

EAVESDROPPER. In the lecture used at the revival of Masonry. in 1717, the following punishment was inflicted on a cowan : 11 To be placed under the eaves of the house, in rainy weather, till the water runs in at his shoulders and.. out at his shoes." Property dimit‑from the I s‑a usnao, to id go and to dicrharye‑Dimittelo gum quern mano prehendrrv ‑Cnvra ELE ‑EEL 7D$ ELECTION. In Englandthe Master is.elected, and when installed be r"wisb the Wardens.

 

EMERGENCY. A Lodge of emergency may, st any time, he called by‑the authority of the Master, or, in his absence, by the Senior Warden, but on no pretence without such authority first given. The particular reason of, calling a Lodge of emergency shall be expressed in the summons, and afterward recorded in the minutes; and no business but that so expressed shall be entered upon at mob meeting. Engtith Cbnatitutiom ENDLESS SERPENT. The serpent was symbolical of the divine wisdom, power, and creative energy; and of immortality and regeneration, from the shed= ding of his skin; and of eternity, when in the actor biting his own tail. Beddtss these various eymbolixaations, we we informed that the Egyptians represented the world by a circle, Intersected by two diameters, perpendicular to each other.lkan.

 

ENVY.

 

None shall discover envy at the prosperity of a brother, nor supplant him, or put him out of his work, if he be capable to finish the same, for no man can finish another's work so much to the lord's profit, unless he be thoroughly atquainted with the designs and draughts. of him that began it.‑‑QM Charges: EXALTED.

 

A candidate is said to be exalted, when he receives the degree of Holy Royal Arch Mason.

 

Exalted means elevated, or lifted up. and is applicable both to a peculiar ceremony of the degree, and to the fact that this degree; in the rite in which it is practiced, constitutes the summit of Ancient Masonry.lfockey.

 

EXPULSION. The highest punishment known to Masonic law. The punish. ment for the different grades of crime or misconduct, are reprimand, definite suspension, indefinite suspension, and expulsion. Dr. Oliver tells us, correctly; that fines are not admissible In Masonry, and yet, in his definition of expulsion, he mentions fines as one of the punishments.

 

Expulsion should never take place except for gross unmasonic conduct, and where reformation can not be reasonably toped for..

 

FEES OF HONOR. Every brother, on his appointment, or rettppointment to either of the following offices, shall pay these sums:‑The Deputy Grand Master, having served the office of Steward, ten guineas‑if not. thirty guineas; Grand Treasurer five guineas; Grand Registrar, Secretary, and Deacons, three guineas each ; Grand Director of Ceremonies, Superintendent of Works, and Sword Bearer, two guineas each; a Provincial Grand Master, twenty guineas, and if be have not served the office of Grand Steward, twenty guineas more; std a Deputy Provincial Grand Master pays two guineas for registering his name it We books of the Grand Lodge.‑afimr.

 

We could not officer a Grand Lodge In this country upon such terms.

 

FELLOW CRAFT. The second degree is Masonry‑me who has been inklo 1,d and Passed.

 

704 FID‑FRE FIDELITY.

 

Joining the right band is a pledge of fid‑aity ; for Yalerius Maxemas tells us that the ancients had a moral deity whom they called Fides, a goddess of honesty, or fidelity, and adds, when they promised anything of old, they gave their hand upon it, as we do now, and therefore she is represented as giving her hand, and sometimes as only two hands conjoined.

 

Chartarlus more fully describes this by observing that the proper residence of faith, or fidelity, was thought by the ancients to be in the right head.‑CaleoM FIXED LIGHTS.

 

The fixed lights of a Lodge were formerly represented by " three windows, supposed to be in every room where a Lodge is held ; referring to the cardinal points of the compass, according to the antique rules of Masonry." There was one in the East, another in the West. and another in the South, to light the men to, at, and from labor ; but there was none in the North, because the sun darts no rays from thence.

 

These constitute the symbolical situations of the three chief officers‑Oliver.

 

FLOOR‑CLOTH.

 

In former times. it was not customary to use a boor‑cloth, but the necessary figures were drawn upon the floor with chalk or charcoal, which, when done with, were washed of

 

This custom was in use here and there till about 1760.

 

Many lodges now use solid bodies for their floor‑cloths, and not paintings.

 

Every good Mason knows what they represent, and what a floorcloth is. The border by which it is surrounded Is as important symbol.Gadicke.

 

FOOT.

 

Indolence should not persuade the foot to halt. or wrath to turn our steps out of the way; but forgetting injuries and selfish feelings, and remembering that man was born for the aid of his generation. and not for his own enjoyments only, but to do that which is good; we should be swift to have mercy, to save to strengthen, and execute benevolence.‑Old Lectures. .. FREE‑BORN.

 

Born of free parents.

 

FREEMASON.

 

One who has taken one or more of the degrees of Frea Masonry.

 

FREEMASONRY.

 

A great system of divine truths, instituted to teach man his whole duty to his fellow‑man, and to point him to that other and greater system of divine and immutable laws, instituted to teach man his whole duty to his Creator‑Gon.

 

FREE AND ACCEPTED.

 

The origin of this term, as applied to Masons, has been variously considered; indeed, we know of no two writers who agree, and yet we think there should be but one opinion, and that founded on simple and plain faots.

 

The workmen employed on the Temple were not only free‑born. but confined to those who, of their own free will and accord, offered their services, and agreed to remain until the work was completed:

 

Ring Solomon intended to reward all such by having them taught the secrets of geometry and architecture, and tb^. still greater secret that there was but one God ; and hence the importance of his having evidence that they were good and true men, before be a.‑cepted them. And this is the origin of the term Free and Accepted.

 

The thirty FUR‑GRA lbousand drafted men, Canaanites, bond‑men, were not permitted to work on the Temple, and were never made Freemasons.

 

The origin of the term Ancient, as prefixed now to the words Free and Accepte4 in quite a different thing, and is properly a subject of speculation.

 

FURNITURE.

 

The Holy Bible, the Square, and the Compasses.

 

GAVEL.

 

A small wooden hammer or mallet‑the instrument of power is the hands of the Master; and when not respected and obeyed bye he member% the charter should be arrested, or the disobedient suspended or expelled.

 

GEOMETRY.

 

An a mathematical science, geometry is emeatial to a correct knowledge of architecture; and, as Solomon's builders were scientific arehltes% geometry was one of their chief studies; but geometry, and Masonry never c"Id have been considered synonymous, terms, even by stoae‑maso* ssuah less by as Institution that was Speculative, as well an Operative GHIBLIM. The Ghiblimites were expert workmen, and favorites of HISS Solomon, and hence are they held in commemoration in the teachings of the last degree of Ancient Craft Masonry.

 

GOOD MASON. ^A good Mason is not only a good man, but an industrious one. He will not only possess feelings of benevolence, but will not benevolently; he will not only teach the principles of Masonry, but practice them; he will not only desire the welfare of Masonry, but labor to promote its prosperity; he will not,only feel charitably inclined, but will so bestir himself, as‑to, be able to giva alms; he will not only feel brotherly kindness, but his acts will prove the slacerity of his feelings ; he will not only abstain from speaking evil of his brother, but will dissuade others from doing so. In short, he will labor to know his whole duty, and delight in doing it.

 

GRAND ARCHITECT. We have never been satisfied with the use of this term in the Lodge room.

 

It has the appearance of going out of the Bible, and Into Masonry, for a name for Jehovah.

 

We have heard Him called the Great Geometrician, and the same license may lead us to call Him the Great Arithmetieian, Great Grammarian, etc., etc.

 

GRAND EAST. This term originated with Modern Masonry, and efforts we being made to introduce it into Ancient Craft Masonry. We think Grand Lodga, or Grand Assembly, are more appropriate, because. Uuy are Masonlc.terme.

 

GRAND LODGE. The highest governing power known to Masonry.

 

GRAND MASTER. The presiding officer of a Grand Lodge of Freemasons.

 

GRAND OFFICERS. All officers of a Grand Lodge.

 

GRAND STEWARDS' LODGE. In England, the Grand Stewards of Charity have a Lodge chartered by this name, but it has no power to confer degrees.

 

GRAND WARDENS. The second and third officers of a Grand Lodge. In England they are appointed by the Grand Master; in this country they are elected.

 

46 GRE‑4MM GREAT LIGHTS. The Holy Bible, the SgttVe, and the Compamm' HARMONY. Good order and brotherly feelings among the members. )to GbBte can prosper unless harmony prevails. It is the especial duty of the Master W preserve order and harmony, cost what it may, and, to this end, if milder me+smt fail, the discordant material must be thrown over among the rubbish.

 

HIEROGLYPHICS Hieroglyphics were used before the discovery of the art of writing, and through paintings of natural or scientific objects were representò ed 'invisible things and ideas, which could not have otherwise been delineated. On account of Its importance, and the difficulty of reading it, it was considered wtoted. Hieroglyphics must always be understood to be pictorial‑representations, sod a `symbol can be. both a pictorial representation and as action. From whM is here acid, the Freemason will be able to perceive which of the Masonto objedta he has to,consider as hieroglyphics, and which as symbols.‑Godicke HIGH TWELVE High meridian‑noon.

 

HILLS AND VALLEYS. Before we had the convenience of such well! formed LAM the brethren used to meet on the highest ofhills and in'the lowsit‑of valleys; and, if they were asked why they met so high, so low, and so veiy secret, they replied, she better .to see and observe all that might ascend or dgmend; and, in'caw a eowan should appear, the Tyler might give timely notice to the WorshipAil Master, by which means the Lodge might be closed, and the jewels put by, 'thereby preventing any unlawful intrusion.‑Old Y or* Ze awes.

 

HOLY OF HOLIER. The legend of the Master's degree details some Interesting incidents in connection with the sanctum sanctorum of King Solomotr's Temple.

 

HOURS OF WORK. The Masters and officers should always be punctual In their attendance, and ‑observe the hour of meeting with scrupulous exactness; for correct conduct in officers will iavariably produce a corresponding accuracy in‑the brethren. I know nothing which tends more to disgust and sour the mind, than the unprQdtable employment of waiting impatiently for the attendance df the superior officers, with a probable expectation of being disappointed at' laaL‑Okeer.

 

'I. A. M.

 

According to the cabalistical theologians, Moses, asking the Lord if He would tell him the name of His Divine Essence, received for answer, 2 Say I AM THAT I AM, sent me 'to you" (the children of Israel), equivalent to saying ‑What use to It to ask what is inexplicable?

 

ò1 I AM THAT I AM," as

 

he ancient sages say, meant that He was with them in that captivity, so would He benlu others; and,'therefore, He then revealed to Moses the Tetragrammaton; and this He repeated, as He would manifest Himself by its representation of the tea sovereign lights: and by that means would become known, although Wiled it: them; because His existence will be ever bidden from all, and can not be explained by any character.‑‑AfamasmA Ben Israel.

 

IMMOVABLE. The Immovable jewels are the Square, Level, and Plumb hilt reasonP see answer to question'' What are the movable and immovabk Jow4VunAhie volume.

 

INDENTED TASSEL. This is an old name for.the ornamented border which ,surrounds the mosaic pavement, now called the tesselatrd border.‑Oliver.

 

INDISSOLUBLE TIE. Masonry annihilates all parties, conciliates all private opinions, and renders those who, by their Almighty Father, were made of one blood, tObe.also of one heart and one mind ; brethren bound firmly together by that indissoluble tie‑the lose of their God, and the love of their kind.

 

Dodd.

 

r INITIATED.

 

When a candidate passes through the ceremony of the lent degree, he is said to be initiated‑made.

 

INNOCENCE.‑The Masonic virtue aymbolia d V +the :badge of an Entered Apprentice.

 

INSTALLATION. The ceremony of qualifying the oflcers.

 

INTERNAL. The internal qualities, and not. the external adornments, recommend a man to be made a Mason.

 

INVESTED. The investment of the candidate referred to Naphthali, and lylhis t eremony he was considered free; thus the tribe of Naphthali had.a‑peculiar .freedom attached to them, in conformity with the divine blessing pronouuced,by Moses, just before his death.‑‑Oliver.

 

When the initiate is intrusted with all the secrets of the degree, he is invested ISH CHOAZEB. Hewers of stone in the Tyrian quarries, preparatory of iKing Solomon's Temple.

 

1SH SABBAL. The men of burden, being the remains of the old Canaaalteaarho were employed about the work, amounting to 70,000, who are not numbered among the Masons.

 

JACOB'S LADDER. Its moral is explained in .the 5rat degree.

 

JAH. The Hebrew name of God.

 

JEHOSHAPHAT. In the Hebrew this word eigniiies God the Judge. An old manuscript, found in the early part of the last century, represents every Ledge as being situated in the Vale of Jehoshaphat, and that there God would. judge :the,world in the final day JEWELS. The Freemasons' ornaments are three. jewels, the Square, the LweL and. the Plumb‑Rule.

 

JEWISH MASONS. The true and pure Freemasons' Lodges allow no Jews: to be admitted; for a Jew, according to his faith, can not lay his hand upon, the `Gospel of St. John, as a proof of his sincerity and truth. Also, the doctrine of a Triune God is the most important distinction between Christianity and Judaism, and the chief doctrine of Christianity, so that no Jew can acknowledge tWs qym. 'bol, which is so sacred to a Freemason.‑Gadi*e.

 

How strangely must the above language sound to those who belie" ,that òMasonry orWnated with the Jews. and that it does not teach any sectarian relig 1011.

 

709

 

JOB‑LAN JOHN'S BROTHERS.

 

After the Crusades to the Holy Land, the Knights of St John established. in Flanders. hospitals for the relief of those afflicted witk St. Anthony's fire. These Hospitalers were called John's Brothers, and, hence, by confounding the societies, the term was improperly applied to Masons.

 

.

 

JURISDICTION.

 

The jurisdiction of a Grand Lodge extends over every Lodge working within its territorial limits, and over all places not already oocu. pied by a Grand Lodge, JUST AND PERFECT.

 

A Lodge, to be just and perfect, must have a legal varrant, its officers installed, and the Lodge constituted by proper authority.

 

JUSTICE. The key to harmony, and, when tempered with mercy, constitutes the bulwark of Masonry.

 

KEY‑STONE. Used in the Royal Arch degree to represent a certain key‑stone of Solomon's Temple.

 

KING. The first officer in the Royal Arch Chapter, commonly called the First Principal. He represents Zerubbabel, the Governor of Judea, at the building of the second Temple.‑‑Olives.

 

In the United States the first ofet of a Chapter Is the High Priest, whom we are taught represents Jeshus. the High Priest, who was the pontiff when the Temple was destroyed, and who, It is taught, was descended of the order of Melchisedek.

 

The King is the second officer, and represents Bagel, the boll prophet, and principal of the Sanhedrlm.

 

The Scribe is the third officer, and represents Zerubbabel, of the royal race of David.

 

And as he was esteemed chief of all the Jews who returned from captivity, the:.e Is at least the appearance of the propriety of representing him by the first officer.

 

KNOCK.

 

A term peculiar to the Lxlhe room.

 

LABOR. A Lodge is said to be at Irbor whenever It is opened, but more properly is the Lodge at labor when at work‑‑conferring degrees.

 

LAMBSKIN.

 

Its moral use is taught in tL3 lectures of the several degrees.

 

LANDMARKS OF FREEMASONRY. "n T.wndmarks of Masonry are those immemorial laws which have been handed down from age to age, and from gener. ation to generation, no one knowing whence they originated, and no one having the right to alter, or change them, but all Masons being bound by a fair and liberal construction of them. They consist of the wrtten and unwritten landsmental laws of the Society.

 

The unwritten Landmarks comprise all those esseutial ritusla and teachings of the Lodge room, and which can be learned nowhere elm.

 

The written Landmarks are six in number, and are to I%e fontsd order the head of ò' The Old Charges of a Freemason," in the English fbuit+uines, first printed and published in 1723, by order of the Grand Lodge of England. edited by Dr. James Anderson. But one attempt, so far as we know, has ever been made to alter, change, or amend this fundamental written code, by a leg‑%I Grand Lodge, and that was an order of the Grand Lodge of England to strike twit 11 barn," and LAT‑‑LOY

 

709 Insert in its stead "man," so as to admit liberates slaves to the mysteries of the Order. but which amendment has been frowned down by 11 the good and true" everywhere. Lawrence Dermott rendered himself notorious by altering and chang Ing the reading of this immemorial code, so as to suit the purposes of the spurious body of Masons in London, known as the Anciad Masons, or Athol Grand Lpdge. And now, w4en the evils long inflicted upon Memory in the United States, by the false teaching of Dermott, are being rapidly removed, and hopes are entertained that soon all Grand Lodges will return to the true law, an American author has written and published two hundred and reventy‑five pages, in order to prove that the unknown framers of the Old Charges were mistaken in saying there were but six Landmarks, there being, as he says, jest seventeen t How vain the hope of a return to the laws and usages of our fathers, if teachers shall continue to introduce novelties, as fast as we get clear of older innovations.

 

LATE HOURS. Seeping late home in the Ledge room has made more anti. Masons than any other one cause. The brethren should never reelect a Master who has permitted late hours, except in oases of pressing necessity.

 

LAWS OF THE LAND. See Old Charges.

 

LAWS OF MASONRY. See Old Charges, LAW‑SUITS. See Old Charges.

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE No brother, whether mbmber or visitor, can leave the Lodge without obtaining leave of the Master. Nor is he allowed to hold oovvereations with any brother without leave.

 

LECTURE Each degree to furnished with a traditional sketch, explanatory of the ritual sad the objects of Masonry, which is called a lecture.

 

LECTURER. An ofilcer of modern appointment. His duty is to give instrnotion.

 

LEGEND.

 

A sacred chronicle. The legends of Masonry are the secret teeth. tions of the Order.

 

LESSER LIGHTS. The explanation belongo to the Lodge room.

 

LEVEL. See the Lecture.

 

LEWIS. Modern Masons initiate the son of a Mama at eighteen years old, mA call him a Lewis.

 

LILY‑WORK. Peace.

 

LODGE

 

As men call the house of God a church, and when religious !ervios are performed in it, say it is church hours, so also we call the locality in which a Lodge assembles a Lodge, and when the brethren are assembled in it, it is Lodge hours.

 

The form.of a Lodge is an oblong square.

 

Three well‑informed bret tren form a legal Lodge, five improve it, and seven make It perfect.

 

We ma; aim all a room in which a Lodge to held a hall.‑Gadi&L LOYALTY. See Old Charges.

 

MAD‑‑NOR.

 

MADE

 

He who is initiated is said to be made a Mason: MANNA. A symbol in Royal Arch Masonry.

 

MARK MASONS. The fourth degree in Masonry: Formerly tii constituted a part of, and the completion of the Fellow Craft's degree: MASONIC YEAR. Freemasons date their year according to Mosaic chronoology, or from the creation of the world, thus four thousand years more than the common calendar shows. The Masonic year does not commence on the 19 January, but on the 24th June. But this way of reckoning; is. only usual in thewritings of the Order. ‑Gadiccke.

 

For all practical purposes, the Masonic year is best. dated to. been with tic regular meetings of the Grand Lodge:, MASTER OF A LODGE. See. Old Charges MATURE AGE. The Order of Free and Accepted M

 

shoutd oeaa6R solely of men of mature age, and it is in accordance with ttMw rule that young men and boys are denied admittance.

 

In the Aneien4Chargpsof the. English Constitution Book, under date 29th December, 1729, it is laid down as a rule that no person shall be initiated under,tirmttpilve years. of age. Thr Lodges .of other countries initiate at an earlier period, and the son of a Freemason, called Lewis, is allowed to be initiated much earlier.‑‑olivrr.

 

How strange it seems, that Dr Oliver could give the above, as‑ an extract from the Ancient Charges,. and still more strange that be. should, in the ‑same sentence, show that it was not taken from the Old Charges,, but, a. mere Regplar. tion of the Grand Lodge. The Old Charges say only that persons admitted must be '1 of mature and discreet age," and, therefore, in obedtenes to th&.lkw ‑the paramount law‑‑=‑that dge which the laws of the laud ssteesc mature,. malt be so considered by Masons MIDDLE CHAMBER. The Temple of Solomon stood on Mount Mori* sad occupied the site of the present‑Mosque of Omar, beneath the dome of which. in a remarkable rock, fifteen feet above the level of the earroundlug pl Mbena,, evidently left by design, for a peculiar purpose, and well answering to use account in 1 Kings.vL, where it ba:etated that ~< the door for the. middle chamber was in the right side of the house, and they went up with winding stairs into the middle chamber, and out of the middle into the third;"' thus establikhIug the Asst, tint the Holy of Holke waaas an elevated. Wk, to; which, and to nothing else, can this remarkable rock be referred with the shadow of a sesaaa.‑Oksvt MORAL LAW. A Mason is obliged, by his tenure, to obey tlis moral law. Net Old Charges.

 

MORAL QUALIFICATIONS. The moral gnrAfioatlvna. of a candidate am ‑ that be shall neither be an atheist, an infidel, nor an irreilgions libertine; that he must practice the four cardinal; and the three theologjeal vii tues ; he must ilt on humble believer in the wisdom, power,, and goodness, of God, because‑ tYl constitutes the religious creed of Freemasonry, and sots, as a check upon vmi and a stimulus to virtue‑014w.

 

NOS‑PED

 

7,11 As the Doctor believes Masonry is Christianity, he is consistent in making. it, as above, sectarian. The Old Charges say: 2 If be (the Mason) rightly, under stand the Art, he will never be a stupid atheist, nor an irreligious libeet1ae." They do not say that he shall not be an infidel.

 

Should tpla moulding, of. the old law to suit particular views be tolerated. where will it end? MOSAIC PAVEMENT. The mosaic pavement was found before the, porch ot King Solomon's Temple.

 

Fortunate are they who can draw near unto it, aw:aino auto the porch.‑Gadicka

 

.

 

MOVABLE JEWELS. The Rough Ashlar, the Perfeet Ashlar, and the Tracing‑Board MYSTERIES. The usages, custorna, laws, and. docttes:of aaecret $odd* MYSTIC TIE.

 

That sacred and inviolable bond which vanes men of the most discordant opinions into one band of brothers,. which lives but, out, language to men of all nations, and one sitar to men of all religions,, is properlZ from the mysterious influence it exerter denominated the mystic tie; and Fine mgeons alone, because they are under its influence,, or

 

y ija benef.are called 11 brethren of the mystic tie."‑Mae4.

 

NAME OF THE LODGE: A Lodge can not, change its, name or number, without the consent of the Grand Lodge.

 

NEGATIVE. When any one is proposed to become a member,, or any jp"" to be made a Mason, if it appear, upon casting up the ballot, thak he ip m*t~. no member or visiting brother shall discover, by any mean' whatsoever. who those members were that opposed his election, under the, pens)ty of qua brother being for ever expelled the Lodge (if a member), and, if a visiting brother, of his being never more admitted as a visitor, or boooming, a member; and immediately after a negative passes on any person being proposed, the Master shall cause the law to be read, that no brother present may plead ignoranee.‑Ofd tbnditngww.

 

OLD C$ARGTS. The wAtten IAadmarks; the&oibia"Wvfl&Aeu lawn of Mepoory. See, Dtgesli ON. The Egyptian name for Jehovah. They believed Him eUrnal but v10le, and looked to the sun. ga his dwelling‑place. 04 v4%; B gy9ogdaiow with Osiris.

 

OPENING. See Questions of Masonic Usage. PARALLEL LINES. See the lecture. PECTORAL.

 

See the lecture.

 

PEDAL. See the lecture.

 

PEDESTAL.

 

A pedestal is the basis of a statue, or Iewer portion of a pahm It should be in the form of a double cube.

 

There are four pedestals in a Ledge, one forming the altar, one for the Master, and one for each of the Wardens. Tbsse pedestals are immovable‑stationary, and, hence, the‑ mats of thuespriath oi6aeraare called stations, sad the jewel oppertalaing to each is atatioawf, ad is called as immovable jewel.

 

..

 

712

 

PEN‑POR PENAL.

 

Penal 5.... Explained in the lecture.

 

16 PERFECT ASHLAR. Explained ip the Lecture.

 

PERPENDICULAR. In a geometrical sense, that which is upright and erect. leaning neither one way nor another. In a figurative and symbolical sense, it conveys the signification of Justice, Fortitude, Prudence, and Temperance; Justice, that leans to no side but that of truth; Fortitude, that yields to no adverse attack: Prudence, that ever pursues the straight path of integrity; and Temperance, that swerves not for appetite nor passion.‑Mackey.

 

PERSONAL MERIT. See Old Charges.

 

PE'T'ITION. Under the usages of the United States, a petition for a new Lodge must be signed by at least seven Master Masons, in good standing, and addressed to the Grand Lodge, or Grand Master, in vacation.

 

It must be recomò mended by one or more Lodges, or their officers,

 

Grand Lodges vary in the tfetails of a legal petition.

 

PHRASES OF ADMISSION.

 

When a candidate takes the first degree, he is said to be Initiated; when he takes the Fellow Craft's, he is Passed; when he takes the Mast'iti's degree, he is Raised; when he takes the Mark Master's degree, he is Advanced; when he has acted PA Master of a Lodge, he is said to have Presided in the Oriental Chair; when he becomes a Most Excellent Master, he is Received and Accepted; and when he takes the Royal Arch degree, he is Exalted to the Most Sublime degree.

 

PHYSICAL. See Old Charges.

 

PICSA%& On Royal Arch Work.

 

PILLARS. Wisdom, Strength, and Beauty.

 

Hear the Lecture.

 

PILLARS OF THE PORCH.

 

For a description of these pillars, see the Biblo and Joeephna.

 

We think they were only eighteen cubits in bight, but the opinions of scientific builders are asked.

 

PLACED.

 

At the close of initiation the novitiate ispkie d.

 

See the work.

 

PLUMB‑RULE. An instrument to test the uprightness of any structure. For etc moral teaching, hear Lecture.

 

POINT WITHIN A CIRCLE. Hear the Lecture.

 

POLITICS. Politic" are entirely prohibited from a Freemasons' Lodge, and no brother dare attempt to propagate his views upon politics or religion, by means of the Order, this being in direct opposition to the ancient statutes.

 

POMEGRANATE. A symbol of plenty.

 

PORCH.

 

The width of the porch, holy and most holy places, were twenty cubits, and the bight over the holy and most holy places was thirty cubits; bqt the bight of the porch was much greater, being no less than one hundred and POT‑PRO

 

713 twenty cubits, or four times the bight of the rest of the building.

 

To the North and South sides, and the West end of the holy and most holy places, or all around the edifice. from the back of the porch on the one side, to the back of the porch on the other, certain buildings were attached; these were called side chambers, and consisted of three stories, each five cubits high, and were joined to the wall of the Temple without‑Calm:: POT OF INCENSE. An emblem of a pure heart.

 

POT OF MANNA.

 

The pot of manna was placed in the sanctuary, to cons. snemorate the heavenly bread, by which the Israelites were sustained in the wilderness.

 

PURSUIVANT. In former times, a messenger who attended upon the king in the army; among Masons, an officer in some Grand Lodges, whore principal duty is to announce the names of visitors.‑Afackey.

 

PRACTICE. We may talk of religion, its doctrines, Its precepts, and Its privileges; we may talk of philosophy, with all its train of human perfections, and human acquirements; we may become Masons, boast of its secrecy, its science, and its morals; put on all its gaudy trappings and ornaments, and decorate ourselves with its richest external jewels; but if our religion is destitute of love to God, and of Charity toward our fellow‑creatures; if our philosophy is destitute of philanthropy, or if our Masonry is destitute of the activity of doing good, away with religious profession, it Is but an empty name; away with pbilosophical sentiment, it is but as sounding brass; away with Masonic pretensions, they are but as tinkling cymbals.‑lnwood.

 

PRAYER.

 

No Lodge can be opened or closed without prayer. The forma raid down in Monitors are not Masonic forms; any others may be used, provided they are addressed to God.

 

The Jewish prayer is a Masonic prayer, and so is the Christian prayer; both are addressed to Jehovah.

 

PREREQUISITES. See Old Charges.

 

PRIVATE DUTIES. See Old Charges.

 

PROFANE.

 

The word signifies uninitiated.

 

All those who do not belong to the Order are frequently so called.

 

Before a Lodge is held, care must be taken that none but the initiated are present, and that the Lodge is carefully tyled.

 

In the Lodge list; which are frequently open to the public, there are given the addresses to which all letters for the Lodge must be sent, and these are called profane addresses.

 

It would be mudb more proper to call them " town ad dresses," for many of the uninitiated translate the word profane as unmannerly or impious.‑ Gadicke.

 

PROMOTION.

 

Every man strives for promotion, either in ottice or in knowl edge.

 

It is for this reason that the Apprentice strives for the Fellow Craft,a degree ; the Fellow Craft for the Master's degree, and the Master for a still higher degree, or state of knowledge.

 

These who really and zealously strive to obtain a correct knowledge of all that is truly good and valuable in the Craft, will not Atli in their endeavors to obtain Masonic promotion.‑Gadida.

 

714

 

. PRO‑RW, PROPAGATION. Our. Grand Master Solomon, observing the effects praduoed by‑strict order adopted among the Masons employed in his work, conceived tb@. idea, of uniting the wise in every nation, in, the bond. of Brotherly Love, and in thepursuit of scientific acquirements. He admitted to the participation of tMY system those illustrious sages, who resorted to Jerusalem. even from the utterr most parts of the East, to be instructed in his wisdom; and they, returning to their respective homes, propagated the system of Freemasonry over the whole face of the Eastern Continent.‑Ifemming.

 

PROPOSING.

 

Proposing a candidate to a thing which requires the greatest care and attention.

 

Through an improper subject, a whole Lodge, nay, even the whole Society‑may receive a deep wound.

 

No one dare propose a person with whom he is not intimately acquainted, and whose conduct he has not had au opportuaity of observing. under different. circumstances.

 

The person wlw is about to make a proposition, must have carefully inquired whether the candidate is influenced by the desire of gain or self‑interest; for he must not look to the Order as a means of making money, but rather as a eteans of expending it, in charitable objects.‑Olive.

 

PROVINCIAL GRAND LODGE. A ep`$ordinate Grand Lodge.

 

PROVINCIAL GRAND MASTER. The (Grand Master of a subordinate Grand Lodge, PRUDENCE.

 

One of the cardinal virtuaa PUNISHMENTS. Masonic punishments, are reprimand, definite suspensiop, indefinite suspension, and expulsion. Immoral, or unmasonie conduct subjects 's brother to either of the three first, according as the, magnitude of the otlhnse deownds.

 

Gross unmasonic conduct alone, is cause for expulsion, and sboWNl r cer be resorted to, while there is a reasonable hope of reformation.

 

RAISED.

 

This term is used to designate the reception of a candidate into the third degree of Masonry. It conveys an allusion to a particular part of the ceremonies, as well as to the fact of his being, elevated or raised to that degree, which is universally acknowledged to be ti}e summit of Ancient Craft Masonry. ‑~iFrckey.

 

RECEIVED AND ACCEPTED. A brother who: take the degree of Mast Excellent Maater, is. accepted and rscelved.

 

REFRESHMENT. " I like the good old custom of moderate refreshment during Lodge hours, because, under proper restriction, I am persuaded that it is consem4nt with ancient usage.

 

The following were the routine ceremonies which were used on such occasions by our brethren of the last century.

 

At a certain hour of the, evening, and, with certain ceremonies, the Lodge was called from labor to. refreshment, when the brethren ' enjoyed themselves with decent merrimeuk' ind the song and the toast prevailed for a brief period." The foregoing is from the pen of Dr. Oliver,

 

Now, sa:toasta are usually drank with intoxicating liquors‑especially in England‑we elearil understand tire Parson as advocating a return to " the, gpsd: old timer," when 11 the good ail Rif_.‑RTT 3ustom," of wine‑bibbing was the fleAion of the‑‑ day, and lo‑ which Mhsons and parsons were equally distinguished. To, the. reigns. of the Henrys, aye, or the Georges, when a ░'three‑bottle‑man╗`was. . esteemed a greater, man than a ripe scholar‑had one then been fonnd‑‑when a lady of the better class dared not be even with a book in her hand, and when a candidate was made a Freemason, fhee of charge, because he was known to be a good drinker. and capable of singing a good song.

 

Verily, we think the Parsom should have‑ lived before the author of the' Spedatar, that his taste might have been gratified to the full, without the haaard of eentanuinating. by precept sail example; the morality of the Brotherhood, in the nineteenth century.

 

In our earnest zeal to spread and'communieate moral lessons to our brethren, we may sometimes have fallen by the way, and taught errors; but we hope never to me. the day, when we can tolerate the introduction: of the bottle into'th& Lodge room, or the ante‑room. Who does not know that drunkards are first dratedrinkers, and that the only sure way, to guard against excess in drinking into" touck.aot, taste not the‑nucleon thing:" REGISTRAR.

 

An officer in the Grand Lodge' of Bagiand.

 

.REGULAR LODGE. A Lodge; established by warrant from a legal Grand Loge, and duly constituted by. the Grand Master, or his Deputy, and having always open upon the altar the great light in Masonry‑the Holy Bible.

 

REGULATIONS. The local laws and rules adopted by Grand Lodges, The the government of the Craft.

 

REINSTATEMENT.

 

The. Lodge. that, suspends or expels a brother is, the. proper authority to restore, or reinstate him, and in the event of its refusal to do buy the aggrieved may appeal to the Grand Lodge, which body has the original; as wall as appellate power to restore to all the gourul privileges.of Masonry, bat an to membership in a subordinate Lodge.

 

UELIEF.

 

Aid given to the. indgpat or oppressed:

 

It. may, or mar not be charity.

 

If given reluctantly, it, may be, to., the full, relief, but charity, is.tlt%*a* will, heart‑offering; and prefers, to be secretly indulged.

 

REMOVAL OF LODGES. A Lodge can not be removed without. permbolon from the Grand Lodge.

 

RENUNCIATION. Among the Jaws,, when a person renounced any bargain or contract, he took off his shoe, and gave it to his fellow; which was considered a sufficient evidence that he transferred all his right unto that. person to whew haadelivered, hisshoe: Biskp PaWA REPRESENTATIVES. The Master and Wardens are the representatives of basil Lodges in Grand Lodges sad,,eolleetivelyä constitate that: body.

 

RETURNS.

 

Every Lodge must make annual returns to the Grand Lodge, is; mob form as may be prescribed.

 

REVISION.

 

1░.A revision of the Ledge lectures periodically, to meet‑ the advance of civilization and ecienoe, ought. to lake place under the sanction of the Grand Lodge." 716

 

RIG‑‑8AL How strangely sounds the foregoing language, and especially eo, as coming from Dr. Oliver, an old Mason and teacher of Masonic law. Already have we lost much of the purity and simplicity, and, consequently, beauty of Masonry, by unauthorized innovations; and now the Doctor would lValim a periodical tampering with the work and lectures, under the vain hope of improving the system, " to meet the wants of civilization ;' not the least improvement urged by him self, would be the introduction of the wifie‑cup in Lodge hours.

 

How vain an the efforts of the good and true to preserve the Landmarks, and transmit Ancient Freemasonry, if the learned teachers shall instruct the Craft that Masonry mast be made to bend to the tastes of the age 1 RIGHT ANGLE.

 

The perfect sincerity of one right line to another, Is an the line of that angle, the line of duty being radius.

 

An acute angle is fmperfft sincerity.

 

An obtuse angle is injustice.

 

Join sincerity perfectly to any duty slid it forms justice, and is equal to an angle of ninety degrees.‑‑Old Lectwv.

 

RIGHT HAND.

 

The proper residence of faith or fidelity was thought to be in the right hand, and, therefore, this deity was sometimes represented by two right hands joined together; sometimes by two little images shaking each other by.tbe right hand ; so that the right hand was esteemed by the ancients as a sacred symbol.

 

And agreeably to this are those expressions in Virgil ò.‑" Ea iextva idesque;' as if'shaking by the right hand was an indispensable token of an honest heart.

 

And again: "Cur dextrw jungere daxtram non datur, ac versa audire, et reddere votes Y" that is to say, why should we not join right hand to right hand, and hear and speak the truth i‑Andcraon.

 

RITE. A solemn religious set.

 

External observance of forms. Modem societies assuming the name of Masons, claim to practice Masonry by other rites, meaning, doubtless, other rituals, degrees: and teaching.

 

ROD.

 

Aaron's rod is represented in the Royal Arch degree. In the hands of (loses this rod was " a sceptre of righteousness to the children of Israel." ROUGH ASHLAR. A rough stone. One of the movable jewels of an Entered Apprentice.

 

ROYAL ARCH.

 

The last and principal degree of the Chapter.

 

This, to. gether with the lecture, now in the council of Royal and Select Masters, doss. pletes the third degree‑the summit of Freemasonry.

 

ROYAL ART.

 

Masonry was so called because it was instituted by the Royal King of Israel sad communicated an a royal secret.

 

b'T. JOHN'S MASONRY.

 

For several centuries Freemasonry has, in some countries. been called St. John's Masonry, and thus is it now called in Scotland. It is probable that it originated with the dedication of Lodges to the Sts. John.

 

SALUTE.

 

The Grand Master, after being installed, should be saluted by an the brethren present, with the secret Grand honors.

 

Operative Masons used as appropriate salutation to strange brethren.

 

S.AN‑QTR

 

711 SANCTUM SANCTORUM. This was the oracle ‑,,and here were four, cherabitaw‑two lesser, constructed by Moses of massive gold, and two larger, made by Solomon, and plated with gold. The former were attached to the lid of the Mercy Seat; the latter spread their wings over it, as an ornament and protection ‑‑‑4Nimr.

 

SCARLET.

 

The color adopted for the Royal Arch degree, when that degree was instituted.

 

SCROLL. A roll of parchment originally made of the bark of trees, and upon which the Jews wrote the five books of Moses. And to this day those books are preserved in the Synagogues, on scrolls from which they read the law. Bebre the Masonic burial of a deceased brother, Freemasons meet to their Lodge room, perform the secret ceremoiry, and deposit in .the archives of the Lodge a scrod, containing an account of the birth, life, and death of the brother.

 

SCULL AND CROSS‑BONES. Emblems of mortality. They are need in the Encampments of Knights Templar.

 

SCYTHE.

 

Emblem of time. See Master's lecture.

 

SEAL.

 

The seal of each Lodge should have a device, having allusion to ifs location or name.

 

SECRECY. Secrecy and silence are Masonic virtues.

 

SECRET SOCIETIES. All societies who meet with closed doors, and refuse to make known their objects and ends. In this sense Masonry is not a secret Society. But Masons have ceremonies which they do refuse to divulge, and, thus tfer, are secret.

 

SEEING. No blind man can be made a Mason.

 

SENIORITY OF LODGES, Is determined by the date of their chartetn, SHEKINAH. A ray of glory.

 

SHESH‑BAZZAR. ZerubbabeL SHIBBOLETH. Shiilboleth signifies waters SIGNATURE. Every brother to whom a Grand Lodge certificate Is granted .

 

must sign his name in the margin thereof, or it will not be valid.‑Enylia Cbw titakovu.

 

SQUARE.

 

An angle of ninety degrees, and the fourth part of a oirda A Masonic jewel.

 

STANDARD BEARER. A modern officer in Masonry.

 

STRIKING OFF. The Grand Lodge of England doss not use the term arrsl at obwter, but strikes from the register an offending Lodge.

 

'iJ SUMMONS. A command. A brother may‑disregard a notice, without incurring serious censure, but he who wilifullydiaobeye a summons, abould be snsnerided or expelled.

 

SUSPENSION. The second grade of Masonic punishment. Unmwonle'ooer duet leads to suspension, while gross unmasonic conduct leads to expuislou. Both suspended and expelled Masons are deprived of all Masonic privileges, snarl restored or reinstated.

 

SYMBOL.

 

A type.

 

That which, by Its ligure, represents something else.

 

SYMBOLICAL MASONRY. Ancient, Free, end Accepted Masonry. TLew is no~other Freemasonry.

 

TEMPERANCE. One of the cardinal virtues TOASTS.

 

The brother whose duty it is, its a visitor, to return tbanks,‑must be extremely careful not to may too much, or be is‑easily led away into an extemporaneous lecture, to which it is not so easy to find a becoming end; the opposite fault of repeating a few set phrases, like w parrot, ought to be equally as carefcilly guarded against.

 

If both old and young members are at the same table, the 'young never attempt to press before the old.

 

And, before the close, the toast, which is so dear to every good Mason, should never be omitted, viz., 2 Ourstrk and afifcted brethren;" neither ought the serving brethren ever to be forgotten. ‑Gadfcke.

 

TOMB OF A 'MASON. The proper tomb of s Master Mason is a broken column; with an open book upon it, a weeping virgin standing behind the tolumn, and Time uniblding the ringlets of her bait.

 

TRACING‑BOARD,

 

The Tracing‑Board Is for the Master to draw big plans and designs on, that the building, whether moral or literal, may be ooD"wod wiw oruer and regularity.

 

TRADITION.

 

Anytbing delivered orally, from age to aV.

 

TRAVEL.

 

See work in third degree. TRIANGLE. Three angles joined. TROWEL. The working‑tool of a MastWUmon ueed to‑spread cement. 'lieu 1ectare.

 

TYLE or TILE, is a technical Masonic term, and means no more than to guard the Lodge from any one entering who is not a Mason: hence, the person who performs this duty is called a Tyler.

 

UNIFORMITY. All Lodges are particularly bound to observe the'sasm usages and customs.

 

UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE. Masonry teaches a language that is understood ,throughout the worid.by the initiated. It is.ibe‑ovily universal language ever invented.

 

VMGIITLY.

 

A )!axon should endeavor to walk uprightly before Gad &A  USAGES. Settled customs. Any practice peculiar to the Order, long and uninterruptedly maintained bytbe Lodges generally, becomes a law‑the common law.

 

VISITING BRETHREN. Lodges are honored and gratified by the reception of visitors, but all such visitors are admitted through courteey, and not by any absolute right of the applicant. For reasons see Digest.

 

VOTING. The Old Constitutions provided, that all motions made in Gfna Bodge should be submitted to the perusal even of the youngest Apprentice; The approbation and consent of the majority of all the brethren present being Abeoò lately necessary to make the same binding and obligatory. And any one abbve the degree of Entered Apprentice, was capable of representing the Master or Wardens in Grand Lodge in their absence, provided be attended with the proper jewel of office.

 

WAGES. The tradition 'respecting the payment of the workmen's wages at the building of Solomon's Temple, may or may not be accurate, as I am ignorant of the authority on which the calculations are founded. Indeed, the probability is, that the tradition has been fabricated in a subsequent age, without the eat ence of any documents to attest its authenticity.

 

The men were paid in their Lodges by shekels, a silver coin, of about half a crown of our money; and the number of shekels per day was regulated by the square of the number of the degree which each order of men bad attained. Thus, with respect to the Entered Apprentices only, there w6re "ten thousand at work, and twenty thousand at rest. These men, at` the rate of one shekel per head, would receive daily ú1260, x. during the seven years and'seven months of building the Temple, ú3,468,750: In the higher grades, the men were not only remunerated for their labor Wt also fax their superior ineenuity=and artistiesl skill,‑03iser.

 

WORSHIPFUL MASTER. The Master of a Lodge.

 

 719