The Principles ofMasonic Law

A Treatise on theConstitutional Laws,

Usages andLandmarks ofFreemasonry

Mackey, Albert G.

Release date: 2004-04-01Source: Bebook

THE PRINCIPLES OF MASONIC LAW:

A Treatise on the Constitutional Laws,Usages And Landmarks of Freemasonry,

By

Albert G. Mackey, M.D.,

Author of

"The Lexicon of Freemasonry," "The MysticTie," "Legends and Traditions ofFreemasonry," Etc., Etc.,

Grand Lecturer and Grand Secretary ofThe Grand Lodge of South Carolina;Secretary General of the Supreme Councilof the Ancient and Accepted Rite for theSouthern Jurisdiction of the United States,Etc., Etc., Etc.

"Est enim unum jus, quo devincta esthominum societas, quod lex constituituna; qu�lex est recta ratio imperandi atqueprohibendi, quam qui ignorat is estinjustus."

Cicero de Legibus. c. XV.

New York: Jno. W. Leonard & Co., MasonicPublishers, 383 Broadway.

1856.

Entered, according to Act of Congress, inthe year 1855, by Jno. W. Leonard & Co.,

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court ofthe United States for the Southern Districtof New York.

To

Brother J.J.J. Gourgas,

Sovereign Grand Inspector General in theSupreme Council for the NorthernJurisdiction of the United States,

I Dedicate This Work,

As a Slight Testimonial of My Friendshipand Esteem for Him As a Man, And of MyProfound Veneration for His Character Asa Mason; Whose Long and Useful Life HasBeen Well Spent in the LaboriousProsecution of the Science, And theUnremitting Conservation of the Principlesof Our Sublime Institution.

Table of Contents

Preface Introduction

Book First. The Law of Grand Lodges.

Chapter I. Historical Sketch. Chapter II. Ofthe Mode of Organizing Grand Lodges.Chapter III. Of the Members of a GrandLodge. Chapter IV. Of the Officers of aGrand Lodge. Section I. Of the GrandMaster. Section II. The Deputy GrandMaster. Section III. Of the GrandWardens. Section IV. Of the GrandTreasurer. Section V. Of the GrandSecretary. Section VI. Of the GrandChaplain. Section VII. Of the GrandDeacons. Section VIII. Of the GrandMarshal. Section IX. Of the GrandStewards. Section X. Of the GrandSword-Bearer. Section XI. Of the GrandTiler. Chapter V. Of the Powers andPrerogatives of a Grand Lodge. Section

I. General View. Section II. Of theLegislative Power of a Grand Lodge.Section III. Of the Judicial Power of a GrandLodge. Section IV. Of the ExecutivePower of a Grand Lodge.

Book Second. Laws of Subordinate Lodges.

Chapter I. Of the Nature and Organizationof Subordinate Lodges. Chapter II. OfLodges under Dispensation. Chapter III. OfLodges Working under a Warrant ofConstitution. Chapter IV. Of the Officers ofa Subordinate Lodge. Section I. Of theOfficers in General. Section II. Of theWorshipful Master. Section III. Of theWardens. Section IV. Of the Treasurer.Section V. Of the Secretary. Section VI.Of the Deacons. Section VII. Of theStewards. Section VIII. Of the Tiler.Chapter V. Of Rules of Order. Section I.

Of the Order of Business. Section II. OfAppeals from the Decision of the Chair.Section III. Of the Mode of Taking theQuestion. Section IV. Of Adjournments.

Section V. Of the Appointment ofCommittees. Section VI. Of the Mode ofKeeping the Minutes.

Book Third. The Law of Individuals.

Chapter I. Of the Qualifications ofCandidates. Section I. Of the MoralQualifications of Candidates. Section II.Of the Physical Qualifications ofCandidates. Section III. Of theIntellectual Qualifications of Candidates.Section IV. Of the Political Qualifications ofCandidates. Section V. Of the Petition ofCandidates for Admission, and theAction Thereon. Section VI. Of Ballotingfor Candidates. Section VII. Of the

Reconsideration of the Ballot. SectionVIII. Of the Renewal of Applications byRejected Candidates. Section IX. Of theNecessary Probation and Due Proficiencyof Candidates beforeAdvancement Section X. Of Balloting forCandidates in each Degree. Section XI.Of the Number to be Initiated at oneCommunication. Section XII. OfFinishing the Candidates of one Lodge inanother. Section XIII. Of the Initiation ofNon-residents. Chapter II. Of the Rights ofEntered Apprentices. Chapter III. Of theRights of Fellow Crafts. Chapter IV. Of theRights of Master Masons. Section I. Ofthe Right of Membership. Section II. Ofthe Right of Visit. Section III. Of theExamination of Visitors. Section IV. OfVouching for a Brother. Section V. Of theRight of Claiming Relief. Section VI. Ofthe Right of Masonic Burial. Chapter V. Ofthe Rights of Past Masters. Chapter VI. Of

Affiliation. Chapter VII. Of Demitting.Chapter VIII. Of Unaffiliated Masons.

Book Fourth. Of Masonic Crimes andPunishments.

Chapter I. Of What Are Masonic Crimes.Chapter II. Of Masonic Punishments.Section I. Of Censure. Section II. OfReprimand. Section III. Of Exclusionfrom the Lodge. Section IV. Of DefiniteSuspension. Section V. Of IndefiniteSuspension. Section VI. Of Expulsion.Chapter III. Of Masonic Trials. Section I.Of the Form of Trial. Section II. Of theEvidence in Masonic Trials. Chapter IV. Ofthe Penal Jurisdiction of a Lodge. ChapterV. Of Appeals. Chapter VI. Of Restoration.

Index. Footnotes.

Preface.

In presenting to the fraternity a work onthe Principles of Masonic Law, it is due tothose for whom it is intended, thatsomething should be said of the designwith which it has been written, and of theplan on which it has been composed. It isnot pretended to present to the craft anencyclopedia of jurisprudence, in whichevery question that can possibly arise, inthe transactions of a Lodge, is decidedwith an especial reference to its particularcircumstances. Were the accomplishmentof such an herculean task possible, exceptafter years of intense and unremittinglabor, the unwieldy size of the bookproduced, and the heterogeneous natureof its contents, so far from inviting, wouldrather tend to distract attention, and theobject of communicating a knowledge ofthe Principles of Masonic Law, would belost in the tedious collation of precedents,arranged without scientific system, and

enunciated without explanation.

When I first contemplated the compositionof a work on this subject, a distinguishedfriend and Brother, whose opinion I muchrespect, and with whose advice I amalways anxious to comply, unless for themost satisfactory reasons, suggested theexpediency of collecting the decisions ofall Grand Masters, Grand Lodges, andother masonic authorities upon everysubject of Masonic Law, and of presentingthem, without commentary, to thefraternity.

But a brief examination of this method, ledme to perceive that I would be thusconstructing simply a digest of decrees,many of which would probably be theresults of inexperience, of prejudice, or oferroneous views of the masonic system,and from which the authors themselves

have, in repeated instances, subsequentlyreceded--for Grand Masters and GrandLodges, although entitled to great respect,are not infallible--and I could not,conscientiously, have consented to assist,without any qualifying remark, in theextension and perpetuation of edicts andopinions, which, however high theauthority from which they emanated, I didnot believe to be in accordance with theprinciples of Masonic jurisprudence.

Another inconvenience which would haveattended the adoption of such a method is,that the decisions of different GrandLodges and Grand Masters are sometimesentirely contradictory on the same pointsof Masonic Law. The decree of onejurisdiction, on any particular question,will often be found at variance with that ofanother, while a third will differ from both.The consultor of a work, embracing within

its pages such distracting judgments,unexplained by commentary, would be indoubt as to which decision he shouldadopt, so that coming to the inspectionwith the desire of solving a legal question,he would be constrained to close thevolume, in utter despair of extracting truthor information from so confused a mass ofcontradictions.

This plan I therefore at once abandoned.But knowing that the jurisprudence ofMasonry is founded, like all legal science,on abstract principles, which govern andcontrol its entire system, I deemed it to bea better course to present these principlesto my readers in an elementary andmethodical treatise, and to develop fromthem those necessary deductions whichreason and common sense would justify.

Hence it is that I have presumed to call this

work "The Principles of Masonic Law." It isnot a code of enactments, nor a collectionof statutes, nor yet a digest of opinions; butsimply an elementary treatise, intended toenable every one who consults it, withcompetent judgment, and ordinaryintelligence, to trace for himself thebearings of the law upon any questionwhich he seeks to investigate, and to form,for himself, a correct opinion upon themerits of any particular case.

Blackstone, whose method of teaching Ihave endeavored, although I confess "ablongo inter-vallo," to pursue, in speakingof what an academical expounder of thelaw should do, says:

"He should consider his course as ageneral map of the law, marking out theshape of the country, its connections, andboundaries, its greater divisions, and

principal cities; it is not his business todescribe minutely the subordinate limits,or to fix the longitude and latitude of everyinconsiderable hamlet."

Such has been the rule that has governedme in the compilation of this work. But indelineating this "general map" of theMasonic Law, I have sought, if I maycontinue the metaphor, so to defineboundaries, and to describe countries, asto give the inspector no difficulty in"locating" (to use an Americanism) anysubordinate point. I have treated, it is true,of principles, but I have not altogether lostsight of cases.

There are certain fundamental laws of theInstitution, concerning which there neverhas been any dispute, and which havecome down to us with all the sanctions ofantiquity, and universal acceptation. In

announcing these, I have not alwaysthought it necessary to defend theirjustice, or to assign a reason for theirenactment.

The weight of unanimous authority has, inthese instances, been deemed sufficient toentitle them to respect, and to obedience.

But on all other questions, where authorityis divided, or where doubts of thecorrectness of my decision might arise, Ihave endeavored, by a course of argumentas satisfactory as I could command, toassign a reason for my opinions, and todefend and enforce my views, by areference to the general principles ofjurisprudence, and the peculiar characterof the masonic system. I ask, and shouldreceive no deference to my ownunsupported theories--as a man, I am, ofcourse, fallible--and may often have

decided erroneously. But I do claim for myarguments all the weight and influence ofwhich they may be deemed worthy, afteran attentive and unprejudicedexamination. To those who may at first beready--because I do not agree with alltheir preconceived opinions--to doubt ordeny my conclusions, I would say, in thelanguage of Themistocles, "Strike, but hearme."

Whatever may be the verdict passed uponmy labors by my Brethren, I trust that someclemency will be extended to the errorsinto which I may have fallen, for the sake ofthe object which I have had in view: that,namely, of presenting to the Craft anelementary work, that might enable everyMason to know his rights, and to learn hisduties.

The intention was, undoubtedly, a good

one. How it has been executed, it is not forme, but for the masonic public todetermine.

Albert G. Mackey.

Charleston, S.C., January 1st., 1856.

Introduction.

The Authorities for Masonic Law.

The laws which govern the institution ofFreemasonry are of two kinds, _unwritten_and _written,_ and may in a manner becompared with the "lex non scripta," orcommon law, and the "lex seripta," orstatute law of English and American jurists.

The "lex non scripta," or _unwritten law_ ofFreemasonry is derived from thetraditions, usages and customs of thefraternity as they have existed from theremotest antiquity, and as they areuniversally admitted by the generalconsent of the members of the Order. Infact, we may apply to these unwritten lawsof Masonry the definition given byBlackstone of the "leges non script� of theEnglish constitution--that "their originalinstitution and authority are not set downin writing, as acts of parliament are, butthey receive their binding power, and theforce of laws, by long and immemorial

usage and by their universal receptionthroughout the kingdom." When, in thecourse of this work, I refer to theseunwritten laws as authority upon any point,I shall do so under the appropriatedesignation of "ancient usage."

The "lex scripta," or written law ofMasonry, is derived from a variety ofsources, and was framed at differentperiods. The following documents I deemof sufficient authority to substantiate anyprinciple, or to determine any disputedquestion in masonic law.

1. The "Ancient Masonic charges, from amanuscript of the Lodge of Antiquity," andsaid to have been written in the reign ofJames II.[1]

2. The regulations adopted at the GeneralAssembly held in 1663, of which the Earl of

St. Albans was Grand Master.[2]

3. The interrogatories propounded to theMaster of a lodge at the time of hisinstallation, and which, from theiruniversal adoption, without alteration, bythe whole fraternity, are undoubtedly to beconsidered as a part of the fundamentallaw of Masonry.

4. "The Charges of a Freemason, extractedfrom the Ancient Records of Lodgesbeyond sea, and of those in England,Scotland, and Ireland, for the use of theLodges in London," printed in the firstedition of the Book of Constitutions, and tobe found from p. 49 to p. 56 of thatwork.[3]

5. The thirty-nine "General Regulations,"adopted "at the annual assembly and feastheld at Stationers' hall on St. John the

Baptist's day, 1721," and which werepublished in the first edition of the Book ofConstitutions, p. 58 to p.

6. The subsequent regulations adopted atvarious annual communications by theGrand Lodge of England, up to the year1769, and published in different editions ofthe Book of Constitutions. These, althoughnot of such paramount importance anduniversal acceptation as the Old Chargesand the Thirty-nine Regulations, are,nevertheless, of great value as the meansof settling many disputed questions, byshowing what was the law and usage of thefraternity at the times in which they wereadopted.

Soon after the publication of the edition of1769 of the Book of Constitutions, theGrand Lodges of America began toseparate from their English parent and to

organize independent jurisdictions. Fromthat period, the regulations adopted by theGrand Lodge of England ceased to haveany binding efficacy over the craft in thiscountry, while the laws passed by theAmerican Grand Lodges lost the characterof general regulations, and were investedonly with local authority in their severaljurisdictions.

Before concluding this introductorysection, it may be deemed necessary thatsomething should be said of the "AncientLandmarks of the Order," to whichreference is so often made.

Various definitions have been given of thelandmarks. Some suppose them to beconstituted of all the rules and regulationswhich were in existence anterior to therevival of Masonry in 1717, and whichwere confirmed and adopted by the Grand

Lodge of England at that time. Others,more stringent in their definition, restrictthem to the modes of recognition in useamong the fraternity. I am disposed toadopt a middle course, and to define theLandmarks of Masonry to be, all thoseusages and customs of the craft--whetherritual or legislative--whether they relate toforms and ceremonies, or to theorganization of the society--which haveexisted from time immemorial, and thealteration or abolition of which wouldmaterially affect the distinctive characterof the institution or destroy its identity.Thus, for example, among the legislativelandmarks, I would enumerate the office ofGrand Master as the presiding officer overthe craft, and among the ritual landmarks,the legend of the third degree. But thelaws, enacted from time to time by GrandLodges for their local government, nomatter how old they may be, do not

constitute landmarks, and may, at anytime, be altered or expunged, since the39th regulation declares expressly that"every annual Grand Lodge has aninherent power and authority to make newregulations or to alter these (viz., thethirty-nine articles) for the real benefit ofthis ancient fraternity, provided alwaysthat the old landmarks be carefullypreserved."

Book First

The Law of Grand Lodges.

It is proposed in this Book, first to presentthe reader with a brief historical sketch ofthe rise and progress of the system ofGrand Lodges; and then to explain, in thesubsequent sections, the mode in whichsuch bodies are originally organized, whoconstitute their officers and members, andwhat are their acknowledgedprerogatives.

Chapter I.

Historical Sketch.

Grand Lodges under their presentorganization, are, in respect to theantiquity of the Order, of a comparativelymodern date. We hear of no such bodies inthe earlier ages of the institution. Traditioninforms us, that originally it was governedby the despotic authority of a few chiefs. Atthe building of the temple, we have reasonto believe that King Solomon exercised anunlimited and irresponsible control overthe craft, although a tradition (not,however, of undoubted authority) says thathe was assisted in his government by thecounsel of twelve superintendants,selected from the twelve tribes of Israel.But we know too little, from authenticmaterials, of the precise system adopted at

that remote period, to enable us to makeany historical deductions on the subject.

The first historical notice that we have ofthe formation of a supreme controllingbody of the fraternity, is in the "GothicConstitutions"[4] which assert that, in theyear 287, St. Alban, the protomartyr ofEngland, who was a zealous patron of thecraft, obtained from Carausius, the BritishEmperor, "a charter for the Masons to holda general council, and gave it the name ofassembly." The record further states, thatSt. Alban attended the meeting andassisted in making Masons, giving them"good charges and regulations." We knownot, however, whether this assembly evermet again; and if it did, for how manyyears it continued to exist. The subsequenthistory of Freemasonry is entirely silent onthe subject.

The next general assemblage of the craft,of which the records of Freemasonryinform us, was that convened in 926, at thecity of York, in England, by Prince Edwin,the brother of King Athelstane, and thegrandson of Alfred the Great. This, we say,was the next general assemblage, becausethe Ashmole manuscript, which wasdestroyed at the revival of Freemasonry in1717, is said to have stated that, at thattime, the Prince obtained from his brother,the king, a permission for the craft "to holda yearly communication and a generalassembly." The fact that such a power ofmeeting was then granted, is conclusivethat it did not before exist: and wouldseem to prove that the assemblies of thecraft, authorised by the charter ofCarausius, had long since ceased to beheld. This yearly communication did not,however, constitute, at least in the sensewe now understand it, a Grand Lodge. The

name given to it was that of the "GeneralAssembly of Masons." It was not restricted,as now, to the Masters and Wardens of thesubordinate lodges, acting in the capacityof delegates or representatives, but wascomposed, as Preston has observed, of asmany of the fraternity at large as, beingwithin a convenient distance, could attendonce or twice a year, under the auspices ofone general head, who was elected andinstalled at one of these meetings, andwho, for the time being, received homageas the governor of the whole body. AnyBrethren who were competent todischarge the duty, were allowed, by theregulations of the Order, to open and holdlodges at their discretion, at such timesand places as were most convenient tothem, and without the necessity of what wenow call a Warrant of Constitution, andthen and there to initiate members into theOrder.[5] To the General Assembly,

however, all the craft, without distinction,were permitted to repair; each Masonpresent was entitled to take part in thedeliberations, and the rules andregulations enacted were the result of thevotes of the whole body. The GeneralAssembly was, in fact, precisely similar tothose political congregations which, in ourmodern phraseology, we term "massmeetings."

These annual mass meetings or GeneralAssemblies continued to be held, for manycenturies after their first establishment, atthe city of York, and were, during all thatperiod, the supreme judicatory of thefraternity. There are frequent references tothe annual assemblies of Freemasons inpublic documents. The preamble to an actpassed in 1425, during the reign of HenryVI., just five centuries after the meeting atYork, states that, "by the _yearly

congregations_ and confederacies madeby the Masons in their _generalassemblies, _ the good course and effect ofthe statute of laborers were openlyviolated and broken." This act whichforbade such meetings, was, however,never put in force; for an old record,quoted in the Book of Constitutions, speaksof the Brotherhood having frequented this"mutual assembly," in 1434, in the reign ofthe same king. We have another record ofthe General Assembly, which was held inYork on the 27th December, 1561, whenQueen Elizabeth, who was suspicious oftheir secrecy, sent an armed force todissolve the meeting. A copy is stillpreserved of the regulations which wereadopted by a similar assembly held in1663, on the festival of St. John theEvangelist; and in these regulations it isdeclared that the private lodges shall givean account of all their acceptations made

during the year to the General Assembly.Another regulation, however, adopted atthe same time, still more explicitlyacknowledges the existence of a GeneralAssembly as the governing body of thefraternity. It is there provided, "that for thefuture, the said fraternity of Freemasonsshall be regulated and governed by oneGrand Master and as many Wardens as thesaid society shall think fit to appoint atevery Annual General Assembly."

And thus the interests of the institutioncontinued, until the beginning of theeighteenth century, or for nearly eighthundred years, to be entrusted to thoseGeneral Assemblies of the fraternity, who,without distinction of rank or office,annually met at York to legislate for thegovernment of the craft.

But in 1717, a new organization of the

governing head was adopted, which gavebirth to the establishment of a GrandLodge, in the form in which these bodiesnow exist. So important a period in thehistory of Masonry demands our specialattention.

After the death, in 1702, of King William,who was himself a Mason, and a greatpatron of the craft, the institution began tolanguish, the lodges decreased in number,and the General Assembly was entirelyneglected for many years. A few oldlodges continued, it is true, to meetregularly, but they consisted of only a fewmembers.

At length, on the accession of George I.,the Masons of London and its vicinitydetermined to revive the annualcommunications of the society. There wereat that time only four lodges in the south of

England, and the members of these, withseveral old Brethren, met in February,1717, at the Apple Tree Tavern, in Charlesstreet, Covent Garden, and organized byputting the oldest Master Mason, who wasthe Master of a lodge, in the chair; theythen constituted themselves into whatAnderson calls, "a Grand Lodge _protempore;"_ resolved to hold the annualassembly and feast, and then to choose aGrand Master.

Accordingly, on the 24th of June, 1717, theassembly and feast were held; and theoldest Master of a lodge being in the chair,a list of candidates was presented, out ofwhich Mr. Anthony Sayer was electedGrand Master, and Capt. Joseph Elliott andMr. Jacob Lamball, Grand Wardens.

The Grand Master then commanded theMasters and Wardens of lodges to meet

the Grand Officers every quarter, incommunication, at the place he shouldappoint in his summons sent by the Tiler.

This was, then, undoubtedly, thecommencement of that organization of theMasters and Wardens of lodges into aGrand Lodge, which has ever sincecontinued to exist.

The fraternity at large, however, stillcontinued to claim the right of beingpresent at the annual assembly; and, infact, at that meeting, their punctualattendance at the next annual assemblyand feast was recommended.

At the same meeting, it was resolved "thatthe privilege of assembling as Masons,which had been hitherto unlimited, shouldbe vested in certain lodges or assembliesof Masons convened in certain places; and

that every lodge to be hereafter convened,except the four old lodges at this timeexisting, should be legally authorized toact by a warrant from the Grand Master forthe time being, granted to certainindividuals by petition, with the consentand approbation of the Grand Lodge incommunication; and that, without suchwarrant, no lodge should be hereafterdeemed regular or constitutional."

In consequence of this regulation, severalnew lodges received Warrants ofConstitution, and their Masters andWardens were ordered to attend thecommunications of the Grand Lodge. TheBrethren at large vested all their privilegesin the four old lodges, in trust that theywould never suffer the old charges andlandmarks to be infringed; and the oldlodges, in return, agreed that the Mastersand Wardens of every new lodge that

might be constituted, should be permittedto share with them all the privileges of theGrand Lodge, except precedence of rank.The Brethren, says Preston, consideredtheir further attendance at the meetings ofthe society unnecessary after theseregulations were adopted; and thereforetrusted implicitly to their Masters andWardens for the government of the craft;and thenceforward the Grand Lodge hasbeen composed of all the Masters andWardens of the subordinate lodges whichconstitute the jurisdiction.

The ancient right of the craft, however, totake a part in the proceedings of the GrandLodge or Annual Assembly, was fullyacknowledged by a new regulation,adopted about the same time, in which it isdeclared that all alterations of theConstitutions must be proposed andagreed to, at the third quarterly

communication preceding the annualfeast, and be offered also to the perusal of_all_ the Brethren before dinner, _even ofthe youngest Entered Apprentice_[6]

This regulation has, however, (I know notby what right,) become obsolete, and theAnnual Assembly of Masons has longceased to be held; the Grand Lodgeshaving, since the beginning of theeighteenth century, assumed the form andorganization which they still preserve, asstrictly representative bodies.

Chapter II.

Of the Mode of Organizing Grand Lodges.

The topic to be discussed in this section is,the answer to the question, How shall aGrand Lodge be established in any stateor country where such a body has notpreviously existed, but where there aresubordinate lodges working underWarrants derived from Grand Lodges inother states? In answering this question, itseems proper that I should advert to thecourse pursued by the original GrandLodge of England, at its establishment in1717, as from that body nearly all theGrand Lodges of the York rite now inexistence derive their authority, eitherdirectly or indirectly, and the mode of itsorganization has, therefore, universallybeen admitted to have been regular andlegitimate.

In the first place, it is essentially requisitethat the active existence of subordinatelodges in a state should precede the

formation of a Grand Lodge; for the formerare the only legitimate sources of thelatter. A mass meeting of Masons cannotassemble and organize a Grand Lodge. Acertain number of lodges, holding legalwarrants from a Grand Lodge or fromdifferent Grand Lodges, must meet bytheir representatives and proceed to theformation of a Grand Lodge. When thatprocess has been accomplished, thesubordinate lodges return the warrants,under which they had theretofore worked,to the Grand Lodges from which they hadoriginally received them, and take newones from the body which they haveformed.

That a mass meeting of the fraternity of anystate is incompetent to organize a GrandLodge has been definitively settled--notonly by general usage, but by the expressaction of the Grand Lodges of the United

States which refused to recognize, in 1842,the Grand Lodge of Michigan which hadbeen thus irregularly established in thepreceding year. That unrecognized bodywas then dissolved by the Brethren ofMichigan, who proceeded to establish foursubordinate lodges under Warrantsgranted by the Grand Lodge of New York.These four lodges subsequently met inconvention and organized the presentGrand Lodge of Michigan in a regularmanner.

It seems, however, to have been settled inthe case of Vermont, that where a GrandLodge has been dormant for many years,and all of its subordinates extinct, yet ifany of the Grand Officers, last elected,survive and are present, they may revivethe Grand Lodge and proceedconstitutionally to the exercise of itsprerogatives.

The next inquiry is, as to the number oflodges required to organize a new GrandLodge. Dalcho says that _five_ lodges arenecessary; and in this opinion he issupported by the Ahiman Rezon ofPennsylvania, published in 1783 byWilliam Smith, D.D., at that time the GrandSecretary of that jurisdiction, and also bysome other authorities. But no suchregulation is to be found in the Book ofConstitutions, which is now admitted tocontain the fundamental law of theinstitution. Indeed, its adoption wouldhave been a condemnation of the legalityof the Mother Grand Lodge of England,which was formed in 1717 by the union ofonly _four_ lodges. The rule, however, isto be found in the Ahiman Rezon ofLaurence Dermott, which was adopted bythe "Grand Lodge of Ancient Freemasons,"that seceded from the lawful Grand Lodge

in 1738. But as that body was undoubtedly,under our present views of masonic law,schismatic and illegal, its regulations havenever been considered by masonic writersas being possessed of any authority.

In the absence of any written law upon thesubject, we are compelled to look toprecedent for authority; and, although theGrand Lodges in the United States haveseldom been established with arepresentation of less than four lodges, thefact that that of Texas was organized in1837 by the representatives of only_three_ lodges, and that the Grand Lodgethus instituted was at once recognized aslegal and regular by all its sister GrandLodges, seems to settle the question thatthree subordinates are sufficient toinstitute a Grand Lodge.

Three lodges, therefore, in any territory

where a Grand Lodge does not alreadyexist, may unite in convention andorganize a Grand Lodge. It will then benecessary, that these lodges shouldsurrender the warrants under which theyhad been previously working, and take outnew warrants from the Grand Lodge whichthey have constituted; and, from that timeforth, all masonic authority is vested in theGrand Lodge thus formed.

The Grand Lodge having been thusconstituted, the next inquiries that suggestthemselves are as to its members and itsofficers, each of which questions willoccupy a distinct discussion.

Chapter III.

Of the Members of a Grand Lodge.

It is an indisputable fact that the "GeneralAssembly" which met at York in 926 wascomposed of all the members of thefraternity who chose to repair to it; and it isequally certain that, at the first GrandLodge, held in 1717, after the revival ofMasonry, all the craft who were presentexercised the right of membership invoting for Grand Officers,[7] and must,therefore, have been considered membersof the Grand Lodge. The right does not,however, appear to have been afterwardsclaimed. At this very assembly, the GrandMaster who had been elected, summonedonly the Master and Wardens of the lodgesto meet him in the quarterlycommunications; and Preston distinctlystates, that soon after, the Brethren of thefour old lodges, which had constituted theGrand Lodge, considered their attendanceon the future communications of thesociety unnecessary, and therefore

concurred with the lodges which had beensubsequently warranted in delegating thepower of representation to their Mastersand Wardens, "resting satisfied that nomeasure of importance would be adoptedwithout their approbation."

Any doubts upon the subject were,however, soon put at rest by the enactmentof a positive law. In 1721, thirty-ninearticles for the future government of thecraft were approved and confirmed, thetwelfth of which was in the followingwords:

"The Grand Lodge consists of, and isformed by, the Masters and Wardens of allthe regular particular lodges upon record,with the Grand Master at their head, andhis Deputy on his left hand, and the GrandWardens in their proper places."

From time to time, the number of theseconstituents of a Grand Lodge wereincreased by the extension of thequalifications for membership. Thus, in1724, Past Grand Masters, and in 1725,Past Deputy Grand Masters, were admittedas members of the Grand Lodge. Finally itwas decreed that the Grand Lodge shouldconsist of the four present and all pastgrand officers; the Grand Treasurer,Secretary, and Sword-Bearer; the Master,Wardens, and nine assistants of the GrandStewards' lodge, and the Masters andWardens of all the regular lodges.

Past Masters were not at first admitted asmembers of the Grand Lodge. There is norecognition of them in the oldConstitutions. Walworth thinks it must havebeen after 1772 that they wereintroduced.[8] I have extended myresearches to some years beyond that

period, without any success in finding theirrecognition as members under theConstitution of England. It is true that, in1772, Dermott prefixed a note to hisedition of the Ahiman Rezon, in which heasserts that "Past Masters of warrantedlodges on record are allowed thisprivilege (of membership) whilst theycontinue to be members of any regularlodge." And it is, doubtless, on thisimperfect authority, that the Grand Lodgesof America began at so early a period toadmit their Past Masters to seats in theGrand Lodge. In the authorized Book ofConstitutions, we find no such provision.Indeed, Preston records that in 1808, at thelaying of the foundation-stone of theCovent Garden Theatre, by the Prince ofWales, as Grand Master, "the Grand Lodgewas opened by Charles Marsh, Esq.,attended by the _Masters and Wardens_ ofall the regular lodges;" and, throughout

the description of the ceremonies, nonotice is taken of Past Masters as formingany part of the Grand Lodge. The firstnotice that we have been enabled toobtain of Past Masters, as forming any partof the Grand Lodge of England, is in the"Articles of Union between the two GrandLodges of England," adopted in 1813,which declare that the Grand Lodge shallconsist of the Grand and Past GrandOfficers, of the actual Masters andWardens of all the warranted lodges, andof the "Past Masters of Lodges who haveregularly served and passed the chairbefore the day of Union, and whocontinued, without secession, regularcontributing members of a warrantedlodge." But it is provided, that after thedecease of all these ancient Past Masters,the representation of every lodge shallconsist of its Master and Wardens, and onePast Master only. There is, I presume, no

doubt that, from 1772, Past Masters hadheld a seat in the Athol Grand Lodge ofAncient Masons, and that they did not inthe original Grand Lodge, is, I believe, afact equally indisputable. By the presentconstitutions of the United Grand Lodge ofEngland, Past Masters are members of theGrand Lodge, while they continuesubscribing members of a private lodge.In some of the Grand Lodges of the UnitedStates, Past Masters have been permittedto retain their membership, while inothers, they have been disfranchised.

On the whole, the result of this inquiryseems to be, that Past Masters have noinherent right, derived from the ancientlandmarks, to a seat in the Grand Lodge;but as every Grand Lodge has the power,within certain limits, to make regulationsfor its own government, it may or may notadmit them to membership, according to

its own notion of expediency.

Some of the Grand Lodges have not onlydisfranchised Past Masters but Wardensalso, and restricted membership only toacting Masters. This innovation has arisenfrom the fact that the payment of mileageand expenses to three representativewould entail a heavy burden on therevenue of the Grand Lodge. The reasonmay have been imperative; but in thepractice, pecuniary expediency has beenmade to override an ancient usage.

In determining, then, who are theconstitutional members of a Grand Lodge,deriving their membership from inherentright, I should say that they are the Mastersand Wardens of all regular lodges in thejurisdiction, with the Grand Officerschosen by them. All others, who by localregulations are made members, are so

only by courtesy, and not by prescriptionor ancient law.

Chapter IV.

Of the Officers of a Grand Lodge.

The officers of a Grand Lodge may bedivided into two classes, _essential_ and_accidental_, or, as they are more usuallycalled, _Grand_ and _Subordinate_. Theformer of these classes are, as the nameimports, essential to the composition of aGrand Lodge, and are to be found in everyjurisdiction, having existed from theearliest times. They are the Grand andDeputy Grand Masters, the GrandWardens, Grand Treasurer, and GrandSecretary. The Grand Chaplain is alsoenumerated among the Grand Officers,but the office is of comparatively moderndate.

The subordinate officers of a Grand Lodgeconsist of the Deacons, Marshal,Pursuivant, or Sword-Bearer, Stewards,and others, whose titles and duties vary indifferent jurisdictions. I shall devote aseparate section to the consideration of the

duties of each and prerogatives of theseofficers.

Section I.

_Of the Grand Master._

The office of Grand Master of Masons hasexisted from the very origin of theinstitution; for it has always beennecessary that the fraternity should have apresiding head. There have been periodsin the history of the institution whenneither Deputies nor Grand Wardens arementioned, but there is no time in itsexistence when it was without a GrandMaster; and hence Preston, while speakingof that remote era in which the fraternitywas governed by a General Assembly,says that this General Assembly or GrandLodge "was not then restricted, as it is nowunderstood to be, to the Masters andWardens of private lodges, with the GrandMaster and his Wardens at their head; it

consisted of as many of the Fraternity _atlarge_ as, being within a convenientdistance, could attend, once or twice in ayear, under the auspices of one generalhead, who was elected and installed at oneof these meetings; and who for the timebeing received homage as the solegovernor of the whole body."[9] The officeis one of great honour as well as power,and has generally been conferred uponsome individual distinguished by aninfluential position in society; so that hisrank and character might reflect creditupon the craft.[10]

The Grand Mastership is an elective office,the election being annual andaccompanied with impressive ceremoniesof proclamation and homage made to himby the whole craft. Uniform usage, as wellas the explicit declaration of the GeneralRegulations,[11] seems to require that he

should be installed by the last GrandMaster. But in his absence the Deputy orsome Past Grand Master may exercise thefunctions of installation or investiture. Inthe organization of a new Grand Lodge,ancient precedent and the necessity of thething will authorize the performance of theinstallation by the Master of the oldestlodge present, who, however, exercises,_pro hac vice_, the prerogatives andassumes the place of a Grand Master.

The Grand Master possesses a greatvariety of prerogatives, some of which arederived from the "lex non scripta," orancient usage; and others from the writtenor statute law of Masonry.[12]

I. He has the right to convene the GrandLodge whenever he pleases, and topreside over its deliberation. In thedecision of all questions by the Grand

Lodge he is entitled to two votes. This is aprivilege secured to him by Article XII. ofthe General Regulations.

It seems now to be settled, by ancientusage as well as the expressed opinion ofthe generality of Grand Lodges and ofmasonic writers, that there is no appealfrom his decision. In June, 1849, the GrandMaster of New York, Bro. Williard,declared an appeal to be out of order andrefused to submit it to the Grand Lodge.The proceedings on that eventful occasionhave been freely discussed by the GrandLodges of the United States, and none ofthem have condemned the act of theGrand Master, while several havesustained it in express terms. "An appeal,"say the Committee of Correspondence ofMaryland, "from the decision of the GrandMaster is an anomaly at war with everyprinciple of Freemasonry, and as such, not

for a moment to be tolerated orcountenanced."[13] This opinion is alsosustained by the Committee of the GrandLodge of Florida in the year 1851, and atvarious times by other Grand Lodges. Onthe other hand, several Grand Lodgeshave made decisions adverse to thisprerogative, and the present regulations ofthe Grand Lodge of England seem, by afair interpretation of their phraseology, toadmit of an appeal from the Grand Master.Still the general opinion of the craft in thiscountry appears to sustain the doctrine,that no appeal can be made from thedecision of that officer. And this doctrinehas derived much support in the way ofanalogy from the report adopted by theGeneral Grand Chapter of the UnitedStates, declaring that no appeal could liefrom the decision of the presiding officerof any Royal Arch body.

Since we have enunciated this doctrine asmasonic law, the question next arises, inwhat manner shall the Grand Master bepunished, should he abuse his greatprerogative? The answer to this questionadmits of no doubt. It is to be found in aregulation, adopted in 1721, by the GrandLodge of England, and is in thesewords:--"If the Grand Master should abusehis great power, and render himselfunworthy of the obedience and submissionof the Lodges, he shall be treated in a wayand manner to be agreed upon in a newregulation." But the same series ofregulations very explicitly prescribe, howthis new regulation is to be made; namely,it is to be "proposed and agreed to at thethird quarterly communication precedingthe annual Grand Feast, and offered to theperusal of all the Brethren before dinner,in writing, even of the youngest enteredapprentice; the approbation and consent

of the majority of all the Brethren presentbeing absolutely necessary, to make thesame binding and obligatory."[14] Thismode of making a new regulation isexplicitly and positively prescribed--it canbe done in no other way--and those whoaccept the old regulations as the law ofMasonry, must accept this provision withthem. This will, in the present organizationof many Grand Lodges, render it almostimpracticable to make such a newregulation, in which case the Grand Mastermust remain exempt from otherpunishment for his misdeeds, than thatwhich arises from his own conscience, andthe loss of his Brethren's regard andesteem.

II. The power of granting dispensations isone of the most important prerogatives ofthe Grand Master. A dispensation may bedefined to be an exemption from the

observance of some law or theperformance of some duty. In Masonry, noone has the authority to grant thisexemption, except the Grand Master; and,although the exercise of it is limited withinthe observance of the ancient landmarks,the operation of the prerogative is stillvery extensive. The dispensing power maybe exercised under the followingcircumstances:

1. The fourth old Regulation prescribesthat "no lodge shall make more than fivenew Brothers at one and the same timewithout an urgent necessity."[15] But of thisnecessity the Grand Master may judge,and, on good and sufficient reason beingshown, he may grant a dispensationenabling any lodge to suspend thisregulation and make more than five newBrothers.

2. The next regulation prescribes "that noone can be accepted a member of aparticular lodge without previous notice,one month before given to the lodge, inorder to make due inquiry into thereputation and capacity of the candidate."But here, also, it is held that, in a suitablecase of emergency, the Grand Master mayexercise his prerogative and dispensewith this probation of one month,permitting the candidate to be made onthe night of his application.

3. If a lodge should have omitted for anycauses to elect its officers or any of themon the constitutional night of election, or ifany officer so elected shall have died,been deposed or removed from thejurisdiction subsequent to his election, theGrand Master may issue a dispensationempowering the lodge to proceed to anelection or to fill the vacancy at any other

specified communication; but he cannotgrant a dispensation to elect a new masterin consequence of the death or removal ofthe old one, while the two Wardens oreither of them remain--because theWardens succeed by inherent right and inorder of seniority to the vacant mastership.And, indeed, it is held that while one of thethree officers remains, no election can beheld, even by dispensation, to fill the othertwo places, though vacancies in them mayhave occurred by death or removal.

4. The Grand Master may grant adispensation empowering a lodge to electa Master from among the members on thefloor; but this must be done only whenevery Past Master, Warden, and PastWarden of the lodge has refused toserve,[16] because ordinarily a requisitequalification for the Mastership is, that thecandidate shall, previously, have served in

the office of Warden.

5. In the year 1723 a regulation wasadopted, prescribing "that no Brothershould belong to more than one lodgewithin the bills of mortality." Interpretingthe last expression to mean threemiles--which is now supposed to be thegeographical limit of a lodge's jurisdiction,this regulation may still be considered as apart of the law of Masonry; but in someGrand Lodges, as that of South Carolina,for instance, the Grand Master willsometimes exercise his prerogative, and,dispensing with this regulation, permit aBrother to belong to two lodges, althoughthey may be within three miles of eachother.

6. But the most important power of theGrand Master connected with hisdispensing prerogative is, that of

constituting new lodges. It has alreadybeen remarked that, anciently, a warrantwas not required for the formation of alodge, but that a sufficient number ofMasons, met together within a certain limit,were empowered, with the consent of thesheriff or chief magistrate of the place, tomake Masons and practice the rites ofMasonry, without such warrant ofConstitution. But, in the year 1717, it wasadopted as a regulation, that every lodge,to be thereafter convened, should beauthorised to act by a warrant from theGrand Master for the time being, grantedto certain persons by petition, with theconsent and approbation of the GrandLodge in communication. Ever since thattime, no lodge has been considered aslegally established, unless it has beenconstituted by the authority of the GrandMaster. In the English Constitutions, theinstrument thus empowering a lodge to

meet, is called, when granted by theGrand Master, a Warrant of Constitution. Itis granted by the Grand Master and not bythe Grand Lodge. It appears to be a finalinstrument, notwithstanding the provisionenacted in 1717, requiring the consent andapprobation of the Grand Lodge; for in theConstitution of the United Grand Lodge ofEngland, there is no allusion whatever tothis consent and approbation.

But in this country, the process issomewhat different, and the Grand Masteris deprived of a portion of his prerogative.Here, the instrument granted by the GrandMaster is called a Dispensation. The lodgereceiving it is not admitted into theregister of lodges, nor is it considered aspossessing any of the rights and privilegesof a lodge, except that of making Masons,until a Warrant of Constitution is grantedby the Grand Lodge. The ancient

prerogative of the Grand Master is,however, preserved in the fact, that after alodge has been thus warranted by theGrand Lodge, the ceremony of constitutingit, which embraces its consecration andthe installation of its officers, can only beperformed by the Grand Master in person,or by his special Deputy appointed for thatpurpose.[17]

III. The third prerogative of the GrandMaster is that of visitation. He has a right tovisit any lodge within his jurisdiction atsuch times as he pleases, and when thereto preside; and it is the duty of the Masterto offer him the chair and his gavel, whichthe Grand Master may decline or accept athis pleasure. This prerogative admits of noquestion, as it is distinctly declared in thefirst of the Thirty-nine Regulations,adopted in 1721, in the following words:--

"The Grand Master or Deputy has fullauthority and right, not only to be present,but to preside in every lodge, with theMaster of the lodge on his left hand, and toorder his Grand Wardens to attend him,who are not to act as Wardens of particularlodges, but in his presence and at hiscommand; for the Grand Master, while in aparticular lodge, may command theWardens of that lodge, or any other MasterMasons, to act as his Wardens, _protempore_."

But in a subsequent regulation it wasprovided, that as the Grand Master cannotdeprive the Grand Wardens of that officewithout the consent of the Grand Lodge, heshould appoint no other persons to act asWardens in his visitation to a privatelodge, unless the Grand Wardens wereabsent. This whole regulation is still inexistence.

The question has been lately mooted,whether, if the Grand Master declines topreside, he does not thereby place himselfin the position of a private Brother, andbecome subject, as all the others present,to the control of the Worshipful Master. Ianswer, that of course he becomes subjectto and must of necessity respect thoserules of order and decorum which areobligatory on all good men and Masons;but that he cannot, by the exercise of anact of courtesy in declining to preside,divest himself of his prerogative, which,moreover, he may at any time during theevening assume, and demand the gavel.The Grand Master of Masons can, under nocircumstances, become subject to thedecrees and orders of the Master of aparticular lodge.

IV. Another prerogative of the Grand

Master is that of appointment; which,however, in this country, has been muchdiminished. According to the oldregulations, and the custom is stillcontinued in the Constitutions of the GrandLodge of England, the Grand Master hasthe right of appointing his Deputy andWardens. In the United States, the officehas been shorn of this high prerogative,and these Officers are elected by theGrand Lodge. The Deputy, however, is stillappointed by the Grand Master, in some ofthe States, as Massachusetts, NorthCarolina, Wisconsin, and Texas. Theappointment of the principal subordinateofficers, is also given to the Grand Masterby the American Grand Lodges.

V. The last and most extraordinary powerof the Grand Master, is that of _makingMasons at sight_.

The power to "make Masons at sight" is atechnical term, which may be defined tobe the power to initiate, pass, and raisecandidates by the Grand Master, in alodge of emergency, or as it is called inthe Book of Constitutions, "an occasionallodge," especially convened by him, andconsisting of such Master Masons as hemay call together for that purposeonly--the lodge ceasing to exist as soon asthe initiation, passing, or raising, has beenaccomplished and the Brethren have beendismissed by the Grand Master.

Whether such a power is vested in theGrand Master, is a question that, within thelast few years, has been agitated withmuch warmth, by some of the GrandLodges of this country; but I am not awarethat, until very lately, the prerogative wasever disputed.[18]

In the Book of Constitutions, however,several instances are furnished of theexercise of this right by various GrandMasters.

In 1731, Lord Lovel being Grand Master,he "formed an occasional lodge atHoughton Hall, Sir Robert Walpole's Housein Norfolk," and there made the Duke ofLorraine, afterwards Emperor of Germany,and the Duke of Newcastle, MasterMasons.[19]

I do not quote the case of the initiation,passing, and raising of Frederick, Prince ofWales, in 1737, which was done in "anoccasional lodge," over which Dr.Desaguliers presided,[20] because asDesaguliers was not the Grand Master, noreven, as has been incorrectly stated by theNew York Committee of Correspondence,Deputy Grand Master, but only a Past

Grand Master, it cannot be called _amaking at sight_. He most probably actedunder the dispensation of the GrandMaster, who at that time was the Earl ofDarnley.

But in 1766, Lord Blaney, who was thenGrand Master, convened "an occasionallodge" and initiated, passed, and raisedthe Duke of Gloucester.[21]

Again in 1767, John Salter, the Deputy,then acting as Grand Master, convened "anoccasional lodge," and conferred the threedegrees on the Duke of Cumberland.[22]

In 1787, the Prince of Wales was made aMason "at an occasional lodge, convened,"says Preston, "for the purpose, at the Starand Garter, Pall Mall, over which the Dukeof Cumberland, (Grand Master) presidedin person."[23]

But it is unnecessary to multiply instancesof the right, exercised by former GrandMasters, of congregating occasionallodges, and making Masons at sight. It hasbeen said, however, by the oppugners ofthis prerogative, that these "occasionallodges" were only special communicationsof the Grand Lodge, and the "makings" arethus supposed to have taken place underthe authority of that body, and not of theGrand Master. The facts, however, do notsustain this position. Throughout the Bookof Constitutions, other meetings, whetherregular or special, are distinctly recordedas meetings of the Grand Lodge, whilethese "occasional lodges" appear only tohave been convened by the Grand Master,for the purpose of making Masons.Besides, in many instances, the lodge washeld at a different place from that of theGrand Lodge, and the officers were not,

with the exception of the Grand Master,the officers of the Grand Lodge. Thus theoccasional lodge, which initiated the Dukeof Lorraine, was held at the residence ofSir Robert Walpole, in Norfolk, while theGrand Lodge always met in London. In1766, the Grand Lodge held itscommunications at the Crown and Anchor;but the occasional lodge, which, in thesame year, conferred the degrees on theDuke of Gloucester, was convened at theHorn Tavern. In the following year, thelodge which initiated the Duke ofCumberland was convened at theThatched House Tavern, the Grand Lodgecontinuing to meet at the Crown andAnchor.

This may be considered very conclusiveevidence of the existence of theprerogative of the Grand Master, which weare now discussing, but the argument

_�fortiori_, drawn from his dispensingpower, will tend to confirm the doctrine.

No one doubts or denies the power of theGrand Master to constitute new lodges bydispensation. In 1741, the Grand Lodge ofEngland forgot it for a moment, andadopted a new regulation, that no newlodge should be constituted until theconsent of the Grand Lodge had been firstobtained, "But this order, afterwardsappearing," says the Book ofConstitutions,[24] "to be an infringementon the prerogative of the Grand Master,and to be attended with manyinconveniences and with damage to thecraft, was repealed."

It is, then, an undoubted prerogative of theGrand Master to constitute lodges bydispensation, and in these lodges, soconstituted, Masons may be legally

entered, passed, and raised. This is doneevery day. Seven Master Masons, applyingto the Grand Master, he grants them adispensation, under authority of whichthey proceed to open and hold a lodge,and to make Masons. This lodge is,however, admitted to be the mere creatureof the Grand Master, for it is in his power,at any time, to revoke the dispensation hehad granted, and thus to dissolve thelodge.

But, if the Grand Master has the power thusto enable others to confer the degrees andmake Masons by his individual authorityout of his presence, are we not permittedto argue _�fortiori_ that he has also theright of congregating seven Brethren andcausing a Mason, to be made in his sight?Can he delegate a power to others whichhe does not himself possess? And is hiscalling together "an occasional lodge," and

making, with the assistance of the Brethrenthus assembled, a Mason "at sight," that isto say, in his presence, anything more orless than the exercise of his dispensingpower, for the establishment of a lodgeunder dispensation, for a temporaryperiod, and for a special purpose. Thepurpose having been effected, and theMason having been made, he revokes hisdispensation, and the lodge is dismissed.If we assumed any other ground than this,we should be compelled to say, thatthough the Grand Master might authoriseothers to make Masons, when he wasabsent, as in the usual case of lodgesunder dispensation yet the instant that heattempted to convey the same powers tobe exercised in his presence, and underhis personal supervision, his authoritywould cease. This course of reasoningwould necessarily lead to a contradictionin terms, if not to an actual absurdity.

It is proper to state, in conclusion, that theviews here set forth are not entertained bythe very able Committee of ForeignCorrespondence of the Grand Lodge ofFlorida, who only admit the power of theGrand Master to make Masons in theGrand Lodge. On the other hand, theGrand Lodge of Wisconsin, at its lastcommunication, adopted a report,asserting "that the Grand Master has theright to make Masons at sight, in caseswhich he may deem proper"--and theCommittee of Correspondence of NewYork declares, that "since the time whenthe memory of man runneth not to thecontrary, Grand Masters have enjoyed theprivilege of making Masons at sight,without any preliminaries, and at anysuitable time or place."

The opinions of the two last quoted Grand

Lodges embody the general sentiment ofthe Craft on this subject.[25] But althoughthe prerogative is thus almost universallyceded to Grand Masters, there are manyvery reasonable doubts as to theexpediency of its exercise, except underextraordinary circumstances ofemergency.

In England, the practice has generallybeen confined to the making of Princes ofthe Royal Family, who, for reasons of state,were unwilling to reduce themselves to thelevel of ordinary candidates and receivetheir initiation publicly in a subordinatelodge.

But in the exercise of this prerogative, theGrand Master cannot dispense with any ofthe requisite forms of initiation, prescribedby the oral laws of the Order. He cannotcommunicate the degrees, but must

adhere to all the establishedceremonies--the conferring of degrees by"communication" being a form unknown tothe York rite. He must be assisted by thenumber of Brethren necessary to open andhold a lodge. Due inquiry must be madeinto the candidate's character, (though theGrand Master may, as in a case ofemergency, dispense with the usualprobation of a month). He cannot interferewith the business of a regular lodge, bymaking one whom it had rejected, norfinishing one which it had commenced.Nor can he confer the three degrees, atone and the same communication. In short,he must, in making Masons at sight,conform to the ancient usages andlandmarks of the Order.

Section II.

_The Deputy Grand Master._

The office of Deputy Grand Master is oneof great dignity, but not of much practicalimportance, except in case of the absenceof the Grand Master, when he assumes allthe prerogatives of that officer. Neither isthe office, comparatively speaking, of avery ancient date. At the firstreorganization of the Grand Lodge in 1717,and for two or three years afterwards, noDeputy was appointed, and it was not until1721 that the Duke of Montagu conferredthe dignity on Dr. Beal. Originally theDeputy was intended to relieve the GrandMaster of all the burden and pressure ofbusiness, and the 36th of the Regulations,adopted in 1721, states that "a Deputy issaid to have been always needful when the

Grand Master was nobly born," because itwas considered as a derogation from thedignity of a nobleman to enter upon theordinary business of the craft. Hence wefind, among the General Regulations, onewhich sets forth this principle in thefollowing words:

"The Grand Master should not receive anyprivate intimations of business, concerningMasons and Masonry, but from his Deputyfirst, except in such cases as his worshipcan easily judge of; and if the applicationto the Grand Master be irregular, hisworship can order the Grand Wardens, orany other so applying, to wait upon theDeputy, who is immediately to prepare thebusiness, and to lay it orderly before hisworship."

The Deputy Grand Master exercises, in theabsence of the Grand Master, all the

prerogatives and performs all the duties ofthat officer. But he does so, not by virtue ofany new office that he has acquired bysuch absence, but simply in the name ofand as the representative of the GrandMaster, from whom alone he derives all hisauthority. Such is the doctrine sustained inall the precedents recorded in the Book ofConstitutions.

In the presence of the Grand Master, theoffice of Deputy is merely one of honour,without the necessity of performing anyduties, and without the power ofexercising any prerogatives.

There cannot be more than one DeputyGrand Master in a jurisdiction; so that theappointment of a greater number, as is thecase in some of the States, is a manifestinnovation on the ancient usages. DistrictDeputy Grand Masters, which officers are

also a modern invention of this country,seem to take the place in some degree ofthe Provincial Grand Masters of England,but they are not invested with the sameprerogatives. The office is one of localorigin, and its powers and duties areprescribed by the local regulations of theGrand Lodge which may have establishedit.

Section III.

_Of the Grand Wardens._

The Senior and Junior Grand Wardenswere originally appointed, like theDeputy, by the Grand Master, and are stillso appointed in England; but in thiscountry they are universally elected by theGrand Lodge. Their duties do notmaterially differ from those performed bythe corresponding officers in asubordinate lodge. They accompany theGrand Master in his visitations, andassume the stations of the Wardens of thelodge visited.

According to the regulations of 1721, theMaster of the oldest lodge present wasdirected to take the chair of the GrandLodge in the absence of both the Grand

Master and Deputy; but this was found tobe an interference with the rights of theGrand Wardens, and it was thereforesubsequently declared that, in the absenceof the Grand Master and Deputy, the lastformer Grand Master or Deputy shouldpreside. But if no Past Grand or PastDeputy Grand Master should be present,then the Senior Grand Warden was to fillthe chair, and, in his absence, the JuniorGrand Warden, and lastly, in absence ofboth these, then the oldest Freemason[26]who is the present Master of a lodge. Inthis country, however, most of the GrandLodges have altered this regulation, andthe Wardens succeed according toseniority to the chair of the absent GrandMaster and Deputy, in preference to anyPast Grand Officer.

Section IV.

_Of the Grand Treasurer._

The office of Grand Treasurer was firstestablished in 1724, in consequence of areport of the Committee of Charity of theGrand Lodge of England. But no one wasfound to hold the trust until the 24th ofJune, 1727, when, at the request of theGrand Master, the appointment wasaccepted by Nathaniel Blackerby, DeputyGrand Master. The duties of the office donot at all differ from those of acorresponding one in every other society;but as the trust is an important one in apecuniary view, it has generally beendeemed prudent that it should only becommitted to "a brother of good worldlysubstance," whose ample means wouldplace him beyond the chances of

temptation.

The office of Grand Treasurer has thispeculiarity, that while all the other officersbelow the Grand Master were originally,and still are in England, appointed, thatalone was always elective.

Section V.

_Of the Grand Secretary._

This is one of the most important offices inthe Grand Lodge, and should always beoccupied by a Brother of intelligence andeducation, whose abilities may reflecthonor on the institution of which he is theaccredited public organ. The office wasestablished in the year 1723, during theGrand Mastership of the Duke of Wharton,previous to which time the duties appearto have been discharged by the GrandWardens.

The Grand Secretary not only records theproceedings of the Grand Lodge, butconducts its correspondence, and is themedium through whom all applications onmasonic subjects are to be made to the

Grand Master, or the Grand Lodge.

According to the regulations of the GrandLodges of England, New York and SouthCarolina, the Grand Secretary may appointan assistant, who is not, however, by virtueof such appointment, a member of theGrand Lodge. The same privilege is alsoextended in South Carolina to the GrandTreasurer.

Section VI.

_Of the Grand Chaplain._

This is the last of the Grand Offices thatwas established, having been instituted onthe 1st of May, in the year 1775. The dutiesare confined to the reading of prayers, andother sacred portions of the ritual, inconsecrations, dedications, funeralservices, etc. The office confers nomasonic authority at all, except that of aseat and a vote in the Grand Lodge.

Section VII.

_Of the Grand Deacons._

But little need be said of the GrandDeacons. Their duties correspond to thoseof the same officers in subordinate lodges.The office of the Deacons, even in asubordinate lodge, is of comparativelymodern institution. Dr. Oliver remarks thatthey are not mentioned in any of the earlyConstitutions of Masonry, nor even so lateas 1797, when Stephen Jones wrote his"Masonic Miscellanies," and he thinks it"satisfactorily proved that Deacons werenot considered necessary, in working thebusiness of a lodge, before the very latterend of the eighteenth century."[27]

But although the Deacons are notmentioned in the various works published

previous to that period, which are quotedby Dr. Oliver, it is nevertheless certain thatthe office existed at a time much earlierthan that which he supposes. In a work inmy possession, and which is now lyingbefore me, entitled "Every Young Man'sCompanion, etc., by W. Gordon, Teacherof the Mathematics," sixth edition printedat London, in 1777, there is a section,extending from page 413 to page 426,which is dedicated to the subject ofFreemasonry and to a description of theworking of a subordinate lodge. Here theSenior and Junior Deacons are enumeratedamong the officers, their exact positionsdescribed and their duties detailed,differing in no respect from theexplanations of our own ritual at thepresent day. The positive testimony of thisbook must of course outweigh the negativetestimony of the authorities quoted byOliver, and shows the existence in

England of Deacons in the year 1777 atleast.

It is also certain that the office of Deaconclaims an earlier origin in America thanthe "very latter end of the eighteenthcentury;" and, as an evidence of this, itmay be stated that, in the "Ahiman Rezon"of Pennsylvania, published in 1783, theGrand Deacons are named among theofficers of the Grand Lodge, "as particularassistants to the Grand Master and SeniorWarden, in conducting the business of theLodge." They are to be found in all GrandLodges of the York Rite, and are usuallyappointed, the Senior by the GrandMaster, and the Junior by the Senior GrandWarden.

Section VIII.

_Of the Grand Marshal._

The _Grand Marshal_, as an officer ofconvenience, existed from an earlyperiod. We find him mentioned in theprocession of the Grand Lodge, made in1731, where he is described as carrying "atruncheon, blue, tipped with gold,"insignia which he still retains. He takes nopart in the usual work of the Lodge; but hisduties are confined to the proclamation ofthe Grand Officers at their installation, andto the arrangement and superintendenceof public processions.

The Grand Marshal is usually appointed bythe Grand Master.

Section IX.

_Of the Grand Stewards._

The first mention that is made of Stewardsis in the Old Regulations, adopted in 1721.Previous to that time, the arrangements ofthe Grand Feast were placed in the handsof the Grand Wardens; and it was torelieve them of this labor that theregulation was adopted, authorizing theGrand Master, or his Deputy, to appoint acertain number of Stewards, who were toact in concert with the Grand Wardens. In1728, it was ordered that the number ofStewards to be appointed should betwelve. In 1731, a regulation was adopted,permitting the Grand Stewards to appointtheir successors. And, in 1735, the GrandLodge ordered, that, "in consideration oftheir past service and future usefulness,"

they should be constituted a Lodge ofMasters, to be called the Stewards' Lodge,which should have a registry in the GrandLodge list, and exercise the privilege ofsending twelve representatives. This wasthe origin of that body now known in theConstitutions of the Grand Lodges ofEngland and New York,[28] as the GrandStewards' Lodge, although it has been veryextensively modified in its organization. InNew York, it is now no more than aStanding Committee of the Grand Lodge;and in England, although it is regularlyconstituted, as a Lodge of Master Masons,it is by a special regulation deprived of allpower of entering, passing, or raisingMasons. In other jurisdictions, the office ofGrand Stewards is still preserved, but theirfunctions are confined to their originalpurpose of preparing and superintendingthe Grand Feast.

The appointment of the Grand Stewardsshould be most appropriately vested in theJunior Grand Warden.

Section X.

_Of the Grand Sword-Bearer._

_Grand Sword-Bearer._--It was an ancientfeudal custom, that all great dignitariesshould have a sword of state borne beforethem, as the insignia of their dignity. Thisusage has to this day been preserved inthe Masonic Institution, and the GrandMaster's sword of state is still borne in allpublic processions by an officer speciallyappointed for that purpose. Some yearsafter the reorganization of the GrandLodge of England, the sword was borne bythe Master of the Lodge to which itbelonged; but, in 1730, the Duke ofNorfolk, being then Grand Master,presented to the Grand Lodge the sword ofGustavus Adolphus, King of Sweden, whichhad afterwards been used in war by

Bernard, Duke of Saxe Weimar, and whichthe Grand Master directed shouldthereafter be adopted as his sword ofstate. In consequence of this donation, theoffice of Grand Sword-Bearer wasinstituted in the following year. The officeis still retained; but some Grand Lodgeshave changed the name to that of _GrandPursuivant_.

Section XI.

_Of the Grand Tiler._

It is evident from the Constitutions ofMasonry, as well as from the peculiarcharacter of the institution, that the officeof Grand Tiler must have existed from thevery first organization of a Grand Lodge.As, from the nature of the duties that he hasto perform, the Grand Tiler is necessarilyexcluded from partaking of thediscussions, or witnessing the proceedingsof the Grand Lodge, it has very generallybeen determined, from a principle ofexpediency, that he shall not be a memberof the Grand Lodge during the term of hisoffice.

The Grand Tiler is sometimes elected bythe Grand Lodge, and sometimes

appointed by the Grand Master.

Chapter V.

Of the Powers and Prerogatives of a GrandLodge.

Section I.

_General View._

The necessary and usual officers of aGrand Lodge having been described, therights, powers, and prerogatives of such abody is the next subject of our inquiry.

The foundation-stone, upon which thewhole superstructure of masonic authorityin the Grand Lodge is built, is to be foundin that conditional clause annexed to thethirty-eight articles, adopted in 1721 bythe Masons of England, and which is inthese words:

"Every annual Grand Lodge has aninherent power and authority to make newregulations, or to alter these for the realbenefit of this ancient fraternity;

PROVIDED ALWAYS THAT THE OLDLANDMARKS BE CAREFULLY PRESERVED;and that such alterations and newregulations be proposed and agreed to atthe third quarterly communicationpreceding the annual Grand Feast; andthat they be offered also to the perusal ofall the Brethren before dinner, in writing,even of the youngest Entered Apprentice:the approbation and consent of themajority of all the Brethren present beingabsolutely necessary, to make the samebinding and obligatory."

The expression which is put incapitals--"provided always that the oldlandmarks be carefully preserved"--is thelimiting clause which must be steadilyborne in mind, whenever we attempt toenumerate the powers of a Grand Lodge. Itmust never be forgotten (in the words ofanother regulation, adopted in 1723, and

incorporated in the ritual of installation),that "it is not in the power of any man, orbody of men, to make any alteration orinnovation in the body of Masonry."

"With these views to limit us, the powers ofa Grand Lodge may be enumerated in thelanguage which has been adopted in themodern constitutions of England, andwhich seem to us, after a carefulcomparison, to be as comprehensive andcorrect as any that we have been able toexamine. This enumeration is in thefollowing language:

"In the Grand Lodge, alone, resides thepower of enacting laws and regulations forthe permanent government of the craft,and of altering, repealing, and abrogatingthem, always taking care that the ancientlandmarks of the order are preserved. TheGrand Lodge has also the inherent power

of investigating, regulating, and decidingall matters relative to the craft, or toparticular lodges, or to individualBrothers, which it may exercise either ofitself, or by such delegated authority, as inits wisdom and discretion it may appoint;but in the Grand Lodge alone resides thepower of erasing lodges, and expellingBrethren from the craft, a power which itought not to delegate to any subordinateauthority in England."

In this enumeration we discover theexistence of three distinct classes ofpowers:--1, a legislative power; 2, ajudicial power; and 3, an executive power.Each of these will occupy a separatesection.

Section II.

_Of the Legislative Power of a GrandLodge._

In the passage already quoted from theConstitutions of the Grand Lodge ofEngland it is said, "in the Grand Lodge,alone, resides the power of enacting lawsand regulations for the government of thecraft, and of altering, repealing, andabrogating them." General regulations forthe government of the whole craftthroughout the world can no longer beenacted by a Grand Lodge. Themultiplication of these bodies, since theyear 1717, has so divided the supremacythat no regulation now enacted can havethe force and authority of those adoptedby the Grand Lodge of England in 1721,and which now constitute a part of the

fundamental law of Masonry, and as suchare unchangeable by any modern GrandLodge.

Any Grand Lodge may, however, enactlocal laws for the direction of its ownspecial affairs, and has also theprerogative of enacting the regulationswhich are to govern all its subordinatesand the craft generally in its ownjurisdiction. From this legislative power,which belongs exclusively to the GrandLodge, it follows that no subordinate lodgecan make any new bye-laws, nor alter itsold ones, without the approval andconfirmation of the Grand Lodge. Hence,the rules and regulations of every lodgeare inoperative until they are submitted toand approved by the Grand Lodge. Theconfirmation of that body is the enactingclause; and, therefore, strictly speaking, itmay be said that the subordinates only

propose the bye-laws, and the GrandLodge enacts them.

Section III.

_Of the Judicial Power of a Grand Lodge._

The passage already quoted from theEnglish Constitutions continues to say, that"the Grand Lodge has the inherent powerof investigating, regulating and decidingall matters relative to the craft, or toparticular lodges, or to individualBrothers, which it may exercise, either ofitself, or by such delegated authority as inits wisdom and discretion it may appoint."Under the first clause of this section, theGrand Lodge is constituted as the SupremeMasonic Tribunal of its jurisdiction. But asit would be impossible for that body toinvestigate every masonic offense thatoccurs within its territorial limits, with thatfull and considerate attention that theprinciples of justice require, it has, under

the latter clause of the section, delegatedthis duty, in general, to the subordinatelodges, who are to act as its committees,and to report the results of their inquiry forits final disposition. From this course ofaction has risen the erroneous opinion ofsome persons, that the jurisdiction of theGrand Lodge is only appellate in itscharacter. Such is not the case. The GrandLodge possesses an original jurisdictionover all causes occurring within its limits.It is only for expediency that it remits theexamination of the merits of any case to asubordinate lodge as a _quasi_ committee.It may, if it thinks proper, commence theinvestigation of any matter concerningeither a lodge, or an individual brotherwithin its own bosom, and whenever anappeal from the decision of a lodge ismade, which, in reality, is only a dissentfrom the report of the lodge, the GrandLodge does actually recommence the

investigation _de novo_, and, taking thematter out of the lodge, to whom by itsgeneral usage it had been primarilyreferred, it places it in the hands ofanother committee of its own body for anew report. The course of action is, it istrue, similar to that in law, of an appealfrom an inferior to a superior tribunal. Butthe principle is different. The Grand Lodgesimply confirms or rejects the report thathas been made to it, and it may do thatwithout any appeal having been entered. Itmay, in fact, dispense with the necessity ofan investigation by and report from asubordinate lodge altogether, andundertake the trial itself from the veryinception. But this, though a constitutional,is an unusual course. The subordinatelodge is the instrument which the GrandLodge employs in considering theinvestigation. It may or it may not makeuse of the instrument, as it pleases.

Section IV.

_Of the Executive Power of a GrandLodge._

The English Constitutions conclude, in thepassage that has formed the basis of ourprevious remarks, by asserting that "in theGrand Lodge, alone, resides the power oferasing lodges and expelling Brethrenfrom the craft, a power which it ought notto delegate to any subordinate authority."The power of the Grand Lodge to eraselodges is accompanied with a coincidentpower of constituting new lodges. Thispower it originally shared with the GrandMaster, and still does in England; but inthis country the power of the Grand Lodgeis paramount to that of the Grand Master.The latter can only constitute lodgestemporarily, by dispensation, and his act

must be confirmed, or may be annulled bythe Grand Lodge. It is not until a lodge hasreceived its Warrant of Constitution fromthe Grand Lodge, that it can assume therank and exercise the prerogatives of aregular and legal lodge.

The expelling power is one that is veryproperly intrusted to the Grand Lodge,which is the only tribunal that shouldimpose a penalty affecting the relations ofthe punished party with the wholefraternity. Some of the lodges in thiscountry have claimed the right to expelindependently of the action of the GrandLodge. But the claim is founded on anerroneous assumption of powers that havenever existed, and which are notrecognized by the ancient constitutions,nor the general usages of the fraternity. Asubordinate lodge tries its delinquentmember, under the provisions which have

already been stated, and, according to thegeneral usage of lodges in the UnitedStates, declares him expelled. But thesentence is of no force nor effect until ithas been confirmed by the Grand Lodge,which may, or may not, give the requiredconfirmation, and which, indeed, oftenrefuses to do so, but actually reverses thesentence. It is apparent, from the viewsalready expressed on the judicial powersof the Grand Lodge, that the sentence ofexpulsion uttered by the subordinate is tobe taken in the sense of arecommendatory report, and that it is theconfirmation and adoption of that report bythe Grand Lodge that alone gives it vitalityand effect.

The expelling power presumes, of course,coincidently, the reinstating power. As theGrand Lodge alone can expel, it also alonecan reinstate.

These constitute the general powers andprerogatives of a Grand Lodge. Of coursethere are other local powers, assumed byvarious Grand Lodges, and differing in theseveral jurisdictions, but they are allderived from some one of the three classesthat we have enumerated. From theseviews, it will appear that a Grand Lodge isthe supreme legislative, judicial, andexecutive authority of the Masonicjurisdiction in which it is situated. It is, touse a feudal term, "the lord paramount" inMasonry. It is a representative body, inwhich, however, it constituents havedelegated everything and reserved norights to themselves. Its authority is almostunlimited, for it is restrained by but asingle check:--_It cannot alter or removethe ancient landmarks_.

Book Second

Laws of Subordinate Lodges.

Having thus succinctly treated of the law inrelation to Grand Lodges, I come next inorder to consider the law as it respects theorganization, rights, powers, andprivileges of subordinate Lodges; and thefirst question that will engage our attentionwill be, as to the proper method oforganizing a Lodge.

Chapter I.

Of the Nature and Organization ofSubordinate Lodges.

The old charges define a Lodge to be "aplace where Masons assemble and work;"and also "that assembly, or duly organizedsociety of Masons." The lecture on the firstdegree gives a still more precisedefinition. It says that "a lodge is anassemblage of Masons, duly congregated,having the Holy Bible, square, andcompasses, and a charter, or warrant ofconstitution, empowering them to work."

Every lodge of Masons requires for itsproper organization, that it should havebeen congregated by the permission ofsome superior authority, which may beeither a Grand Master or a Grand Lodge.When a lodge is organized by theauthority of a Grand Master, it is said towork under a Dispensation, and when bythe authority of a Grand Lodge, it is said towork under a warrant of constitution. In thehistory of a lodge, the former authority

generally precedes the latter, the lodgeusually working for some time under thedispensation of the Grand Master, before itis regularly warranted by the GrandLodge. But this is not necessarily the case.A Grand Lodge will sometimes grant awarrant of constitution at once, without theprevious exercise, on the part of the GrandMaster, of his dispensing power. As it is,however, more usually the practice for thedispensation to precede the warrant ofconstitution, I shall explain the formation ofa lodge according to that method.

Any number of Master Masons, not underseven, being desirous of unitingthemselves into a lodge, apply by petitionto the Grand Master for the necessaryauthority. This petition must set forth thatthey now are, or have been, members of aregularly constituted lodge, and mustassign, as a reason for their application,

that they desire to form the lodge "for theconveniency of their respectivedwellings," or some other sufficientreason. The petition must also name thebrethren whom they desire to act as theirMaster and Wardens, and the place wherethey intend to meet; and it must berecommended by the nearest lodge.

Dalcho says that not less than three MasterMasons should sign the petition; but in thishe differs from all the other authorities,which require not less than seven. Thisrule, too, seems to be founded in reason;for, as it requires seven Masons toconstitute a quorum for opening andholding a lodge of Entered Apprentices, itwould be absurd to authorize a smallernumber to organize a lodge which, after itsorganization, could not be opened, normake Masons in that degree.

Preston says that the petition must berecommended "by the Masters of threeregular lodges adjacent to the place wherethe new lodge is to be held." Dalcho says itmust be recommended "by three otherknown and approved Master Masons," butdoes not make any allusion to any adjacentlodge. The laws and regulations of theGrand Lodge of Scotland require therecommendation to be signed "by theMasters and officers of two of the nearestlodges." The Constitutions of the GrandLodge of England require that it must berecommended "by the officers of someregular lodge." The recommendation of aneighboring lodge is the general usage ofthe craft, and is intended to certify to thesuperior authority, on the very bestevidence that can be obtained, that,namely, of an adjacent lodge, that the newlodge will be productive of no injury to theOrder.

If this petition be granted, the GrandSecretary prepares a document called a_dispensation_, which authorizes theofficers named in the petition to open andhold a lodge, and to "enter, pass, and raiseFreemasons." The duration of thisdispensasation is generally expressed onits face to be, "until it shall be revoked bythe Grand Master or the Grand Lodge, oruntil a warrant of constitution is granted bythe Grand Lodge." Preston says, that theBrethren named in it are authorized "toassemble as Masons for forty days, anduntil such time as a warrant of constitutioncan be obtained by command of the GrandLodge, or that authority be recalled." Butgenerally, usage continues thedispensation only until the next meeting ofthe Grand Lodge, when it is eitherrevoked, or a warrant of constitutiongranted.

If the dispensation be revoked by eitherthe Grand Master or the Grand Lodge (foreither has the power to do so), the lodge ofcourse at once ceases to exist. Whateverfunds or property it has accumulatedrevert, as in the case of all extinct lodges,to the Grand Lodge, which may be calledthe natural heir of its subordinates; but allthe work done in the lodge, under thedispensation, is regular and legal, and allthe Masons made by it are, in every senseof the term, "true and lawful Brethren."

Let it be supposed, however, that thedispensation is confirmed or approved bythe Grand Lodge, and we thus arrive atanother step in the history of the newlodge. At the next sitting of the GrandLodge, after the dispensation has beenissued by the Grand Master, he states thatfact to the Grand Lodge, when, either at his

request, or on motion of some Brother, thevote is taken on the question ofconstituting the new lodge, and, if amajority are in favor of it, the GrandSecretary is ordered to grant a warrant ofconstitution.

This instrument differs from a dispensationin many important particulars. It is signedby all the Grand Officers, and emanatesfrom the Grand Lodge, while thedispensation emanates from the office ofthe Grand Master, and is signed by himalone. The authority of the dispensation istemporary, that of the warrant permanent;the one can be revoked at pleasure by theGrand Master, who granted it; the otheronly for cause shown, and by the GrandLodge; the one bestows only a name, theother both a name and a number; the oneconfers only the power of holding a lodgeand making Masons, the other not only

confers these powers, but also those ofinstallation and of succession in office.From these differences in the characters ofthe two documents, arise importantdifferences in the powers and privileges ofa lodge under dispensation and of one thathas been regularly constituted. Thesedifferences shall hereafter be considered.

The warrant having been granted, therestill remain certain forms and ceremoniesto be observed, before the lodge can takeits place among the legal and registeredlodges of the jurisdiction in which it issituated. These are its consecration, itsdedication, its constitution, and theinstallation of its officers. We shall not fullyenter into a description of these variousceremonies, because they are laid down atlength in all the Monitors, and are readilyaccessible to our readers. It will besufficient if we barely allude to their

character.

The ceremony of constitution is so called,because by it the lodge becomesconstituted or established. Orthoepistsdefine the verb to constitute, as signifying"to give a formal existence to anything."Hence, to constitute a lodge is to give itexistence, character, and standing as such;and the instrument that warrants theperson so constituting or establishing it, inthis act, is very properly called the"warrant of constitution."

The consecration, dedication, andconstitution of a lodge must be performedby the Grand Master in person; or, if hecannot conveniently attend, by some PastMaster appointed by him as his specialproxy or representative for that purpose.On the appointed evening, the GrandMaster, accompanied by his Grand

Officers, repairs to the place where thenew lodge is to hold its meetings, thelodge[29] having been placed in thecentre of the room and decently coveredwith a piece of white linen or satin. Havingtaken the chair, he examines the recordsof the lodge and the warrant ofconstitution; the officers who have beenchosen are presented before him, when heinquires of the Brethren if they continuesatisfied with the choice they have made.The ceremony of consecration is thenperformed. The Lodge is uncovered; andcorn, wine, and oil--the masonic elementsof consecration--are poured upon it,accompanied by appropriate prayers andinvocations, and the lodge is finallydeclared to be consecrated to the honorand glory of God.

This ceremony of consecration has beenhanded down from the remotest antiquity.

A consecrating--a separating from profanethings, and making holy or devoting tosacred purposes--was practiced by boththe Jews and the Pagans in relation to theirtemples, their altars, and all their sacredutensils. The tabernacle, as soon as it wascompleted, was consecrated to God by theunction of oil. Among the Pagan nations,the consecration of their temples was oftenperformed with the most sumptuousofferings and ceremonies; but oil was, onall occasions, made use of as an element ofthe consecration. The lodge is, therefore,consecrated to denote that henceforth it isto be set apart as an asylum sacred to thecultivation of the great masonic principlesof Friendship, Morality, and BrotherlyLove. Thenceforth it becomes to theconscientious Mason a place worthy of hisreverence; and he is tempted, as hepasses over its threshold, to repeat thecommand given to Moses: "Put off thy

shoes from off thy feet, for the placewhereon thou standest is holy ground."

The corn, wine, and oil are appropriatelyadopted as the Masonic elements ofconsecration, because of the symbolicsignification which they present to themind of the Mason. They are enumeratedby David as among the greatest blessingswhich we receive from the bounty ofDivine Providence. They were annuallyoffered by the ancients as the first fruits, ina thank-offering for the gifts of the earth;and as representatives of "the corn ofnourishment, the wine of refreshment, andthe oil of joy," they symbolically instructthe Mason that to the Grand Master of theUniverse he is indebted for the "health,peace, and plenty" that he enjoys.

After the consecration of the lodge, followsits dedication. This is a simple ceremony,

and principally consists in thepronunciation of a formula of words bywhich the lodge is declared to bededicated to the holy Saints John, followedby an invocation that "every Brother mayrevere their character and imitate theirvirtues."

Masonic tradition tells us that our ancientBrethren dedicated their lodges to KingSolomon, because he was their first MostExcellent Grand Master; but that modernMasons dedicate theirs to St. John theBaptist and St. John the Evangelist,because they were two eminent patrons ofMasonry. A more appropriate selection ofpatrons to whom to dedicate the lodge,could not easily have been made; since St.John the Baptist, by announcing theapproach of Christ, and by the mysticalablution to which he subjected hisproselytes, and which was afterwards

adopted in the ceremony of initiation intoChristianity, might well be considered asthe Grand Hierophant of the Church; whilethe mysterious and emblematic nature ofthe Apocalypse assimilated the mode ofteaching adopted by St. John theEvangelist to that practiced by thefraternity. Our Jewish Brethren usuallydedicate their lodges to King Solomon,thus retaining their ancient patron,although they thereby lose the benefit ofthat portion of the Lectures which refers tothe "lines parallel." The Grand Lodge ofEngland, at the union in 1813, agreed todedicate to Solomon and Moses, applyingthe parallels to the framer of thetabernacle and the builder of the temple;but they have no warranty for this inancient usage, and it is unfortunately notthe only innovation on the ancientlandmarks that that Grand Lodge has latelypermitted.

The ceremony of dedication, like that ofconsecration, finds its archetype in theremotest antiquity. The Hebrews made nouse of any new thing until they had firstsolemnly dedicated it. This ceremony wasperformed in relation even to privatehouses, as we may learn from the book ofDeuteronomy.[30] The 30th Psalm is asong said to have been made by David onthe dedication of the altar which heerected on the threshing-floor of Ornan theJebusite, after the grievous plague whichhad nearly devastated the kingdom.Solomon, it will be recollected, dedicatedthe temple with solemn ceremonies,prayers, and thank-offerings. Theceremony of dedication is, indeed, alludedto in various portions of the Scriptures.

Selden[31] says that among the Jewssacred things were both dedicated and

consecrated; but that profane things, suchas private houses, etc., were simplydedicated, without consecration. The samewriter informs us that the Pagans borrowedthe custom of consecrating and dedicatingtheir sacred edifices, altars, and images,from the Hebrews.

The Lodge having been thus consecratedto the solemn objects of Freemasonry, anddedicated to the patrons of the institution,it is at length prepared to be constituted.The ceremony of constitution is thenperformed by the Grand Master, who,rising from his seat, pronounces thefollowing formulary of constitution:

"In the name of the most Worshipful GrandLodge, I now constitute and form you, mybeloved Brethren, into a regular lodge ofFree and Accepted Masons. From this timeforth, I empower you to meet as a regular

lodge, constituted in conformity to the ritesof our Order, and the charges of ourancient and honorable fraternity;--and maythe Supreme Architect of the Universeprosper, direct, and counsel you, in allyour doings."

This ceremony places the lodge among theregistered lodges of the jurisdiction inwhich it is situated, and gives it a rank andstanding and permanent existence that itdid not have before. In one word, it has, bythe consecration, dedication, andconstitution, become what we technicallyterm "a just and legally constituted lodge,"and, as such, is entitled to certain rightsand privileges, of which we shall hereafterspeak. Still, however, although the lodgehas been thus fully and completelyorganized, its officers have as yet no legalexistence. To give them this, it isnecessary that they be inducted into their

respective offices, and each officersolemnly bound to the faithfulperformance of the duties he hasundertaken to discharge. This constitutesthe ceremony of installation. TheWorshipful Master of the new lodge isrequired publicly to submit to the ancientcharges; and then all, except Past Masters,having retired, he is invested with the PastMaster's degree, and inducted into theoriental chair of King Solomon. TheBrethren are then introduced, and duehomage is paid to their new Master, afterwhich the other officers are obligated tothe faithful discharge of their respectivetrusts, invested with their insignia of office,and receive the appropriate charge. Thisceremony must be repeated at everyannual election and change of officers.

The ancient rule was, that when the GrandMaster and his officers attended to

constitute a new lodge, the Deputy GrandMaster invested the new Master, the GrandWardens invested the new Wardens, andthe Grand Treasurer and Grand Secretaryinvested the Treasurer and Secretary. Butthis regulation has become obsolete, andthe whole installation and investiture arenow performed by the Grand Master. Onthe occasion of subsequent installations,the retiring Master installs his successor;and the latter installs his subordinateofficers.

The ceremony of installation is derivedfrom the ancient custom of inauguration, ofwhich we find repeated instances in thesacred as well as profane writings. Aaronwas inaugurated, or installed, by theunction of oil, and placing on him thevestments of the High Priest; and everysucceeding High Priest was in like mannerinstalled, before he was considered

competent to discharge the duties of hisoffice. Among the Romans, augurs, priests,kings, and, in the times of the republic,consuls were always inaugurated orinstalled. And hence, Cicero, who was anaugur, speaking of Hortensius, says, "itwas he who installed me as a member ofthe college of augurs, so that I was boundby the constitution of the order to respectand honour him as a parent."[32] Theobject and intention of the ancientinauguration and the Masonic installationare precisely the same, namely, that ofsetting apart and consecrating a person tothe duties of a certain office.

The ceremonies, thus briefly described,were not always necessary to legalize acongregation of Masons. Until the year1717, the custom of confining theprivileges of Masonry, by a warrant ofconstitution, to certain individuals, was

wholly unknown. Previous to that time, arequisite number of Master Masons wereauthorized by the ancient charges tocongregate together, temporarily, at theirown discretion, and as best suited theirconvenience, and then and there to openand hold lodges and make Masons;making, however, their return, and payingtheir tribute to the General Assembly, towhich all the fraternity annually repaired,and by whose awards the craft weregoverned.

Preston, speaking of this ancient privilege,says: "A sufficient number of Masons mettogether within a certain district, with theconsent of the sheriff or chief magistrate ofthe place, were empowered at this time tomake Masons and practice the rights ofMasonry, without a warrant ofconstitution." This privilege, Preston says,was inherent in them as individuals, and

continued to be enjoyed by the old lodges,which formed the Grand Lodge in 1717, aslong as they were in existence.

But on the 24th June, 1717, the GrandLodge of England adopted the followingregulation: "That the privilege ofassembling as Masons, which had hithertobeen unlimited, should be vested incertain lodges or assemblies of Masons,convened in certain places; and that everylodge to be hereafter convened, exceptthe four old lodges at this time existing,should be legally authorized to act by awarrant from the Grand Master for the timebeing, granted to certain individuals bypetition, with the consent and approbationof the Grand Lodge in communication; andthat, without such warrant, no lodge shouldbe hereafter deemed regular orconstitutional."

This regulation has ever since continued inforce, and it is the original law underwhich warrants of constitution are nowgranted by Grand Lodges for theorganization of their subordinates.

Chapter II.

Of Lodges under Dispensation.

It is evident, from what has already beensaid, that there are two kinds of lodges,each regular in itself, but each peculiarand distinct in its character. There arelodges working under a dispensation, andlodges working under a warrant ofconstitution. Each of these will require aseparate consideration. The former will bethe subject of the present chapter.

A lodge working under a dispensation is amerely temporary body, originated for aspecial purpose, and is thereforepossessed of very circumscribed powers.The dispensation, or authority under whichit acts, expressly specifies that the personsto whom it is given are allowed tocongregate that they may "admit, enter,pass, and raise Freemasons;" no otherpowers are conferred either by words orimplication, and, indeed, sometimes thedispensation states, that that congregation

is to be "with the sole intent and view, thatthe Brethren so congregated, admitted,entered, and made, when they become asufficient number, may be duly warrantedand constituted for being and holding aregular lodge."[33]

A lodge under dispensation is simply thecreature of the Grand Master. To him it isindebted for its existence, and on his willdepends the duration of that existence. Hemay at any time revoke the dispensation,and the dissolution of the lodge would bethe instant result. Hence a lodge workingunder a dispensation can scarcely, withstrict technical propriety, be called alodge; it is, more properly speaking, acongregation of Masons, acting as theproxy of the Grand Master.

With these views of the origin andcharacter of lodges under dispensation,

we will be better prepared to understandthe nature and extent of the powers whichthey possess.

A lodge under dispensation can make nobye-laws. It is governed, during itstemporary existence, by the generalConstitutions of the Order and the rulesand regulations of the Grand Lodge inwhose jurisdiction it is situated. In fact, asthe bye-laws of no lodge are operativeuntil they are confirmed by the GrandLodge, and as a lodge working under adispensation ceases to exist as such assoon as the Grand Lodge meets, it isevident that it would be absurd to frame acode of laws which would have no efficacy,for want of proper confirmation, andwhich, when the time and opportunity forconfirmation had arrived, would beneedless, as the society for which theywere framed would then have no legal

existence--a new body (the warrantedlodge) having taken its place.

A lodge under dispensation cannot electofficers. The Master and Wardens arenominated by the Brethren, and, if thisnomination is approved, they areappointed by the Grand Master. In givingthem permission to meet and makeMasons, he gave them no power to doanything else. A dispensation is itself asetting aside of the law, and an exceptionto a general principle; it must, therefore,be construed literally. What is not grantedin express terms, is not granted at all. And,therefore, as nothing is said of the electionof officers, no such election can be held.The Master may, however, and alwaysdoes for convenience, appoint acompetent Brother to keep a record of theproceedings; but this is a temporaryappointment, at the pleasure of the Master,

whose deputy or assistant he is; for theGrand Lodge looks only to the Master forthe records, and the office is not legallyrecognized. In like manner, he may deputea trusty Brother to take charge of the funds,and must, of course, from time to time,appoint the deacons and tiler for thenecessary working of the lodge.

As there can be no election, neither canthere be any installation, which, of course,always presumes a previous election for adeterminate period. Besides, theinstallation of officers is a part of theceremony of constitution, and thereforenot even the Master and Wardens of alodge under dispensation are entitled tobe thus solemnly inducted into office.

A lodge under dispensation can elect nomembers. The Master and Wardens, whoare named in the dispensation, are, in

point of fact, the only persons recognizedas constituting the lodge. To them isgranted the privilege, as proxies of theGrand Master, of making Masons; and forthis purpose they are authorized tocongregate a sufficient number of Brethrento assist them in the ceremonies. Butneither the Master and Wardens, nor theBrethren, thus congregated have receivedany power of electing members. Nor arethe persons made in a lodge underdispensation, to be considered asmembers of the lodge; for, as has alreadybeen shown, they have none of the rightsand privileges which attach tomembership--they can neither makebye-laws nor elect officers. They,however, become members of the lodgeas soon as it receives its warrant ofconstitution.

Chapter III.

Of Lodges Working under a Warrant ofConstitution.

Section I.

_Of the Powers and Rights of a Lodge._

In respect to the powers and privilegespossessed by a lodge working under awarrant of constitution, we may say, as ageneral principle, that whatever it doespossess is inherent in it--nothing has beendelegated by either the Grand Master orthe Grand Lodge--but that all its rights andpowers are derived originally from theancient regulations, made before theexistence of Grand Lodges, and that whatit does not possess, are the powers whichwere conceded by its predecessors to theGrand Lodge. This is evident from thehistory of warrants of constitution, theauthority under which subordinate lodgesact. The practice of applying by petition tothe Grand Master or the Grand Lodge, for

a warrant to meet as a regular lodge,commenced in the year 1718. Previous tothat time, Freemasons were empoweredby inherent privileges, vested, from timeimmemorial, in the whole fraternity, tomeet as occasion might require, under thedirection of some able architect; and theproceedings of these meetings, beingapproved by a majority of the Brethrenconvened at another lodge in the samedistrict, were deemed constitutional.[34]But in 1718, a year after the formation ofthe Grand Lodge of England, this power ofmeeting _ad libitum_ was resigned into thehands of that body, and it was then agreedthat no lodges should thereafter meet,unless authorized so to do by a warrantfrom the Grand Master, and with theconsent of the Grand Lodge. But as amemorial that this abandonment of theancient right was entirely voluntary, it wasat the same time resolved that this inherent

privilege should continue to be enjoyedby the four old lodges who formed theGrand Lodge. And, still more effectually tosecure the reserved rights of the lodges, itwas also solemnly determined, that whilethe Grand Lodge possesses the inherentright of making new regulations for thegood of the fraternity, provided that the_old landmarks be carefully preserved_,yet that these regulations, to be of force,must be proposed and agreed to at thethird quarterly communication precedingthe annual grand feast, and submitted tothe perusal of all the Brethren, in writing,even of the youngest entered apprentice;"_the approbation and consent of themajority of all the Brethren present beingabsolutely necessary, to make the samebinding and obligatory_."[35]

The corollary from all this is clear. All therights, powers, and privileges, not

conceded, by express enactment of thefraternity, to the Grand Lodge, have beenreserved to themselves. Subordinatelodges are the assemblies of the craft intheir primary capacity, and the GrandLodge is the Supreme Masonic Tribunal,only because it consists of and isconstituted by a representation of theseprimary assemblies. And, therefore, asevery act of the Grand Lodge is an act ofthe whole fraternity thus represented,each new regulation that may be made isnot an assumption of authority on the partof the Grand Lodge, but a new concessionon the part of the subordinate lodges.

This doctrine of the reserved rights of thelodges is very important, and should neverbe forgotten, because it affords much aidin the decision of many obscure points ofmasonic jurisprudence. The rule is, thatany doubtful power exists and is inherent

in the subordinate lodges, unless there isan express regulation conferring it on theGrand Lodge. With this preliminary view,we may proceed to investigate the natureand extent of these reserved powers of thesubordinate lodges.

A lodge has the right of selecting its ownmembers, with which the Grand Lodgecannot interfere. This is a right that thelodges have expressly reserved tothemselves, and the stipulation is insertedin the "general regulations" in thefollowing words:

"No man can be entered a Brother in anyparticular lodge, or admitted a memberthereof, without the unanimous consent ofall the members of that lodge then present,when the candidate is proposed, and whentheir consent is formally asked by theMaster. They are to give their consent in

their own prudent way, either virtually orin form, but with unanimity. Nor is thisinherent privilege subject to adispensation, because the members of aparticular lodge are the best judges of it;and because, if a turbulent member shouldbe imposed upon them, it might spoil theirharmony, or hinder the freedom of theircommunication; or even break anddisperse the lodge, which ought to beavoided by all true and faithful."[36]

But although a lodge has the inherent rightto require unanimity in the election of acandidate, it is not necessarily restricted tosuch a degree of rigor.

A lodge has the right to elect its ownofficers. This right is guaranteed to it bythe words of the Warrant of Constitution.Still the right is subject to certainrestraining regulations. The election must

be held at the proper time, which,according to the usage of Masonry, in mostparts of the world, is on or immediatelybefore the festival of St. John theEvangelist. The proper qualifications mustbe regarded. A member cannot be electedas Master, unless he has previously servedas a Warden, except in the instance of anew lodge, or other case of emergency.Where both of the Wardens refusepromotion, where the presiding Masterwill not permit himself to be reelected,and where there is no Past Master who willconsent to take the office, then, and thenonly, can a member be elected from thefloor to preside over the lodge.

By the Constitutions of England, only theMaster and Treasurer are electedofficers.[37] The Wardens and all the otherofficers are appointed by the Master, whohas not, however, the power of removal

after appointment, except by consent ofthe lodge;[38] but American usage givesthe election of all the officers, except thedeacons, stewards, and, in some instances,the tiler, to the lodge.

As a consequence of the right of election,every lodge has the power of installing itsofficers, subject to the same regulations, inrelation to time and qualifications, as givenin the case of elections.

The Master must be installed by a PastMaster,[39] but after his own installation hehas the power to install the rest of theofficers. The ceremony of installation is nota mere vain and idle one, but is productiveof important results. Until the Master andWardens of a lodge are installed, theycannot represent the lodge in the GrandLodge, nor, if it be a new lodge, can it berecorded and recognized on the register

of the Grand Lodge. No officer canpermanently take possession of the officeto which he has been elected, until he hasbeen duly installed.[40] The rule of thecraft is, that the old officer holds on untilhis successor is installed, and this rule is ofuniversal application to officers of everygrade, from the Tiler of a subordinatelodge, to the Grand Master of Masons.

Every lodge that has been dulyconstituted, and its officers installed, isentitled to be represented in the GrandLodge, and to form, indeed, a constituentpart of that body.[41] The representativesof a lodge are its Master and twoWardens.[42] This character ofrepresentation was established in 1718,when the four old lodges, which organizedthe Grand Lodge of England, agreed "toextend their patronage to every lodgewhich should hereafter be constituted by

the Grand Lodge, according to the newregulations of the society; and while suchlodges acted in conformity to the ancientconstitutions of the Order, to admit theirMasters and Wardens to share with themall the privileges of the Grand Lodge,excepting precedence of rank."[43]Formerly all Master Masons werepermitted to sit in the Grand Lodge, or, asit was then called, the General Assembly,and represent their lodge; and thereforethis restricting the representation to thethree superior officers was, in fact, aconcession of the craft. This regulation isstill generally observed; but I regret to seea few Grand Lodges in this countryinnovating on the usage, and still furtherconfining the representation to the Mastersalone.

The Master and Wardens are not merely inname the representatives of the lodge, but

are bound, on all questions that comebefore the Grand Lodge, truly to representtheir lodge, and vote according to itsinstructions. This doctrine is expressly laiddown in the General Regulations, in thefollowing words: "The majority of everyparticular lodge, when congregated, notelse, shall have the privilege of givinginstructions to their Master and Wardens,before the meeting of the Grand Chapter,or Quarterly Communication; because thesaid officers are their representatives, andare supposed to speak the sentiments oftheir Brethren at the said GrandLodge."[44]

Every lodge has the power to framebye-laws for its own government,provided they are not contrary to, norinconsistent with, the general regulationsof the Grand Lodge; nor the landmarks ofthe order.[45] But these bye-laws will not

be valid, until they are submitted to andapproved by the Grand Lodge. And this isthe case, also, with every subsequentalteration of them, which must in likemanner be submitted to the Grand Lodgefor its approval.

A lodge has the right of suspending orexcluding a member from his membershipin the lodge; but it has no power to expelhim from the rights and privileges ofMasonry, except with the consent of theGrand Lodge. A subordinate lodge tries itsdelinquent member, and, if guilty,declares him expelled; but the sentence isof no force until the Grand Lodge, underwhose jurisdiction it is working, hasconfirmed it. And it is optional with theGrand Lodge to do so, or, as is frequentlydone, to reverse the decision and reinstatethe Brother. Some of the lodges in thiscountry claim the right to expel,

independently of the action of the GrandLodge; but the claim is not valid. The veryfact that an expulsion is a penalty, affectingthe general relations of the punished partywith the whole fraternity, proves that itsexercise never could, with propriety, beintrusted to a body so circumscribed in itsauthority as a subordinate lodge.Accordingly, the general practice of thefraternity is opposed to it; and therefore allexpulsions are reported to the GrandLodge, not merely as matters ofinformation, but that they may beconfirmed by that body. The EnglishConstitutions are explicit on this subject."In the Grand Lodge alone," they declare,"resides the power of erasing lodges andexpelling Brethren from the craft, a powerwhich it ought not to delegate to anysubordinate authority in England." Theyallow, however, a subordinate lodge to_exclude_ a member from the lodge; in

which case he is furnished with acertificate of the circumstances of hisexclusion, and then may join any otherlodge that will accept him, after beingmade acquainted with the fact of hisexclusion, and its cause. This usage has notbeen adopted in this country.

A lodge has a right to levy such annualcontribution for membership as themajority of the Brethren see fit. This isentirely a matter of contract, with whichthe Grand Lodge, or the craft in general,have nothing to do. It is, indeed, a modernusage, unknown to the fraternity of formertimes, and was instituted for theconvenience and support of the privatelodges.

A lodge is entitled to select a name foritself, to be, however, approved by theGrand Lodge.[46] But the Grand Lodge

alone has the power of designating thenumber by which the lodge shall bedistinguished. By its number alone isevery lodge recognized in the register ofthe Grand Lodge, and according to theirnumbers is the precedence of the lodgesregulated.

Finally, a lodge has certain rights inrelation to its Warrant of Constitution. Thisinstrument having been granted by theGrand Lodge, can be revoked by no otherauthority. The Grand Master, therefore,has no power, as he has in the case of alodge under dispensation, to withdraw itsWarrant, except temporarily, until the nextmeeting of the Grand Lodge. Nor is it inthe power of even the majority of thelodge, by any act of their own, to resignthe Warrant. For it has been laid down as alaw, that if the majority of the lodge shoulddetermine to quit the lodge, or to resign

their warrant, such action would be of noefficacy, because the Warrant ofConstitution, and the power of assembling,would remain with the rest of themembers, who adhere to theirallegiance.[47] But if all the memberswithdraw themselves, their Warrantceases and becomes extinct. If the conductof a lodge has been such as clearly toforfeit its charter, the Grand Lodge alonecan decide that question and pronouncethe forfeiture.

Section II.

_Of the Duties of a Lodge._

So far in relation to the rights andprivileges of subordinate lodges. But thereare certain duties and obligations equallybinding upon these bodies, and certainpowers, in the exercise of which they arerestricted. These will next engage ourattention.

The first great duty, not only of everylodge, but of every Mason, is to see thatthe landmarks of the Order shall never beimpaired. The General Regulations ofMasonry--to which every Master, at hisinstallation, is bound to acknowledge hissubmission--declare that "it is not in thepower of any man, or body of men, tomake innovations in the body of Masonry."

And, hence, no lodge, without violating allthe implied and express obligations intowhich it has entered, can, in any manner,alter or amend the work, lectures, andceremonies of the institution. As itsmembers have received the ritual fromtheir predecessors, so are they bound totransmit it, unchanged, in the slightestdegree, to their successors. In the GrandLodge, alone, resides the power ofenacting new regulations; but, even _it_must be careful that, in every suchregulation, the landmarks are preserved.When, therefore, we hear young andinexperienced Masters speak of makingimprovements (as they arrogantly callthem) upon the old lectures orceremonies, we may be sure that suchMasters either know nothing of the dutiesthey owe to the craft, or are willfullyforgetful of the solemn obligation whichthey have contracted. Some may suppose

that the ancient ritual of the Order isimperfect, and requires amendment. Onemay think that the ceremonies are toosimple, and wish to increase them;another, that they are too complicated, anddesire to simplify them; one may bedispleased with the antiquated language;another, with the character of thetraditions; a third, with something else.But, the rule is imperative and absolute,that no change can or must be made togratify individual taste. As the Barons ofEngland, once, with unanimous voice,exclaimed, "Nolumus leges Angli�mutare!"so do all good Masons respond to everyattempt at innovation, "We are unwilling toalter the customs of Freemasonry."

In relation to the election of officers, asubordinate lodge is allowed to exerciseno discretion. The names and duties ofthese officers are prescribed, partly by the

landmarks or the ancient constitutions, andpartly by the regulations of various GrandLodges. While the landmarks arepreserved, a Grand Lodge may add to thelist of officers as it pleases; and whatevermay be its regulation, the subordinatelodges are bound to obey it; nor can anysuch lodge create new offices nor abolishold ones without the consent of the GrandLodge.

Lodges are also bound to elect theirofficers at a time which is alwaysdetermined; not by the subordinate, butby the Grand Lodge. Nor can a lodgeanticipate or postpone it unless by adispensation from the Grand Master.

No lodge can, at an extra meeting, alter oramend the proceedings of a regularmeeting. If such were not the rule, anunworthy Master might, by stealth,

convoke an extra meeting of a part of hislodge, and, by expunging or altering theproceedings of the previous regularmeeting, or any particular part of them,annul any measures or resolutions thatwere not consonant with his peculiarviews.

No lodge can interfere with the work orbusiness of any other lodge, without itspermission. This is an old regulation,founded on those principles of comity andbrotherly love that should exist among allMasons. It is declared in the manuscriptcharges, written in the reign of James II.,and in the possession of the Lodge ofAntiquity, at London, that "no Master orFellow shall supplant others of their work;that is to say, that, if he hath taken a work,or else stand Master of any work, that heshall not put him out, unless he be unableof cunning to make an end of his work."

And, hence, no lodge can pass or raise acandidate who was initiated, or initiate onewho was rejected, in another lodge. "Itwould be highly improper," says theAhiman Rezon, "in any lodge, to confer adegree on a Brother who is not of theirhouse-hold; for, every lodge ought to becompetent to manage their own business,and are the best judges of thequalifications of their own members."

I do not intend, at the present time, toinvestigate the qualifications ofcandidates--as that subject will, in itself,afford ample materials for a futureinvestigation; but, it is necessary that Ishould say something of the restrictionsunder which every lodge labors in respectto the admission of persons applying fordegrees.

In the first place, no lodge can initiate a

candidate, "without previous notice, anddue examination into his character; andnot unless his petition has been read atone regular meeting and acted on atanother." This is in accordance with theancient regulations; but, an exception to itis allowed in the case of an emergency,when the lodge may read the petition foradmission, and, if the applicant is wellrecommended, may proceed at once toelect and initiate him. In somejurisdictions, the nature of the emergencymust be stated to the Grand Master, who, ifhe approves, will grant a dispensation;but, in others, the Master, or Master andWardens, are permitted to be competentjudges, and may proceed to elect andinitiate, without such dispensation. TheGrand Lodge of South Carolina adheres tothe former custom, and that of England tothe latter.

Another regulation is, that no lodge canconfer more than two degrees, at onecommunication, on the same candidate.The Grand Lodge of England is still morestringent on this subject, and declares that"no candidate shall be permitted toreceive more than one degree, on thesame day; nor shall a higher degree inMasonry be conferred on any Brother at aless interval than four weeks from hisreceiving a previous degree, nor until hehas passed an examination, in open lodge,in that degree." This rule is also in force inSouth Carolina and several other of theAmerican jurisdictions. But, the law whichforbids the whole three degrees of AncientCraft Masonry to be conferred, at the samecommunication, on one candidate, isuniversal in its application, and, as such,may be deemed one of the ancientlandmarks of the Order.

There is another rule, which seems to be ofuniversal extent, and is, indeed, containedin the General Regulations of 1767, to thefollowing effect: "No lodge shall makemore than five new Brothers at one and thesame time, without an urgent necessity."

All lodges are bound to hold theirmeetings at least once in every calendarmonth; and every lodge neglecting so todo for one year, thereby forfeits its warrantof constitution.

The subject of the removal of lodges is thelast thing that shall engage our attention.Here the ancient regulations of the crafthave adopted many guards to prevent thecapricious or improper removal of a lodgefrom its regular place of meeting. In thefirst place, no lodge can be removed fromthe town in which it is situated, to any otherplace, without the consent of the Grand

Lodge. But, a lodge may remove from onepart of the town to another, with theconsent of the members, under thefollowing restrictions: The removal cannotbe made without the Master's knowledge;nor can any motion, for that purpose, bepresented in his absence. When such amotion is made, and properly seconded,the Master will order summonses to everymember, specifying the business, andappointing a day for considering anddetermining the affair. And if then amajority of the lodge, with the Master, ortwo-thirds, without him, consent to theremoval, it shall take place; but noticethereof must be sent, at once, to the GrandLodge. The General Regulations of 1767further declare, that such removal must beapproved by the Grand Master. I supposethat where the removal of the lodge wasonly a matter of convenience to themembers, the Grand Lodge would hardly

interfere, but leave the whole subject totheir discretion; but, where the removalwould be calculated to affect the interestsof the lodge, or of the fraternity--as in thecase of a removal to a house of badreputation, or to a place of evidentinsecurity--I have no doubt that the GrandLodge, as the conservator of the characterand safety of the institution, would have aright to interpose its authority, and preventthe improper removal.

I have thus treated, as concisely as theimportant nature of the subjects wouldpermit, of the powers, privileges, duties,and obligations of lodges, and haveendeavored to embrace, within the limitsof the discussion, all those prominentprinciples of the Order, which, as theyaffect the character and operations of thecraft in their primary assemblies, mayproperly be referred to the Law of

Subordinate Lodges.

Chapter IV.

Of the Officers of a Subordinate Lodge.

Section I.

_Of the Officers in General._

Four officers, at least, the ancient customsof the craft require in every lodge; andthey are consequently found throughoutthe globe. These are the Master, the twoWardens, and the Tiler. Almost equallyuniversal are the offices of Treasurer,Secretary, and two Deacons. But, besidesthese, there may be additional officersappointed by different Grand Lodges. TheGrand Lodge of England, for instance,requires the appointment of an officer,called the "Inner Guard." The GrandOrient of France has prescribed a varietyof officers, which are unknown to Englishand American Masonry. The Grand Lodgesof England and South Carolina direct thattwo Stewards shall be appointed, while

some other Grand Lodges make no suchrequisition. Ancient usage seems to haverecognized the following officers of asubordinate lodge: the Master, twoWardens, Treasurer, Secretary, twoDeacons, two Stewards, and Tiler; and Ishall therefore treat of the duties andpowers of these officers only, in the courseof the present chapter.

The officers of a lodge are electedannually. In this country, the election takesplace on the festival of St. John theEvangelist, or at the meeting immediatelyprevious; but, in this latter case, the dutiesof the offices do not commence until St.John's day, which may, therefore, beconsidered as the beginning of themasonic year.

Dalcho lays down the rule, that "noFreemason chosen into any office can

refuse to serve (unless he has before filledthe same office), without incurring thepenalties established by the bye-laws."Undoubtedly a lodge may enact such aregulation, and affix any reasonablepenalty; but I am not aware of any ancientregulation which makes it incumbent onsubordinate lodges to do so.

If any of the subordinate officers, exceptthe Master and Wardens, die, or beremoved from office, during the year, thelodge may, under the authority of adispensation from the Grand Master, enterinto an election to supply the vacancy. Butin the case of the death or removal of theMaster or either of the Wardens, noelection can be held to supply thevacancy, even by dispensation, forreasons which will appear when I come totreat of those offices.

No officer can resign his office after he hasbeen installed. Every officer is elected fortwelve months, and at his installationsolemnly promises to perform the duties ofthat office until the next regular day ofelection; and hence the lodge cannotpermit him, by a resignation, to violate hisobligation of office.

Another rule is, that every officer holds onto his office until his successor has beeninstalled. It is the installation, and not theelection, which puts an officer intopossession; and the faithful management ofthe affairs of Masonry requires, thatbetween the election and installation of hissuccessor, the predecessor shall notvacate the office, but continue to dischargeits duties.

An office can be vacated only by death,permanent removal from the jurisdiction,

or expulsion. Suspension does not vacate,but only suspends the performance of theduties of the office, which must then betemporarily discharged by some otherperson, to be appointed from time to time;for, as soon as the suspended officer isrestored, he resumes the dignities andduties of his office.

Section II.

_Of the Worshipful Master._

This is probably the most important officein the whole system of Masonry, as, uponthe intelligence, skill, and fidelity of theMasters of our lodges, the entire institutionis dependent for its prosperity. It is anoffice which is charged with heavyresponsibilities, and, as a justconsequence, is accompanied by theinvestiture of many important powers.

A necessary qualification of the Master of alodge is, that he must have previouslyserved in the office of a Warden.[48] Thisqualification is sometimes dispensed within the case of new lodges, or where nomember of an old lodge, who has servedas a Warden, will accept the office of

Master. But it is not necessary that heshould have served as a Warden in thelodge of which he is proposed to beelected Master. The discharge of theduties of a Warden, by regular electionand installation in any other lodge, and atany former period, will be a sufficientqualification.

One of the most important duties of theMaster of a lodge is, to see that the edictsand regulations of the Grand Lodge areobeyed by his Brethren, and that hisofficers faithfully discharge their duties.

The Master has particularly in charge thewarrant of Constitution, which must alwaysbe present in his lodge, when opened.

The Master has a right to call a specialmeeting of his lodge whenever he pleases,and is the sole judge of any emergency

which may require such specialcommunication.

He has, also, the right of closing his lodgeat any hour that he may deem expedient,notwithstanding the whole business of theevening may not have been transacted.This regulation arises from the unwrittenlaw of Masonry. As the Master isresponsible to the Grand Lodge for thefidelity of the work done in his lodge, andas the whole of the labor is, therefore,performed under his superintendence, itfollows that, to enable him to dischargethis responsibility, he must be investedwith the power of commencing, ofcontinuing, or of suspending labor at suchtime as he may, in his wisdom, deem to bethe most advantageous to the edifice ofMasonry.

It follows from this rule that a question of

adjournment cannot be entertained in alodge. The adoption of a resolution toadjourn, would involve the necessity of theMaster to obey it. The power, therefore, ofcontrolling the work, would be taken out ofhis hands and placed in those of themembers, which would be in directconflict with the duties imposed upon himby the ritual. The doctrine that a lodgecannot adjourn, but must be closed orcalled off at the pleasure of the Master,appears now to me to be very generallyadmitted.

The Master and his two Wardens constitutethe representatives of the lodge in theGrand Lodge, and it is his duty to attendthe communications of that body "on allconvenient occasions."[49] When there, heis faithfully to represent his lodge, and onall questions discussed, to obey itsinstructions, voting in every case rather

against his own convictions than againstthe expressed wish of his lodge.

The Master presides not only over thesymbolic work of the lodge, but also overits business deliberations, and in eithercase his decisions are reversible only bythe Grand Lodge. There can be no appealfrom his decision, on any question, to thelodge. He is supreme in his lodge, so far asthe lodge is concerned, being amenablefor his conduct in the government of it, notto its members, but to the Grrand Lodgealone. If an appeal were proposed, itwould be his duty, for the preservation ofdiscipline, to refuse to put the question. If amember is aggrieved by the conduct ordecisions of the Master, he has his redressby an appeal to the Grrand Lodge, whichwill, of course, see that the Master does notrule his lodge "in an unjust or arbitrarymanner." But such a thing as an appeal

from the Master of the lodge to itsmembers is unknown in Masonry.

This may, at first sight, appear to be givingtoo despotic power to the Master. But aslight reflection will convince any one thatthere can be but little danger ofoppression from one so guarded andcontrolled as a Master is, by the sacredobligations of his office, and thesupervision of the Grand Lodge, while theplacing in the hands of the craft sopowerful, and at times, and with badspirits, so annoying a privilege as that ofimmediate appeal, would necessarily tendto impair the energies and lessen thedignity of the Master, while it would besubversive of that spirit of discipline whichpervades every part of the institution, andto which it is mainly indebted for itsprosperity and perpetuity.

The ancient charges rehearsed at theinstallation of a Master, prescribe thevarious moral qualifications which arerequired in the aspirant for that elevatedand responsible office. He is to be a goodman, and peaceable citizen or subject, arespecter of the laws, and a lover of hisBrethren--cultivating the social virtues andpromoting the general good of society aswell as of his own Order.

Within the last few years, the standard ofintellectual qualifications has been greatlyelevated. And it is now admitted that theMaster of a lodge, to do justice to theexalted office which he holds, to the craftover whom he presides, and to thecandidates whom he is to instruct, shouldbe not only a man of irreproachable moralcharacter, but also of expanded intellectand liberal education. Still, as there is noexpress law upon this subject, the

selection of a Master and thedetermination of his qualifications must beleft to the judgment and good sense of themembers.

Section III.

_Of the Wardens._

The Senior and Junior Warden are theassistants of the Master in the governmentof the lodge. They are selected fromamong the members on the floor, thepossession of a previous office not being,as in the case of the Master, a necessaryqualification for election. In England theyare appointed by the Master, but in thiscountry they are universally elected by thelodge.

During the temporary absence of theMaster the Senior Warden has the right ofpresiding, though he may, and often doesby courtesy, invite a Past Master to assumethe chair. In like manner, in the absence ofboth Master and Senior Warden, the Junior

Warden will preside, and competentBrethren will by him be appointed to fillthe vacant seats of the Wardens. But if theMaster and Junior Warden be present, andthe Senior Warden be absent, the JuniorWarden does not occupy the West, butretains his own station, the Masterappointing some Brother to occupy thestation of the Senior Warden. For the JuniorWarden succeeds by law only to the officeof Master, and, unless that office be vacant,he is bound to fulfill the duties of the officeto which he has been obligated.

In case of the death, removal from thejurisdiction, or expulsion of the Master, bythe Grand Lodge, no election can be helduntil the constitutional period. The SeniorWarden will take the Master's place andpreside over the lodge, while his seat willbe temporarily filled from time to time byappointment. The Senior Warden being in

fact still in existence, and only dischargingone of the highest duties of his office, thatof presiding in the absence of the Master,his office cannot be declared vacant andthere can be no election for it. In suchcase, the Junior Warden, for the reasonalready assigned, will continue at his ownstation in the South.

In case of the death, removal, or expulsionof both Master and Senior Warden, theJunior Warden will discharge the duties ofthe Mastership and make temporaryappointments of both Wardens. It mustalways be remembered that the Wardenssucceed according to seniority to the officeof Master when vacant, but that neither canlegally discharge the duties of the other. Itmust also be remembered that when aWarden succeeds to the government of thelodge, he does not become the Master; heis still only a Warden discharging the

functions of a higher vacated station, asone of the expressed duties of his ownoffice. A recollection of these distinctionswill enable us to avoid muchembarrassment in the consideration of allthe questions incident to this subject. If theMaster be present, the Wardens assist himin the government of the lodge. The SeniorWarden presides over the craft while atlabor, and the Junior when they are inrefreshment. Formerly the examination ofvisitors was intrusted to the Junior Warden,but this duty is now more appropriatelyperformed by the Stewards or a specialcommittee appointed for that purpose.

The Senior Warden has the appointment ofthe Senior Deacon, and the Junior Wardenthat of the Stewards.

Section IV.

_Of the Treasurer._

Of so much importance is this officedeemed, that in English Lodges, while allthe other officers are appointed by theMaster, the Treasurer alone is elected bythe lodge. It is, however, singular, that inthe ritual of installation, Preston furnishesno address to the Treasurer on hisinvestiture. Webb, however, has suppliedthe omission, and the charge given in hiswork to this officer, on the night of hisinstallation, having been universallyacknowledged and adopted by the craft inthis country, will furnish us with the mostimportant points of the law in relation tohis duties.

It is, then, in the first place, the duty of the

Treasurer "to receive all moneys from thehands of the Secretary." The Treasurer isonly the banker of the lodge. All fees forinitiation, arrearages of members, and allother dues to the lodge, should be firstreceived by the Secretary, and paidimmediately over to the Treasurer for safekeeping.

The keeping of just and regular accounts isanother duty presented to the Treasurer.As soon as he has received an amount ofmoney from the Secretary, he shouldtransfer the account of it to his books. Bythis means, the Secretary and Treasurerbecome mutual checks upon each other,and the safety of the funds of the lodge issecured.

The Treasurer is not only the banker, butalso the disbursing officer of the lodge; buthe is directed to pay no money except with

the consent of the lodge and on the orderof the Worshipful Master. It seems to me,therefore, that every warrant drawn on himshould be signed by the Master, and theaction of the lodge attested by thecounter-signature of the Secretary.

It is usual, in consequence of the greatresponsibility of the Treasurer, to selectsome Brother of worldly substance for theoffice; and still further to insure the safetyof the funds, by exacting from him a bond,with sufficient security. He sometimesreceives a per centage, or a fixed salary,for his services.

Section V.

_Of the Secretary._

It is the duty of the Secretary to record allthe proceedings of the lodge, "which maybe committed to paper;" to conduct thecorrespondence of the lodge, and toreceive all moneys due the lodge from anysource whatsoever. He is, therefore, therecording, corresponding, and receivingofficer of the lodge. By receiving themoneys due to the lodge in the first place,and then paying them over to theTreasurer, he becomes, as I have alreadyobserved, a check upon that officer.

In view of the many laborious duties whichdevolve upon him, the Secretary, in manylodges, receives a compensation for hisservices.

Should the Treasurer or Secretary die orbe expelled, there is no doubt that anelection for a successor, to fill theunexpired term, may be held bydispensation from the Grand Master. Butthe incompetency of either of theseofficers to perform his duties, by reason ofthe infirmity of sickness or removal fromthe seat of the lodge, will not, I think,authorize such an election. Because theoriginal officer may recover from hisinfirmity, or return to his residence, and, ineither case, having been elected andinstalled for one year, he must remain theSecretary or Treasurer until the expirationof the period for which he had been soelected and installed, and, therefore, onhis recovery or his return, is entitled toresume all the prerogatives and functionsof his office. The case of death, or ofexpulsion, which is, in fact, masonic death,

is different, because all the rightspossessed during life cease _exnecessitate rei_, and forever lapse at thetime of the said physical or masonic death;and in the latter case, a restoration to allthe rights and privileges of Masonry wouldnot restore the party to any office which hehad held at the time of his expulsion.

Section VI.

_Of the Deacons._

In every lodge there are two of theseofficers--a Senior and a Junior Deacon.They are not elected, but appointed; theformer by the Master, and the latter by theSenior Warden.

The duties of these officers are many andimportant; but they are so well defined inthe ritual as to require no furtherconsideration in this place.

The only question that here invites ourexamination is, whether the Deacons, asappointed officers, are removable at thepleasure of the officers who appointedthem; or, whether they retain their offices,like the Master and Wardens, until the

expiration of the year. Masonic authoritiesare silent on this subject; but, basing myjudgment upon analogy, I am inclined tothink that they are not removable: all theofficers of a lodge are chosen to serve forone year, or, from one festival of St. Johnthe Evangelist to the succeeding one. Thishas been the invariable usage in alllodges, and neither in the monitorialceremonies of installation, nor in any rulesor regulations which I have seen, is anyexception to this usage made in respect toDeacons. The written as well as the orallaw of Masonry being silent on this subject,we are bound to give them the benefit ofthis silence, and place them in the samefavorable position as that occupied by thesuperior officers, who, we know, byexpress law are entitled to occupy theirstations for one year. Moreover, the powerof removal is too important to be exercisedexcept under the sanction of an expressed

law, and is contrary to the whole spirit ofMasonry, which, while it invests apresiding officer with the largest extent ofprerogative, is equally careful of the rightsof the youngest member of the fraternity.

From these reasons I am compelled tobelieve that the Deacons, althoughoriginally appointed by the Master andSenior Warden, are not removable byeither, but retain their offices until theexpiration of the year.

Section VII.

_Of the Stewards._

The Stewards, who are two in number, areappointed by the Junior Warden, and sit onthe right and left of him in the lodge. Theiroriginal duties were, "to assist in thecollection of dues and subscriptions; tokeep an account of the lodge expenses; tosee that the tables are properly furnishedat refreshment, and that every Brother issuitably provided for." They are alsoconsidered as the assistants of the Deaconsin the discharge of their duties, and, lately,some lodges are beginning to confide tothem the important trusts of a standingcommittee for the examination of visitorsand the preparation of candidates.

What has been said in relation to the

removal of the Deacons in the precedingsection, is equally applicable to theStewards.

Section VIII.

_Of the Tiler._

This is an office of great importance, andmust, from the peculiar nature of ourinstitution, have existed from its verybeginning. No lodge could ever have beenopened until a Tiler was appointed, andstationed to guard its portals from theapproach of "cowans and eavesdroppers."The qualifications requisite for the office ofa Tiler are, that he must be "a worthyMaster Mason." An Entered Apprentice, ora Fellow Craft, cannot tile a lodge, eventhough it be opened in his own degree. Tonone but Master Masons can this importantduty of guardianship be intrusted. TheTiler is not necessarily a member of thelodge which he tiles. There is noregulation requiring this qualification. In

fact, in large cities, one Brother often actsas the Tiler of several lodges. If, however,he is a member of the lodge, his officedoes not deprive him of the rights ofmembership, and in ballotings forcandidates, election of officers, or otherimportant questions, he is entitled toexercise his privilege of voting, in whichcase the Junior Deacon will temporarilyoccupy his station, while he enters thelodge to deposit his ballot. This appears tobe the general usage of the craft in thiscountry.

The Tiler is sometimes elected by thelodge, and sometimes appointed by theMaster. It seems generally to be admittedthat he may be removed from office formisconduct or neglect of duty, by thelodge, if he has been elected, and by theMaster, if he has been appointed.

Chapter V.

Of Rules of Order.

The safety of the minority, the preservationof harmony, and the dispatch of business,all require that there should be, in everywell-regulated society, some rules andforms for the government of theirproceedings, and, as has been justlyobserved by an able writer onparliamentary law, "whether these formsbe in all cases the most rational or not, isreally not of so great importance; for it ismuch more material that there should be arule to go by, than what that rule is."[50] Bycommon consent, the rules established forthe government of Parliament in England,and of Congress in the United States, andwhich are known collectively under thename of "Parliamentary Law," have beenadopted for the regulation of alldeliberative bodies, whether of a public orprivate nature. But lodges of Freemasonsdiffer so much in their organization andcharacter from other societies, that this law

will, in very few cases, be foundapplicable; and, indeed, in manypositively inapplicable to them. The rules,therefore, for the government of masoniclodges are in general to be deduced fromthe usages of the Order, from traditional orwritten authority, and where both of themare silent, from analogy to the character ofthe institution. To each of these sources,therefore, I shall apply, in the course of thepresent chapter, and in some fewinstances, where the parliamentary lawcoincides with our own, reference will bemade to the authority of the best writers onthat science.

Section I.

_Of the Order of Business._

When the Brethren have been"congregated," or called together by thepresiding officer, the first thing to beattended to is the ceremony of opening thelodge. The consideration of this subject, asit is sufficiently detailed in our ritual, willform no part of the present work.

The lodge having been opened, the nextthing to be attended to is the reading ofthe minutes of the last communication. Theminutes having been read, the presidingofficer will put the question on theirconfirmation, having first inquired of theSenior and Junior Wardens, and lastly ofthe Brethren "around the lodge," whetherthey have any alterations to propose. It

must be borne in mind, that the question ofconfirmation is simply a question whetherthe Secretary has faithfully and correctlyrecorded the transactions of the lodge. If,therefore, it can be satisfactorily shown byany one that there is a mis-entry, or theomission of an entry, this is the time tocorrect it; and where the matter is ofsufficient importance, and the recordingofficer, or any member disputes thecharge of error, the vote of the lodge willbe taken on the subject, and the journalwill be amended or remain as written,according to the opinion so expressed bythe majority of the members. As this is,however, a mere question of memory, itmust be apparent that those members onlywho were present at the previouscommunication, the records of which areunder examination, are qualified toexpress a fair opinion. All others shouldask and be permitted to be excused from

voting.

As no special communication can alter oramend the proceedings of a regular one, itis not deemed necessary to present therecords of the latter to the inspection of theformer. This preliminary reading of theminutes is, therefore, always omitted atspecial communications.

After the reading of the minutes,unfinished business, such as motionspreviously submitted and reports ofcommittees previously appointed, willtake the preference of all other matters.Special communications being called forthe consideration of some special subject,that subject must of course claim thepriority of consideration over all others.

In like manner, where any business hasbeen specially and specifically postponed

to another communication, it constitutes atthat communication what is called, inparliamentary law, "the order of the day,"and may at any time in the course of theevening be called up, to the exclusion ofall other business.

The lodge may, however, at its discretion,refuse to take up the consideration of suchorder; for the same body whichdetermined at one time to consider aquestion, may at another time refuse to doso. This is one of those instances in whichparliamentary usage is applicable to thegovernment of a lodge. Jefferson says:"Where an order is made, that anyparticular matter be taken up on anyparticular day, there a question is to beput, when it is called for, Whether thehouse will now proceed to that matter?" Ina lodge, however, it is not the usage topropose such a question, but the matter

being called up, is discussed and acted on,unless some Brother moves itspostponement, when the question ofpostponement is put.

But with these exceptions, the unfinishedbusiness must first be disposed of, to avoidits accumulation and its possiblesubsequent neglect.[51]

New business will then be taken up in suchorder as the local bye-laws prescribe, orthe wisdom of the Worshipful Master maysuggest.

In a discussion, when any member wishesto speak, he must stand up in his place,and address himself not to the lodge, norto any particular Brother, but to thepresiding officer, styling him "Worshipful."

When two or more members rise nearly

together, the presiding officer determineswho is entitled to speak, and calls him byhis name, whereupon he proceeds, unlesshe voluntarily sits down, and gives way tothe other. The ordinary rules of courtesy,which should govern a masonic bodyabove all other societies, as well as thegeneral usage of deliberative bodies,require that the one first up should beentitled to the floor. But the decision of thisfact is left entirely to the Master, orpresiding officer.

Whether a member be entitled to speakonce or twice to the same question, is leftto the regulation of the local bye-laws ofevery lodge. But, under all circumstances,it seems to be conceded, that a membermay rise at any time with the permission ofthe presiding officer, or for the purpose ofexplanation.

A member may be called to order by anyother while speaking, for the use of anyindecorous remark, personal allusion, orirrelevant matter; but this must be done ina courteous and conciliatory manner, andthe question of order will at once bedecided by the presiding officer.

No Brother is to be interrupted whilespeaking, except for the purpose of callinghim to order, or to make a necessaryexplanation; nor are any separateconversations, or, as they are called in ourancient charges, "private committees," tobe allowed.

Every member of the Order is, in thecourse of the debate as well as at all othertimes in the lodge, to be addressed by thetitle of "Brother," and no secular or worldlytitles are ever to be used.

In accordance with the principles ofjustice, the parliamentary usage isadopted, which permits the mover of aresolution to make the concluding speech,that he may reply to all those who havespoken against it, and sum up thearguments in its favor. And it would be abreach of order as well as of courtesy forany of his opponents to respond to thisfinal argument of the mover.

It is within the discretion of the Master, atany time in the course of the evening, tosuspend the business of the lodge for thepurpose of proceeding to the ceremony ofinitiation, for the "work" of Masonry, as it istechnically called, takes precedence of allother business.

When all business, both old and new, andthe initiation of candidates, if there be any,has been disposed of, the presiding officer

inquires of the officers and members ifthere be anything more to be proposedbefore closing. Custom has prescribed aformulary for making this inquiry, which isin the following words.

The Worshipful Master, addressing theSenior and Junior Wardens and then theBrethren, successively, says: "BrotherSenior, have you anything to offer in theWest for the good of Masonry in general orof this lodge in particular? Anything in theSouth, Brother Junior? Around the lodge,Brethren?" The answers to these inquiriesbeing in the negative on the part of theWardens, and silence on that of the craft,the Master proceeds to close the lodge inthe manner prescribed in the ritual.

The reading of the minutes of the evening,not for confirmation, but for suggestion,lest anything may have been omitted,

should always precede the closingceremonies, unless, from the lateness ofthe hour, it be dispensed with by themembers.

Section II.

_Of Appeals from the Decision of theChair._

Freemasonry differs from all otherinstitutions, in permitting no appeal to thelodge from the decision of the presidingofficer. The Master is supreme in hislodge, so far as the lodge is concerned. Heis amenable for his conduct, in thegovernment of the lodge, not to itsmembers, but to the Grand Lodge alone.In deciding points of order as well asgraver matters, no appeal can be takenfrom that decision to the lodge. If anappeal were proposed, it would be hisduty, for the preservation of discipline, torefuse to put the question. It is, in fact,wrong that the Master should even bycourtesy permit such an appeal to be

taken; because, as the Committee ofCorrespondence of the Grand Lodge ofTennessee have wisely remarked, by theadmission of such appeals by _courtesy_,"is established ultimately a precedent fromwhich will be claimed _the right to take_appeals."[52] If a member is aggrievedwith the conduct or the decisions of theMaster, he has his redress by an appeal tothe Grand Lodge, which will of course seethat the Master does not rule his lodge "inan unjust or arbitrary manner." But such athing as an appeal from the Master to thelodge is unknown in Masonry.

This, at first view, may appear to be givingtoo despotic a power to the Master. But alittle reflection will convince any one thatthere can be but slight danger ofoppression from one so guarded andcontrolled as the Master is by theobligations of his office and the

superintendence of the Grand Lodge,while the placing in the hands of the craftso powerful, and, with bad spirits, soannoying a privilege as that of immediateappeal, would necessarily tend to impairthe energies and lessen the dignity of theMaster, at the same time that it would betotally subversive of that spirit of strictdiscipline which pervades every part ofthe institution, and to which it is mainlyindebted for its prosperity and perpetuity.

In every case where a member supposeshimself to be aggrieved by the decision ofthe Master, he should make his appeal tothe Grand Lodge.

It is scarcely necessary to add, that aWarden or Past Master, presiding in theabsence of the Master, assumes for thetime all the rights and prerogatives of theMaster.

Section III.

_Of the Mode of Taking the Question._

The question in Masonry is not taken _vivavoce_ or by "aye" and "nay." This shouldalways be done by "a show of hands." Theregulation on this subject was adopted notlater than the year 1754, at which time theBook of Constitutions was revised, "and thenecessary alterations and additions made,consistent with the laws and rules ofMasonry," and accordingly, in the editionpublished in the following year, theregulation is laid down in thesewords--"The opinions or votes of themembers are always to be signified byeach holding up one of his hands: whichuplifted hands the Grand Wardens are tocount; unless the number of hands be sounequal as to render the counting useless.

Nor should any other kind of division beever admitted among Masons."[53]

Calling for the yeas and nays has beenalmost universally condemned as anunmasonic practice, nor should any Masterallow it to be resorted to in his lodge.

Moving the "previous question," aparliamentary invention for stopping alldiscussion, is still more at variance withthe liberal and harmonious spirit whichshould distinguish masonic debates, andis, therefore, never to be permitted in alodge.

Section IV.

_Of Adjournments._

Adjournment is a term not recognized inMasonry. There are but two ways in whichthe communication of a lodge can beterminated; and these are either by_closing_ the lodge, or by _calling fromlabor to refreshment_. In the former casethe business of the communication isfinally disposed of until the nextcommunication; in the latter the lodge isstill supposed to be open and may resumeits labors at any time indicated by theMaster.

But both the time of closing the lodge andof calling it from labor to refreshment is tobe determined by the absolute will and thefree judgment of the Worshipful Master, to

whom alone is intrusted the care of "settingthe craft to work, and giving themwholesome instruction for labor." He aloneis responsible to the Grand Master and theGrand Lodge, that his lodge shall beopened, continued, and closed inharmony; and as it is by his "will andpleasure" only that it is opened, so is it byhis "will and pleasure" only that it can beclosed. Any attempt, therefore, on the partof the lodge to entertain a motion foradjournment would be an infringement ofthis prerogative of the Master. Such amotion is, therefore, always out of order,and cannot be; and cannot be acted on.

The rule that a lodge cannot adjourn, butremain in session until closed by theMaster, derives an authoritative sanctionalso from the following clause in the fifth ofthe Old Charges.

"All Masons employed shall meeklyreceive their wages without murmuring ormutiny, _and not desert the Master till thework is finished_."

Section V.

_Of the Appointment of Committees._

It is the prerogative of the Master toappoint all Committees, unless by aspecial resolution provision has beenmade that a committee shall otherwise beappointed.

The Master is also, _ex officio_, chairmanof every committee which he chooses toattend, although he may not originallyhave been named a member of suchcommittee. But he may, if he chooses,waive this privilege; yet he may, at anytime during the session of the committee,reassume his inherent prerogative ofgoverning the craft at all times when in hispresence, and therefore take the chair.

Section VI.

_Of the Mode of Keeping the Minutes._

Masonry is preeminently an institution offorms, and hence, as was to be expected,there is a particular form provided forrecording the proceedings of a lodge.Perhaps the best method ofcommunicating this form to the reader willbe, to record the proceedings of asupposititious meeting or communication.

The following form, therefore, embracesthe most important transactions thatusually occur during the session of alodge, and it may serve as an exemplar,for the use of secretaries.

"A regular communication of ---- Lodge,NO. ----, was holden at ----; on ----, the ----

day of ----A.: L.: 58--.

Present.

Bro.: A. B----, W.: Master. " B. C----,S.: Warden. " C. D----, J.: Warden. "

D. E----, Treasurer. " E. F----,Secretary. " F. G----, S.: Deacon. "G. H----, J.: Deacon. " H. I----, }Stewards. " I. K----, } " K. L----,Tiler.

_Members._ Bro.: L. M---- M.N---- N. O---- O. P----

_Visitors._ P. Q---- Q. R---- R. S---- S. T----

The Lodge was opened in due form on thethird degree of Masonry.

"The minutes of the regular communication

of ---- were read and confirmed.[54]

"The committee on the petition of Mr. C. B.,a candidate for initiation, reportedfavorably, whereupon he was balloted forand duly elected.

"The committee on the application of Mr.D. C., a candidate for initiation, reportedfavorably, whereupon he was balloted for,and the box appearing foul he wasrejected.

"The committee on the application of Mr.E. D., a candidate for initiation, havingreported unfavorably, he was declaredrejected without a ballot.

"The petition of Mr. F. E., a candidate forinitiation, having been withdrawn by hisfriends, he was declared rejected withouta ballot.

"A petition for initiation from Mr. G.F.,inclosing the usual amount andrecommended by Bros. C. D.---- and H.I.----, was referred to a committee ofinvestigation consisting of Bros. G. H.----,L. M.----, and O. P.----.

"Bro. S.R., an Entered Apprentice, havingapplied for advancement, was dulyelected to take the second degree; andBro. W.Y., a Fellow Craft, was, on hisapplication for advancement, duly electedto take the third degree.

"A letter was read from Mrs. T. V.----, thewidow of a Master Mason, when the sum oftwenty dollars was voted for her relief.

"The amendment to article 10, section 5 ofthe bye-laws, proposed by Bro. M. N. ----at the communication of ----, was read a

third time, adopted by a constitutionalmajority and ordered to be sent to theGrand Lodge for approval andconfirmation.

"The Lodge of Master Masons was thenclosed, and a lodge of EnteredApprentices opened in due form.

"Mr. C. B., a candidate for initiation, beingin waiting, was duly prepared, broughtforward and initiated as an EnteredApprentice, he paying the usual fee.

"The Lodge of Entered Apprentices wasthen closed, and a Lodge of Fellow Craftsopened in due form.

"Bro. S. R., an Entered Apprentice, beingin waiting, was duly prepared, broughtforward and passed to the degree of aFellow Craft, he paying the usual fee.

"The Lodge of Fellow Crafts was thenclosed, and a lodge of Master Masonsopened in due form.

"Bro. W. Y., a Fellow Craft, being inwaiting, was duly prepared, broughtforward and raised to the sublime degreeof a Master Mason, he paying the usual fee.

Amount received this evening, as follows:

Petition of Mr. G. F., $5 Fee of Bro.C. B., 5 do. of Bro. S. R., 5 do. ofBro. W. Y., 5--Total, $20

all of which was paid over to the Treasurer.

There being no further business, the lodgewas closed in due form and harmony.

E. F----,

_Secretary._

Such is the form which has been adoptedas the most convenient mode of recordingthe transactions of a lodge. These minutesmust be read, at the close of the meeting,that the Brethren may suggest anynecessary alterations or additions, andthen at the beginning of the next regularmeeting, that they may be confirmed, afterwhich they should be transcribed from therough Minute Book in which they were firstentered into the permanent Record Bookof the lodge.

Book Third.

The Law Of Individuals.

Passing from the consideration of the law,which refers to Masons in theircongregated masses, as the constituents ofGrand and Subordinate Lodges, I nextapproach the discussion of the law whichgoverns, them in their individual capacity,whether in the inception of their masoniclife, as candidates for initiation, or in theirgradual progress through each of the threedegrees, for it will be found that a Mason,as he assumes new and additionalobligations, and is presented withincreased light, contracts new duties, andis invested with new prerogatives andprivileges.

Chapter I.

Of the Qualifications of Candidates.

The qualifications of a candidate forinitiation into the mysteries ofFreemasonry, are four-fold in theircharacter--moral, physical, intellectual andpolitical.

The moral character is intended to securethe respectability of the Order, because,by the worthiness of its candidates, theirvirtuous deportment, and good reputation,will the character of the institution bejudged, while the admission of irreligiouslibertines and contemners of the moral lawwould necessarily impair its dignity andhonor.

The physical qualifications of a candidatecontribute to the utility of the Order,because he who is deficient in any of hislimbs or members, and who is not in thepossession of all his natural senses andendowments, is unable to perform, with

pleasure to himself or credit to thefraternity, those peculiar labors in whichall should take an equal part. He thusbecomes a drone in the hive, and so farimpairs the usefulness of the lodge, as "aplace where Freemasons assemble towork, and to instruct and improvethemselves in the mysteries of theirancient science."

The intellectual qualifications refer to thesecurity of the Order; because theyrequire that its mysteries shall be confidedonly to those whose mental developmentsare such as to enable them properly toappreciate, and faithfully to preserve fromimposition, the secrets thus entrusted tothem. It is evident, for instance, that anidiot could neither understand the hiddendoctrines that might be communicated tohim, nor could he so secure such portionsas he might remember, in the "depositary

of his heart," as to prevent the designingknave from worming them out of him; for,as the wise Solomon has said, "a fool'smouth is his destruction, and his lips arethe snare of his soul."

The political qualifications are intended tomaintain the independence of the Order;because its obligations and privileges arethus confided only to those who, from theirposition in society, are capable of obeyingthe one, and of exercising the otherwithout the danger of let or hindrance fromsuperior authority.

Of the moral, physical and politicalqualifications of a candidate there can beno doubt, as they are distinctly laid downin the ancient charges and constitutions.The intellectual are not so readily decided.

These four-fold qualifications may be

briefly summed up in the followingaxioms.

_Morally_, the candidate must be a man ofirreproachable conduct, a believer in theexistence of God, and living "under thetongue of good report."

_Physically_, he must be a man of at leasttwenty-one years of age, upright in body,with the senses of a man, not deformed ordismembered, but with hale and entirelimbs as a _man_ ought to be.

_Intellectually_, he must be a man in thefull possession of his intellects, not soyoung that his mind shall not have beenformed, nor so old that it shall have falleninto dotage; neither a fool, an idiot, nor amadman; and with so much education as toenable him to avail himself of theteachings of Masonry, and to cultivate at

his leisure a knowledge of the principlesand doctrines of our royal art.

_Politically_, he must be in theunrestrained enjoyment of his civil andpersonal liberty, and this, too, by thebirthright of inheritance, and not by itssubsequent acquisition, in consequence ofhis release from hereditary bondage.

The lodge which strictly demands thesequalifications of its candidates may havefewer members than one less strict, but itwill undoubtedly have better ones.

But the importance of the subject demandsfor each class of the qualifications aseparate section, and a more extendedconsideration.

Section I.

_Of the Moral Qualifications ofCandidates._

The old charges state, that "a Mason isobliged by his tenure to obey the morallaw." It is scarcely necessary to say, thatthe phrase, "moral law," is a technicalexpression of theology, and refers to theTen Commandments, which are so called,because they define the regulationsnecessary for the government of themorals and manners of men. The habitualviolation of any one of these commandswould seem, according to the spirit of theAncient Constitutions, to disqualify acandidate for Masonry.

The same charges go on to say, in relationto the religious character of a Mason, that

he should not be "a stupid atheist, nor anirreligious libertine." A denier of theexistence of a Supreme Architect of theUniverse cannot, of course, be obligatedas a Mason, and, accordingly, there is nolandmark more certain than that whichexcludes every atheist from the Order.

The word "libertine" has, at this day, ameaning very different from what it borewhen the old charges were compiled. Itthen signified what we now call a"free-thinker," or disbeliever in the divinerevelation of the Scriptures. This rulewould therefore greatly abridge theuniversality and tolerance of theInstitution, were it not for the followingqualifying clause in the same instrument:--

"Though in ancient times Masons werecharged in every country to be of thereligion of that country or nation, whatever

it was, yet it is now thought moreexpedient only to oblige them to thatreligion in which all men agree, leavingtheir particular opinions to themselves;that is, to be good men and true, or men ofhonor and honesty, by whateverdenominations or persuasions they may bedistinguished."

The construction now given universally tothe religious qualification of a candidate, issimply that he shall have a belief in theexistence and superintending control of aSupreme Being.

These old charges from which we derivethe whole of our doctrine as to the moralqualifications of a candidate, furtherprescribe as to the political relations of aMason, that he is to be "a peaceablesubject to the civil powers, wherever heresides or works, and is never to be

concerned in plots and conspiraciesagainst the peace and welfare of thenation, nor to behave himself undutifully toinferior magistrates. He is cheerfully toconform to every lawful authority; touphold on every occasion the interest ofthe community, and zealously promote theprosperity of his own country."

Such being the characteristics of a trueMason, the candidate who desires toobtain that title, must show his claim to thepossession of these virtues; and hence thesame charges declare, in reference tothese moral qualifications, that "Thepersons made Masons, or admittedmembers of a lodge, must be good andtrue men--no immoral or scandalous men,but of good report."

Section II.

_Of the Physical Qualifications ofCandidates._

The physical qualifications of a candidaterefer to his sex, his age, and the conditionof his limbs.

The first and most important requisite of acandidate is, that he shall be "_a man_." Nowoman can be made a Mason. Thislandmark is so indisputable, that it wouldbe wholly superfluous to adduce anyarguments or authority in its support.

As to age, the old charges prescribe therule, that the candidate must be "of matureand discreet age." But what is the preciseperiod when one is supposed to havearrived at this maturity and discretion,

cannot be inferred from any uniformpractice of the craft in different countries.The provisions of the civil law, which maketwenty-one the age of maturity, have,however, been generally followed. In thiscountry the regulation is general, that thecandidate must be twenty-one years ofage. Such, too, was the regulation adoptedby the General Assembly, which met onthe 27th Dec., 1663, and which prescribedthat "no person shall be accepted unlesshe be twenty-one years old or more."[55]In Prussia, the candidate is required to betwenty-five; in England, twenty-one,[56]"unless by dispensation from the GrandMaster, or Provincial Grand Master;" inIreland, twenty-one, except "bydispensation from the Grand Master, or theGrand Lodge;" in France, twenty-one,unless the candidate be the son of a Masonwho has rendered important service to thecraft, with the consent of his parent or

guardian, or a young man who has servedsix months with his corps in the army--suchpersons may be initiated at eighteen; inSwitzerland, the age of qualification isfixed at twenty-one, and inFrankfort-on-Mayn, at twenty. In thiscountry, as I have already observed, theregulation of 1663 is rigidly enforced, andno candidate, who has not arrived at theage of twenty-one, can be initiated.

Our ritual excludes "an old man in hisdotage" equally with a "young man underage." But as dotage signifies imbecility ofmind, this subject will be more properlyconsidered under the head of intellectualqualifications.

The physical qualifications, which refer tothe condition of the candidate's body andlimbs, have given rise, within a few yearspast, to a great amount of discussion and

much variety of opinion. The regulationcontained in the old charges of 1721,which requires the candidate to be "aperfect youth," has in some jurisdictionsbeen rigidly enforced to the very letter ofthe law, while in others it has been socompletely explained away as to meananything or nothing. Thus, in SouthCarolina, where the rule is rigid, thecandidate is required to be neitherdeformed nor dismembered, but of haleand entire limbs, as a man ought to be,while in Maine, a deformed person may beadmitted, provided "the deformity is notsuch as to prevent him from beinginstructed in the arts and mysteries ofFreemasonry."

The first written law which we find on thissubject is that which was enacted by theGeneral Assembly held in 1663, under theGrand Mastership of the Earl of St. Albans,

and which declares "that no person shallhereafter be accepted a Freemason butsuch as are of _able_ body."[57]

Twenty years after, in the reign of JamesII., or about the year 1683, it seems to havebeen found necessary, more exactly todefine the meaning of this expression, "ofable body," and accordingly we find,among the charges ordered to be read to aMaster on his installation, the followingregulation:

"Thirdly, that he that be made be able inall degrees; that is, free-born, of a goodkindred, true, and no bondsman, and that_he have his right limbs as a man ought tohave."_[58]

The old charges, published in the originalBook of Constitutions in 1723, contain thefollowing regulation:

"No Master should take an Apprentice,unless he be a perfect youth having nomaim or defect that may render himuncapable of learning the art."

Notwithstanding the positive demand for_perfection_, and the positive and explicitdeclaration that he must have _no maim ordefect_, the remainder of the sentence has,within a few years past, by some GrandLodges, been considered as a qualifyingclause, which would permit the admissionof candidates whose physical defects didnot exceed a particular point. But, inperfection, there can be no degrees ofcomparison, and he who is required to beperfect, is required to be so withoutmodification or diminution. That which is_perfect_ is complete in all its parts, and,by a deficiency in any portion of itsconstituent materials, it becomes not less

perfect, (which expression would be asolecism in grammar,) but at once by thedeficiency ceases to be perfect at all--itthen becomes imperfect. In theinterpretation of a law, "words," saysBlackstone, "are generally to beunderstood in their usual and most knownsignification," and then "perfect" wouldmean, "complete, entire, neither defectivenor redundant." But another source ofinterpretation is, the "comparison of a lawwith other laws, that are made by the samelegislator, that have some affinity with thesubject, or that expressly relate to thesame point."[59] Applying this law of thejurists, we shall have no difficulty inarriving at the true signification of theword "perfect," if we refer to the regulationof 1683, of which the clause in questionappears to have been an exposition. Now,the regulation of 1683 says, in explicitterms, that the candidate must "_have his

right limbs as a man ought to have_."Comparing the one law with the other,there can be no doubt that the requisitionof Masonry is and always has been, thatadmission could only be granted to himwho was neither deformed nordismembered, but of hale and entire limbsas a man should be.

But another, and, as Blackstone terms it,"the most universal and effectual way ofdiscovering the true meaning of a law" is,to consider "the reason and spirit of it, orthe cause which moved the legislator toenact it." Now, we must look for the originof the law requiring physical perfection,not to the formerly operative character ofthe institution, (for there never was a timewhen it was not speculative as well asoperative,) but to its symbolic nature. Inthe ancient temple, every stone wasrequired to be _perfect_, for a perfect

stone was the symbol of truth. In ourmystic association, every Masonrepresents a stone in that spiritual temple,"that house not made with hands, eternal inthe heavens," of which the temple ofSolomon was the type. Hence it is requiredthat he should present himself, like theperfect stone in the material temple, aperfect man in the spiritual building. "Thesymbolic relation of each member of theOrder to its mystic temple, forbids theidea," says Bro. W.S. Rockwell, ofGeorgia,[60] "that its constituent portions,its living stones, should be less perfect orless a type of their great original, than theimmaculate material which formed theearthly dwelling place of the God of theiradoration." If, then, as I presume it will bereadily conceded, by all except those whoerroneously suppose the institution to havebeen once wholly operative andafterwards wholly speculative, perfection

is required in a candidate, not for thephysical reason that he may be enabled togive the necessary signs of recognition,but because the defect would destroy thesymbolism of that perfect stone whichevery Mason is supposed to represent inthe spiritual temple, we thus arrive at aknowledge of the causes which moved thelegislators of Masonry to enact the law,and we see at once, and without doubt,that the words _perfect youth_ are to betaken in an unqualified sense, as signifyingone who has "his right limbs as a manought to have."[61]

It is, however, but fair to state that theremaining clause of the old charge, whichasserts that the candidate must have nomaim or defect that may render himincapable of learning the art, has beensupposed to intend a modification of theword "perfect," and to permit the

admission of one whose maim or defectwas not of such a nature as to prevent hislearning the art of Masonry. But I wouldrespectfully suggest that a criticism of thiskind is based upon a mistaken view of theimport of the words. The sentence is notthat the candidate must have no such maimor defect as might, by possibility, preventhim from learning the art; though this is theinterpretation given by those who are infavor of admitting slightly maimedcandidates. It is, on the contrary, soworded as to give a consequentialmeaning to the word "_that_." He musthave no maim or defect _that_ may renderhim incapable; that is, _because_, byhaving such maim or defect, he would berendered incapable of acquiring our art.

In the Ahiman Rezon published byLaurence Dermott in 1764, and adopted forthe government of the Grand Lodge of

Ancient York Masons in England, andmany of the Provincial Grand andsubordinate lodges of America, theregulation is laid down that candidatesmust be "men of good report, free-born, ofmature age, not deformed nordismembered at the time of their making,and no woman or eunuch." It is true that atthe present day this book possesses nolegal authority among the craft; but I quoteit, to show what was the interpretationgiven to the ancient law by a large portion,perhaps a majority, of the English andAmerican Masons in the middle of theeighteenth century.

A similar interpretation seems at all timesto have been given by the Grand Lodgesof the United States, with the exception ofsome, who, within a few years past, havebegun to adopt a more latitudinarianconstruction.

In Pennsylvania it was declared, in 1783,that candidates are not to be "deformed ordismembered at the time of their making."

In South Carolina the book ofConstitutions, first published in 1807,requires that "every person desiringadmission must be upright in body, notdeformed or dismembered at the time ofmaking, but of hale and entire limbs, as aman ought to be."

In the "Ahiman Rezon and Masonic Ritual,"published by order of the Grand Lodge ofNorth Carolina and Tennessee, in the year1805, candidates are required to be "haleand sound, not deformed or dismemberedat the time of their making."[62]

Maryland, in 1826, sanctioned the AhimanRezon of Cole, which declares the law in

precisely the words of South Carolina,already quoted.

In 1823, the Grand Lodge of Missouriunanimously adopted a report, whichdeclared that all were to be refusedadmission who were not "sound in mindand _all their members_," and she adopteda resolution asserting that "the GrandLodge cannot grant a letter or dispensationto a subordinate lodge working under itsjurisdiction, to initiate any person maimed,disabled, or wanting the qualificationsestablishing by ancient usage."[63]

But it is unnecessary to multiply instances.There never seems to have been anydeviation from the principle that requiredabsolute physical perfection, until, within afew years, the spirit of expediency[64] hasinduced some Grand Lodges to propose amodified construction of the law, and to

admit those whose maims or deformitieswere not such as to prevent them fromcomplying with the ceremonial ofinitiation. Still, a large number of theGrand Lodges have stood fast by theancient landmark, and it is yet to be hopedthat all will return to their first allegiance.The subject is an important one, and,therefore, a few of the more recentauthorities, in behalf of the old law maywith advantage be cited.

"We have examined carefully thearguments 'pro and con,' that haveaccompanied the proceedings of theseveral Grand Lodges, submitted to us,and the conviction has been forced uponour minds, even against our wills, that wedepart from the ancient landmarks andusages of Masonry, whenever we admit anindividual wanting in one of the humansenses, or who is in any particular maimed

or deformed."--_Committee ofCorrespondence G. Lodge of Georgia_,1848, _page_ 36.

"The rationale of the law, excludingpersons physically imperfect anddeformed, lies deeper and is more ancientthan the source ascribed to it.[65] It isgrounded on a principle recognized in theearliest ages of the world; and will befound identical with that which obtainedamong the ancient Jews. In this respect theLevitical law was the same as the masonic,which would not allow any 'to go in untothe vail' who had a blemish--a blind man,or a lame, or a man that wasbroken-footed, or broken-handed, or adwarf, &c....

"The learned and studious Freemasonicantiquary can satisfactorily explain themetaphysics of this requisition in our Book

of Constitutions. For the true and faithfulBrother it sufficeth to know that such arequisition exists. He will prize it the morebecause of its antiquity.... No man can inperfection be 'made a Brother,' no man cantruly 'learn our mysteries,' and practicethem, or 'do the work of a Freemason,' if heis not a _man_ with body free from maim,defect and deformity."--_Report of aSpecial Committee of the Grand Lodge ofNew York, in_ 1848.[66]

"The records of this Grand Lodge may beconfidently appealed to, for proofs of herrepeated refusal to permit maimedpersons to be initiated, and not simply onthe ground that ancient usage forbids it,but because the fundamental constitutionof the Order--the ancient charges--forbidit."--_Committee of Correspondence ofNew York, for 1848, p. 70._

"The lodges subordinate to this GrandLodge are hereby required, in theinitiation of applicants for Masonry, toadhere to the ancient law (as laid down inour printed books), which says he shall beof _entire limbs_"--_Resolution of the G.L.of Maryland, November, 1848._

"I received from the lodge at Ashley apetition to initiate into our Order agentleman of high respectability, who,unfortunately, has been maimed. I refusedmy assent.... I have also refused a similarrequest from the lodge of which I am amember. The fact that the mostdistinguished masonic body on earth hasrecently removed one of the landmarks,should teach _us_ to be careful how wetouch those ancientboundaries."--_Address of the GrandMaster of New Jersey in 1849._

"The Grand Lodge of Florida adopted sucha provision in her constitution, [thequalifying clause permitting the initiationof a maimed person, if his deformity wasnot such as to prevent his instruction], butmore mature reflection, and more lightreflected from our sister Grand Lodges,caused it to be stricken from ourconstitution."--_Address of Gov. Tho.Brown, Grand Master of Florida in_ 1849.

"As to the physical qualifications, theAhiman Rezon leaves no doubt on thesubject, but expressly declares, that everyapplicant for initiation must be a man,free-born, of lawful age, in the perfectenjoyment of his senses, hale, and sound,and not deformed or dismembered; this isone of the ancient landmarks of the Order,which it is in the power of no body of mento change. A man having but one arm, orone leg, or who is in anyway deprived of

his due proportion of limbs and members,is as incapable of initiation as awoman."--_Encyclical Letter of the GrandLodge of South Carolina to its subordinatesin_ 1849.

Impressed, then, by the weight of theseauthorities, which it would be easy, but isunnecessary, to multiply--guided by areference to the symbolic and speculative(not operative) reason of the law--andgoverned by the express words of theregulation of 1683--I am constrained tobelieve that the spirit as well as the letterof our ancient landmarks require that acandidate for admission should be perfectin all his parts, that is, neither redundantnor deficient, neither deformed nordismembered, but of hale and entirelimbs, as a man ought to be.

Section III.

_Of the Intellectual Qualifications ofCandidates._

The Old Charges and AncientConstitutions are not as explicit in relationto the intellectual as to the moral andphysical qualifications of candidates, and,therefore, in coming to a decision on thissubject, we are compelled to draw ourconclusions from analogy, from commonsense, and from the peculiar character ofthe institution. The question that heresuggests itself on this subject is, whatparticular amount of human learning isrequired as a constitutional qualificationfor initiation?

During a careful examination of everyancient document to which I have had

access, I have met with no positiveenactment forbidding the admission ofuneducated persons, even of those whocan neither read nor write. The unwritten,as well as the written laws of the Order,require that the candidate shall be neithera _fool_ nor an _idiot_, but that he shallpossess a discreet judgment, and be in theenjoyment of all the senses of a man. Butone who is unable to subscribe his name,or to read it when written, might still veryeasily prove himself to be within therequirements of this regulation. TheConstitutions of England, formed since theunion of the two Grand Lodges in 1813, arecertainly explicit enough on this subject.They require even more than a bareknowledge of reading and writing, for, indescribing the qualifications of acandidate, they say:

"He should be a lover of the liberal arts

and sciences, and have made someprogress in one or other of them; and hemust, previous to his initiation, subscribehis name at full length, to a declaration ofthe following import," etc. And in a note tothis regulation, it is said, "Any individualwho cannot write is, consequently,ineligible to be admitted into the Order." Ifthis authority were universal in itscharacter, there would be no necessity fora further discussion of the subject. But themodern constitutions of the Grand Lodgeof England are only of force within its ownjurisdiction, and we are therefore againcompelled to resort to a mode ofreasoning for the proper deduction of ourconclusions on this subject.

It is undoubtedly true that in the earlyperiod of the world, when Freemasonrytook its origin, the arts of reading andwriting were not so generally

disseminated among all classes of thecommunity as they now are, when theblessings of a common education can bereadily and cheaply obtained. And it may,therefore, be supposed that among ourancient Brethren there were many whocould neither read nor write. But after all,this is a mere assumption, which, althoughit may be based on probability, has nodirect evidence for its support. And, on theother hand, we see throughout all ourancient regulations, that a markeddistinction was made by our rulersbetween the Freemason and the Masonwho was not free; as, for instance, in theconclusion of the fifth chapter of theAncient Charges, where it is said: "Nolaborer shall be employed in the commonwork of Masonry, nor shall Freemasonswork with those who are not free, withoutan urgent necessity." And this would seemto indicate a higher estimation by the

fraternity of their own character, whichmight be derived from their greaterattainments in knowledge. That in thosedays the ordinary operative masons couldneither read nor write, is a fact establishedby history. But it does not follow that theFreemasons, who were a separate societyof craftsmen, were in the same unhappycategory; it is even probable, that the factthat they were not so, but that they were, incomparison with the unaccepted masons,educated men, may have been the reasonof the distinction made between these twoclasses of workmen.

But further, all the teachings ofFreemasonry are delivered on theassumption that the recipients are men ofsome education, with the means ofimproving their minds and increasing theirknowledge. Even the Entered Apprenticeis reminded, by the rough and perfect

ashlars, of the importance and necessity ofa virtuous education, in fitting him for thedischarge of his duties. To the FellowCraft, the study of the liberal arts andsciences is earnestly recommended; andindeed, that sacred hieroglyphic, theknowledge of whose occult significationconstitutes the most solemn part of hisinstruction, presupposes an acquaintanceat least with the art of reading. And theMaster Mason is expressly told in theexplanation of the forty-seventh problemof Euclid, as one of the symbols of the thirddegree, that it was introduced intoMasonry to teach the Brethren the value ofthe arts and sciences, and that the Mason,like the discoverer of the problem, ourancient Brother Pythagoras, should be adiligent cultivator of learning. Ourlectures, too, abound in allusions whichnone but a person of some cultivation ofmind could understand or appreciate, and

to address them, or any portion of ourcharges which refer to the improvement ofthe intellect and the augmentation ofknowledge, to persons who can neitherread nor write, would be, it seems to us, amockery unworthy of the sacred characterof our institution.

From these facts and this method ofreasoning, I deduce the conclusion that theframers of Masonry, in its presentorganization as a speculative institution,must have intended to admit none into itsfraternity whose minds had not receivedsome preliminary cultivation, and I am,therefore, clearly of opinion, that a personwho cannot read and write is not legallyqualified for admission.

As to the inexpediency of receiving suchcandidates, there can be no question ordoubt. If Masonry be, as its disciples claim

for it, a scientific institution, whose greatobject is to improve the understandingand to enlarge and adorn the mind, whosecharacter cannot be appreciated, andwhose lessons of symbolic wisdom cannotbe acquired, without much studiousapplication, how preposterous would it beto place, among its disciples, one who hadlived to adult years, without having knownthe necessity or felt the ambition for aknowledge of the alphabet of his mothertongue? Such a man could make noadvancement in the art of Masonry; andwhile he would confer no substantialadvantage on the institution, he would, byhis manifest incapacity and ignorance,detract, in the eyes of strangers, from itshonor and dignity as an intellectualsociety.

Idiots and madmen are excluded fromadmission into the Order, for the evident

reason that the former from an absence,and the latter from a perversion of theintellectual faculties, are incapable ofcomprehending the objects, or ofassuming the responsibilities andobligations of the institution.

A question here suggests itself whether aperson of present sound mind, but whohad formerly been deranged, can legallybe initiated. The answer to this questionturns on the fact of his having perfectlyrecovered. If the present sanity of theapplicant is merely a lucid interval, whichphysicians know to be sometimes vouchedto lunatics, with the absolute certainty, orat best, the strong probability, of aneventual return to a state of mentalderangement, he is not, of course,qualified for initiation. But if there has beena real and durable recovery (of which aphysician will be a competent judge), then

there can be no possible objection to hisadmission, if otherwise eligible. We arenot to look to what the candidate once was,but to what he now is.

Dotage, or the mental imbecility producedby excessive old age, is also adisqualification for admission.Distinguished as it is by puerile desiresand pursuits, by a failure of the memory, adeficiency of the judgment, and a generalobliteration of the mental powers, itsexternal signs are easily appreciated, andfurnish at once abundant reason why, likeidiots and madmen, the superannuateddotard is unfit to be the recipient of ourmystic instructions.

Section IV.

_Of the Political Qualifications ofCandidates._

The Constitutions of Masonry require, asthe only qualification referring to thepolitical condition of the candidate, or hisposition in society, that he shall be_free-born_. The slave, or even the manborn in servitude--though he may,subsequently, have obtained his liberty--isexcluded by the ancient regulations frominitiation. The non-admission of a slaveseems to have been founded upon the bestof reasons; because, as Freemasonryinvolves a solemn contract, no one canlegally bind himself to its performancewho is not a free agent and the master ofhis own actions. That the restriction isextended to those who were originally in a

servile condition, but who may have sinceacquired their liberty, seems to depend onthe principle that birth, in a servilecondition, is accompanied by adegradation of mind and abasement ofspirit, which no subsequentdisenthralment can so completely efface asto render the party qualified to perform hisduties, as a Mason, with that "freedom,fervency, and zeal," which are said to havedistinguished our ancient Brethren."Children," says Oliver, "cannot inherit afree and noble spirit except they be bornof a free woman."

The same usage existed in the spuriousFreemasonry or the Mysteries of theancient world. There, no slave, or menborn in slavery, could be initiated;because, the prerequisites imperativelydemanded that the candidate should notonly be a man of irreproachable manners,

but also a free-born denizen of the countryin which the mysteries were celebrated.

Some masonic writers have thought that, inthis regulation in relation to free birth,some allusion is intended, both in theMysteries and in Freemasonry, to therelative conditions and characters of Isaacand Ishmael. The former--the acceptedone, to whom the promise was given--wasthe son of a free woman, and the latter,who was cast forth to have "his handagainst every man, and every man's handagainst him," was the child of a slave.Wherefore, we read that Sarah demandedof Abraham, "Cast out this bondwomanand her son; for the son of the bondwomanshall not be heir with my son." Dr. Oliver,in speaking of the grand festival withwhich Abraham celebrated the weaning ofIsaac, says, that he "had not paid the samecompliment at the weaning of Ishmael,

because he was the son of a bondwoman,and, consequently, could not be admittedto participate in the Freemasonry of hisfather, which could only be conferred onfree men born of free women." The ancientGreeks were of the same opinion; for theyused the word [Greek: douloprepeia] or,"slave manners," to designate any verygreat impropriety of manners.

The Grand Lodge of England extends thisdoctrine, that Masons should be free in alltheir thoughts and actions, so far, that itwill not permit the initiation of a candidatewho is only temporarily deprived of hisliberty, or even in a place of confinement.In the year 1782, the Master of the RoyalMilitary Lodge, at Woolwich, beingconfined, most probably for debt, in theKing's Bench prison, at London, the lodge,which was itinerant in its character, andallowed to move from place to place with

its regiment, adjourned, with its warrant ofconstitution, to the Master in prison, whereseveral Masons were made. The GrandLodge, being informed of thecircumstances, immediately summonedthe Master and Wardens of the lodge "toanswer for their conduct in making Masonsin the King's Bench prison," and, at thesame time, adopted a resolution, affirmingthat "it is inconsistent with the principles ofFreemasonry for any Freemason's lodge tobe held, for the purposes of making,passing, or raising Masons, in any prisonor place of confinement."

Section V.

_Of the Petition of Candidates forAdmission, and the Action thereon_.

The application of a candidate to a lodge,for initiation, is called a "petition." Thispetition should always be in writing, andgenerally contains a statement of thepetitioner's age, occupation, and place ofresidence, and a declaration of the motiveswhich have prompted the application,which ought to be "a favorable opinionconceived of the institution and a desire ofknowledge."[67] This petition must berecommended by at least two members ofthe lodge.

The petition must be read at a stated orregular communication of the lodge, andreferred to a committee of three members

for an investigation of the qualificationsand character of the candidate. Thecommittee having made the necessaryinquiries, will report the result at the nextregular communication and not sooner.

The authority for this deliberate mode ofproceeding is to be found in the fifth of the39 General Regulations, which is in thesewords:

"No man can be made or admitted amember of a particular lodge, withoutprevious notice one month before given tothe said lodge, in order to make dueinquiry into the reputation and capacity ofthe candidate; unless by dispensationaforesaid."

The last clause in this article provides forthe only way in which this probation of amonth can be avoided, and that is when

the Grand Master, for reasons satisfactoryto himself, being such as will constitutewhat is called (sometimes improperly) acase of emergency, shall issue adispensation permitting the lodge toproceed forthwith to the election.

But where this dispensation has not beenissued, the committee should proceeddiligently and faithfully to the discharge oftheir responsible duty. They must inquireinto the moral, physical, intellectual andpolitical qualifications of the candidate,and make their report in accordance withthe result of their investigations.

The report cannot be made at a specialcommunication, but must always bepresented at a regular one. The necessityof such a rule is obvious. As the Master canat any time within his discretion convene aspecial meeting of his lodge, it is evident

that a presiding officer, if actuated by animproper desire to intrude an unworthyand unpopular applicant upon the craft,might easily avail himself for that purposeof an occasion when the lodge beingcalled for some other purpose, theattendance of the members was small, andcausing a ballot to be taken, succeed inelecting a candidate, who would, at aregular meeting, have been blackballedby some of those who were absent fromthe special communication.

This regulation is promulgated by theGrand Lodge of England, in the followingwords: "No person shall be made a Masonwithout a regular proposition at one lodgeand a ballot at the next regular statedlodge;" it appears to have been almostuniversally adopted in similar language bythe Grand Lodges of this country; and, ifthe exact words of the law are wanting in

any of the Constitutions, the general usageof the craft has furnished an equivalentauthority for the regulation.

If the report of the committee isunfavorable, the candidate should beconsidered as rejected, without anyreference to a ballot. This rule is alsofounded in reason. If the committee, after adue inquiry into the character of theapplicant, find the result sodisadvantageous to him as to induce themto make an unfavorable report on hisapplication, it is to be presumed that on aballot they would vote against hisadmission, and as their votes alone wouldbe sufficient to reject him, it is heldunnecessary to resort in such a case to thesupererogatory ordeal of the ballot. Itwould, indeed, be an anomalousproceeding, and one which would reflectgreat discredit on the motives and conduct

of a committee of inquiry, were itsmembers first to report against thereception of a candidate, and then,immediately afterwards, to vote in favor ofhis petition. The lodges will not suppose,for the honor of their committees, that sucha proceeding will take place, andaccordingly the unfavorable report of thecommittee is always to be considered as arejection.

Another reason for this regulation seems tobe this. The fifth General Regulationdeclares that no Lodge should ever make aMason without "due inquiry" into hischaracter, and as the duty of making thisinquiry is entrusted to a competentcommittee, when that committee hasreported that the applicant is unworthy tobe made a Mason, it would certainlyappear to militate against the spirit, if notthe letter, of the regulation, for the lodge,

notwithstanding this report, to enter into aballot on the petition.

But should the committee of investigationreport favorably, the lodge will thenproceed to a ballot for the candidate; but,as this forms a separate and important stepin the process of "making Masons," I shallmake it the subject of a distinct section.

Section VI.

_Of Balloting for Candidates._

The Thirty-nine Regulations do notexplicitly prescribe the ballot-box as theproper mode of testing the opinion of thelodge on the merits of a petition forinitiation. The sixth regulation simply saysthat the consent of the members is to be"formally asked by the Master; and theyare to signify their assent or dissent _intheir own prudent way_ either virtually orin form, but with unanimity." Almostuniversal usage has, however, sanctionedthe ballot box and the use of black andwhite balls as the proper mode ofobtaining the opinion of the members.

From the responsibility of expressing thisopinion, and of admitting a candidate into

the fraternity or of repulsing him from it,no Mason is permitted to shrink. Inballoting on a petition, therefore, everymember of the Lodge is expected to vote;nor can he be excused from the dischargeof this important duty, except by theunanimous consent of his Brethren. All themembers must, therefore, come up to theperformance of this trust with firmness,candor, and a full determination to do whatis right--to allow no personal timidity toforbid the deposit of a black ball, if theapplicant is unworthy, and no illiberalprejudices to prevent the deposition of awhite one, if the character andqualifications of the candidate areunobjectionable. And in all cases where amember himself has no personal oracquired knowledge of thesequalifications, he should rely upon and begoverned by the recommendation of hisBrethren of the Committee of Investigation,

who he has no right to suppose wouldmake a favorable report on the petition ofan unworthy applicant.[68]

The great object of the ballot is, to securethe independence of the voter; and, forthis purpose, its secrecy should beinviolate. And this secrecy of the ballotgives rise to a particular rule whichnecessarily flows out of it.

No Mason can be called to an account forthe vote which he has deposited. The verysecrecy of the ballot is intended to securethe independence and irresponsibility tothe lodge of the voter. And, although it isundoubtedly a crime for a member to voteagainst the petition of an applicant onaccount of private pique or personalprejudice, still the lodge has no right tojudge that such motives alone actuatedhim. The motives of men, unless divulged

by themselves, can be known only to God;"and if," as Wayland says, "from anycircumstances we are led to entertain anydoubts of the motives of men, we arebound to retain these doubts within ourown bosoms." Hence, no judicial noticecan be or ought to be taken by a lodge of avote cast by a member, on the ground ofhis having been influenced by impropermotives, because it is impossible for thelodge legally to arrive at the knowledge;in the first place, of the vote that he hasgiven, and secondly, of the motives bywhich he has been controlled.

And even if a member voluntarily shoulddivulge the nature of his vote and of hismotives, it is still exceedinglyquestionable whether the lodge shouldtake any notice of the act, because by sodoing the independence of the ballotmight be impaired. It is through a similar

mode of reasoning that the Constitution ofthe United States provides, that themembers of Congress shall not bequestioned, in any other place, for anyspeech or debate in either House. As inthis way the freedom of debate ispreserved in legislative bodies, so in likemanner should the freedom of the ballotbe insured in lodges.

The sixth General Regulation requiresunanimity in the ballot. Its language is:"but no man can be entered a Brother inany particular lodge, or admitted to be amember thereof, without the _unanimousconsent of all the members of that lodge_then present when the candidate isproposed." This regulation, it will beremembered, was adopted in 1721. But inthe "New Regulations," adopted in 1754,and which are declared to have beenenacted "only for amending or explaining

the Old Regulations for the good ofMasonry, without breaking in upon theancient rules of the fraternity, stillpreserving the old landmarks," it is said:"but it was found inconvenient to insistupon unanimity in several cases; and,therefore, the Grand Masters have allowedthe lodges to admit a member, if not abovethree black balls are against him; thoughsome lodges desire no suchallowance."[69]

The Grand Lodge of England still actsunder this new regulation, and extends thenumber of black balls which will reject tothree, though it permits its subordinates, ifthey desire it, to require unanimity. Butnearly all the Grand Lodges of this countryhave adhered to the old regulation, whichis undoubtedly the better one, and byspecial enactment have made theunanimous consent of all the Brethren

present necessary to the election of acandidate.

Another question here suggests itself. Cana member, who by the bye-laws of hislodge is disqualified from the exercise ofhis other franchises as a member, inconsequence of being in arrears beyond acertain amount, be prevented fromdepositing his ballot on the application of acandidate? That by such a bye-law he maybe disfranchised of his vote in electingofficers, or of the right to hold office, willbe freely admitted. But the words of theold regulation seem expressly, andwithout equivocation, to require that_every member present_ shall vote. Thecandidate shall only be admitted "by theunanimous consent of all the members ofthat lodge then present when thecandidate is proposed." This right of themembers to elect or reject their

candidates is subsequently called "aninherent privilege," which is not subject toa dispensation. The words are explicit, andthe right appears to be one guaranteed toevery member so long as he continues amember, and of which no bye-law candivest him as long as the paramountauthority of the Thirty-nine GeneralRegulations is admitted. I should say, then,that every member of a lodge present atballoting for a candidate has a right todeposit his vote; and not only a right, but aduty which he is to be compelled toperform; since, without the unanimousconsent of all present, there can be noelection.

Our written laws are altogether silent as tothe peculiar ceremonies which are toaccompany the act of balloting, which hastherefore been generally directed by thelocal usage of different jurisdictions.

Uniformity, however, in this, as in all otherritual observances, is to be commended,and I shall accordingly here describe themethod which I have myself preferred andpractised in balloting for candidates, andwhich is the custom adopted in thejurisdiction of South Carolina.[70]

The committee of investigation havingreported favorably, the Master of thelodge directs the Senior Deacon toprepare the ballot box. The mode in whichthis is accomplished is as follows:--TheSenior Deacon takes the ballot box, and,opening it, places all the white and blackballs indiscriminately in one compartment,leaving the other entirely empty. He thenproceeds with the box to the Junior andSenior Wardens, who satisfy themselvesby an inspection that no ball has been leftin the compartment in which the votes areto be deposited. I remark here, in passing,

that the box, in this and the other instanceto be referred to hereafter, is presented tothe inferior officer first, and then to hissuperior, that the examination anddecision of the former may besubstantiated and confirmed by the higherauthority of the latter. Let it, indeed, beremembered, that in all such cases theusage of masonic _circumambulation_ is tobe observed, and that, therefore, we mustfirst pass the Junior's station before we canget to that of the Senior Warden.

These officers having thus satisfiedthemselves that the box is in a propercondition for the reception of the ballots, itis then placed upon the altar by the SeniorDeacon, who retires to his seat. The Masterthen directs the Secretary to call the roll,which is done by commencing with theWorshipful Master, and proceedingthrough all the officers down to the

youngest member. As a matter ofconvenience, the Secretary generallyvotes the last of those in the room, andthen, if the Tiler is a member of the lodge,he is called in, while the Junior Deacontiles for him, and the name of the applicanthaving been told him, he is directed todeposit his ballot, which he does, and thenretires.

As the name of each officer and member iscalled he approaches the altar, and havingmade the proper masonic salutation to theChair, he deposits his ballot and retires tohis seat. The roll should be called slowly,so that at no time should there be morethan one person present at the box; for, thegreat object of the ballot being secrecy,no Brother should be permitted so near themember voting as to distinguish the colorof the ball he deposits.

The box is placed on the altar, and theballot is deposited with the solemnity of amasonic salutation, that the voters may beduly impressed with the sacred andresponsible nature of the duty they arecalled on to discharge. The system ofvoting thus described, is, therefore, farbetter on this account than the onesometimes adopted in lodges, of handinground the box for the members to deposittheir ballots from their seats

The Master having inquired of theWardens if all have voted, then orders theSenior Deacon to "take charge of the ballotbox." That officer accordingly repairs tothe altar, and taking possession of the box,carries it, as before, to the Junior Warden,who examines the ballot, and reports, if allthe balls are white, that "the box is clear inthe South," or, if there is one or more blackballs, that "the box is foul in the South."

The Deacon then carries it to the SeniorWarden, and afterwards to the Master,who, of course, make the same report,according to the circumstances, with thenecessary verbal variation of "West" and"East."

If the box is _clear_--that is, if all theballots are white--the Master thenannounces that the applicant has beenduly elected, and the Secretary makes arecord of the fact.

But if the box is declared to be _foul_, theMaster inspects the number of black balls;if he finds two, he declares the candidateto be rejected; if only one, he so states thefact to the lodge, and orders the SeniorDeacon again to prepare the ballot box,and a second ballot is taken in the sameway. This is done lest a black ball mighthave been inadvertently voted on the first

ballot. If, on the second scrutiny, one blackball is again found, the fact is announcedby the Master, who orders the election tolie over until the next stated meeting, andrequests the Brother who deposited theblack ball to call upon him and state hisreasons. At the next stated meeting theMaster announces these reasons to thelodge, if any have been made known tohim, concealing, of course, the name of theobjecting Brother. At this time the validityor truth of the objections may bediscussed, and the friends of the applicantwill have an opportunity of offering anydefense or explanation. The ballot is thentaken a third time, and the result, whateverit may be, is final. As I have alreadyobserved, in most of the lodges of thiscountry, a reappearance of the one blackball will amount to a rejection. In thoselodges which do not require unanimity, itwill, of course, be necessary that the

requisite number of black balls must bedeposited on this third ballot to insure arejection. But if, on inspection, the box isfound to be "clear," or without a black ball,the candidate is, of course, declared to beelected. In any case, the result of the thirdballot is final, nor can it be set aside orreversed by the action of the Grand Masteror Grand Lodge; because, by the sixthGeneral Regulation, already so frequentlycited, the members of every particularlodge are the best judges of thequalifications of their candidates; and, touse the language of the Regulation, "if afractious member should be imposed onthem, it might spoil their harmony, orhinder their freedom, or even break anddisperse the lodge."

Section VII.

_Of the Reconsideration of the Ballot._

There are, unfortunately, some men in ourOrder, governed, not by essentially badmotives, but by frail judgments and bytotal ignorance of the true object anddesign of Freemasonry, who never, underany circumstances, have recourse to theblack ball, that great bulwark of Masonry,and are always more or less incensedwhen any more judicious Brotherexercises his privilege of excluding thosewhom he thinks unworthy of participationin our mysteries.

I have said, that these men are notgoverned by motives essentially bad. Thisis the fact. They honestly desire theprosperity of the institution, and they

would not willfully do one act which wouldimpede that prosperity. But theirjudgments are weak, and their zeal iswithout knowledge. They do not at allunderstand in what the true prosperity ofthe Order consists, but really andconscientiously believing that its actualstrength will be promoted by the increaseof the number of its disciples; they lookrather to the _quantity_ than to the_quality_ of the applicants who knock atthe doors of our lodges.

Now a great difference in respect to themode in which the ballot is conducted, willbe found in those lodges which are freefrom the presence of such injudiciousbrethren, and others into which they havegained admittance.

In a lodge in which every member has acorrect notion of the proper moral

qualifications of the candidates forMasonry, and where there is a generaldisposition to work well with a few, ratherthan to work badly with many, when aballot is ordered, each Brother, havingdeposited his vote, quietly and calmlywaits to hear the decision of the ballot boxannounced by the Chair. If it is "clear," allare pleased that another citizen has beenfound worthy to receive a portion of theilluminating rays of Masonry. If it is "foul,"each one is satisfied with the adjudication,and rejoices that, although knowingnothing himself against the candidate,some one has been present whom a moreintimate acquaintance with the character ofthe applicant has enabled to interpose hisveto, and prevent the purity of the Orderfrom being sullied by the admission of anunworthy candidate. Here the matter ends,and the lodge proceeds to other business.

But in a lodge where one of theseinjudicious and over-zealous Brethren ispresent, how different is the scene. If thecandidate is elected, he, too, rejoices; buthis joy is, that the lodge has gained onemore member whose annual dues andwhose initiation fee will augment theamount of its revenues. If he is rejected, heis indignant that the lodge has beendeprived of this pecuniary accession, andforthwith he sets to work to reverse, ifpossible, the decision of the ballot box,and by a volunteer defense of the rejectedcandidate, and violent denunciations ofthose who opposed him, he seeks to alarmthe timid and disgust the intelligent, sothat, on a _reconsideration_, they may beinduced to withdraw their opposition.

The _motion for reconsideration_ is, then,the means generally adopted, by suchseekers after quantity, to insure the

success of their efforts to bring all into ourfold who seek admission, irrespective ofworth or qualification. In other words, wemay say, that _the motion forreconsideration is the great antagonist ofthe purity and security of the ballot box_.The importance, then, of the positionwhich it thus assumes, demands a briefdiscussion of the time and mode in which aballot may be reconsidered.

In the beginning of the discussion, it maybe asserted, that it is competent for anybrother to move a reconsideration of aballot, or for a lodge to vote on such amotion. The ballot is a part of the work ofinitiating a candidate. It is the preparatorystep, and is just as necessary to his legalmaking as the obligation or the investiture.As such, then, it is clearly entirely underthe control of the Master. The Constitutionsof Masonry and the Rules and Regulations

of every Grand and Subordinate lodgeprescribe the mode in which the ballotshall be conducted, so that the sense of themembers may be taken. The Grand Lodgealso requires that the Master of the lodgeshall see that that exact mode of ballotshall be pursued and no other, and it willhold him responsible that there shall be noviolation of the rule. If, then, the Master issatisfied that the ballot has been regularlyand correctly conducted, and that nopossible good, but some probable evil,would arise from its reconsideration, it isnot only competent for him, but it is hissolemn duty to refuse to permit any suchreconsideration. A motion to that effect, itmay be observed, will always be out oforder, although any Brother mayrespectfully request the Worshipful Masterto order such a reconsideration, or suggestto him its propriety or expediency.

If, however, the Master is not satisfied thatthe ballot is a true indication of the senseof the lodge, he may, in his own discretion,order a reconsideration. Thus there maybe but one black ball;--now a single blackball may sometimes be inadvertentlycast--the member voting it may have beenfavorably disposed towards the candidate,and yet, from the hurry and confusion ofvoting, or from the dimness of the light orthe infirmity of his own eyes, or from someother equally natural cause, he may haveselected a black ball, when he intended tohave taken a white one. It is, therefore, amatter of prudence and necessary caution,that, when only one black ball appears, theMaster should order a new ballot. On thissecond ballot, it is to be presumed thatmore care and vigilance will be used, andthe reappearance of the black ball willthen show that it was depositeddesignedly.

But where two or three or more black ballsappear on the first ballot, such a course ofreasoning is not authorized, and theMaster will then be right to refuse areconsideration. The ballot has then beenregularly taken--the lodge hasemphatically decided for a rejection, andany order to renew the ballot would onlybe an insult to those who opposed theadmission of the applicant, and an indirectattempt to thrust an unwelcome intruderupon the lodge.

But although it is in the power of theMaster, under the circumstances which wehave described, to order areconsideration, yet this prerogative isaccompanied with certain restrictions,which it may be well to notice.

In the first place, the Master cannot order a

reconsideration on any other night thanthat on which the original ballot wastaken.[71] After the lodge is closed, thedecision of the ballot is final, and there isno human authority that can reverse it. Thereason of this rule is evident. If it wereotherwise, an unworthy Master (for,unfortunately, all Masters are not worthy)might on any subsequent evening availhimself of the absence of those who hadvoted black balls, to order areconsideration, and thus succeed inintroducing an unfit and rejectedcandidate into the lodge, contrary to thewishes of a portion of its members.

Neither can he order a reconsideration onthe same night, if any of the Brethren whovoted have retired. All who expressedtheir opinion on the first ballot, must bepresent to express it on the second. Thereasons for this restriction are as evident

as for the former, and are of the samecharacter.

It must be understood, that I do not hererefer to those reconsiderations of theballot which are necessary to a fullunderstanding of the opinion of the lodge,and which have been detailed in theceremonial of the mode of balloting, as itwas described in the preceding Section.

It may be asked whether the Grand Mastercannot, by his dispensations, permit areconsideration. I answer emphatically,NO. The Grand Master possesses no suchprerogative. There is no law in the wholejurisprudence of the institution clearerthan this--that neither the Grand Lodge northe Grand Master can interfere with thedecision of the ballot box. In Anderson'sConstitutions, the law is laid down, underthe head of "Duty of Members" (edition of

1755, p. 312), that in the election ofcandidates the Brethren "are to give theirconsent in their own prudent way, eithervirtually or in form, but with unanimity."And the regulation goes on to say: "Nor isthis inherent privilege _subject to adispensation_, because the members of alodge are the best judges of it; andbecause, if a turbulent member should beimposed upon them, it might spoil theirharmony, or hinder the freedom of theircommunications, or even break anddisperse the lodge." This settles thequestion. A dispensation to reconsider aballot would be an interference with theright of the members "to give their consentin their own prudent way;" it would be aninfringement of an "inherent privilege,"and neither the Grand Lodge nor theGrand Master can issue a dispensation forsuch a purpose. Every lodge must be leftto manage its own elections of candidates

in its own prudent way.

I conclude this section by a summary of theprinciples which have been discussed,and which I have endeavored to enforceby a process of reasoning which I trustmay be deemed sufficiently convincing.They are briefly these:

1. It is never in order for a member tomove for the reconsideration of a ballot onthe petition of a candidate for initiation,nor for a lodge to entertain such a motion.

2. The Master alone can, for reasonssatisfactory to himself, order such areconsideration.

3. The Master cannot order areconsideration on any subsequent night,nor on the same night, after any member,who was present and voted, has departed.

4. The Grand Master cannot grant adispensation for a reconsideration, nor inany other way interfere with the ballot. Thesame restriction applies to the GrandLodge.

Section VIII.

_Of the Renewal of Applications byRejected Candidates._

As it is apparent from the last section thatthere can be no reconsideration by alodge of a rejected petition, the questionwill naturally arise, how an errorcommitted by a lodge, in the rejection of aworthy applicant, is to be corrected, orhow such a candidate, when oncerejected, is ever to make a second trial, forit is, of course, admitted, thatcircumstances may occur in which acandidate who had been once blackballedmight, on a renewal of his petition, befound worthy of admission. He may havesince reformed and abandoned the vicioushabits which caused his first rejection, or itmay have been since discovered that that

rejection was unjust. How, then, is such acandidate to make a new application?

It is a rule of universal application inMasonry, that no candidate, having beenonce rejected, can apply to any otherlodge for admission, except to the onewhich rejected him. Under this regulationthe course of a second application is asfollows:

Some Grand Lodges have prescribed that,when a candidate has been rejected, itshall not be competent for him to applywithin a year, six months, or some otherdefinite period. This is altogether a localregulation--there is no such law in theAncient Constitutions--and therefore,where the regulations of the Grand Lodgeof the jurisdiction are silent upon thesubject, general principles direct thefollowing as the proper course for a

rejected candidate to pursue on a secondapplication. He must send in a new letter,recommended and vouched for as before,either by the same or other Brethren--itmust be again referred to a committee--lieover for a month--and the ballot be thentaken as is usual in other cases. It must betreated in all respects as an entirely newpetition, altogether irrespective of the factthat the same person had ever beforemade an application. In this way duenotice will be given to the Brethren, and allpossibility of an unfair election will beavoided.

If the local regulations are silent upon thesubject, the second application may bemade at any time after the rejection of thefirst, all that is necessary being, that thesecond application should pass throughthe same ordeal and be governed by thesame rules that prevail in relation to an

original application.

Section IX.

_Of the necessary Probation and dueProficiency of Candidates beforeAdvancement_.

There is, perhaps, no part of thejurisprudence of Masonry which it is morenecessary strictly to observe than thatwhich relates to the advancement ofcandidates through the several degrees.The method which is adopted in passingApprentices and raising Fellow Crafts--theprobation which they are required to servein each degree before advancing to ahigher--and the instructions which theyreceive in their progress, often materiallyaffect the estimation which is entertainedof the institution by its initiates. Thecandidate who long remains at the porchof the temple, and lingers in the middle

chamber, noting everything worthy ofobservation in his passage to the holy ofholies, while he better understands thenature of the profession upon which he hasentered, will have a more exalted opinionof its beauties and excellencies than hewho has advanced, with all the rapiditythat dispensations can furnish, from thelowest to the highest grades of the Order.In the former case, the design, thesymbolism, the history, and the moral andphilosophical bearing of each degree willbe indelibly impressed upon the mind,and the appositeness of what has gonebefore to what is to succeed will be readilyappreciated; but, in the latter, the lessonsof one hour will be obliterated by those ofthe succeeding one; that which has beenlearned in one degree, will be forgotten inthe next; and when all is completed, andthe last instructions have been imparted,the dissatisfied neophyte will find his

mind, in all that relates to Masonry, in astate of chaotic confusion. Like Cassio, hewill remember "a mass of things, butnothing distinctly."

An hundred years ago it was said that"Masonry was a progressive science, andnot to be attained in any degree ofperfection, but by time, patience, and aconsiderable degree of application andindustry."[72] And it is because that dueproportion of time, patience andapplication, has not been observed, thatwe so often see Masons indifferent to theclaims of the institution, and totally unableto discern its true character. The arcana ofthe craft, as Dr. Harris remarks, should begradually imparted to its members,according to their improvement.

There is no regulation of our Order morefrequently repeated in our constitutions,

nor one which should be more rigidlyobserved, than that which requires ofevery candidate a "suitable proficiency" inone degree, before he is permitted to passto another. But as this regulation is toooften neglected, to the manifest injury ofthe whole Order, as well as of theparticular lodge which violates it, by theintroduction of ignorant and unskillfulworkmen into the temple, it may be worththe labor we shall spend upon the subject,to investigate some of the authoritieswhich support us in the declaration, that nocandidate should be promoted, until, by adue probation, he has made "suitableproficiency in the preceding degree."

In one of the earliest series of regulationsthat have been preserved--made in thereign of Edward III., it was ordained, "thatsuch as were to be admitted MasterMasons, or Masters of work, should be

examined whether they be able of cunningto serve their respective Lords, as well thelowest as the highest, to the honor andworship of the aforesaid art, and to theprofit of their Lords."

Here, then, we may see the origin of thatusage, which is still practiced in every wellgoverned lodge, not only of demanding aproper degree of proficiency in thecandidate, but also of testing thatproficiency by an examination.

This cautious and honest fear of thefraternity, lest any Brother should assumethe duties of a position which he could notfaithfully discharge, and which is, in ourtime, tantamount to a candidate'sadvancing to a degree for which he is notprepared, is again exhibited in thecharges enacted in the reign of James II.,the manuscript of which was preserved in

the archives of the Lodge of Antiquity inLondon. In these charges it is required,"that no Mason take on no lord's worke,nor any other man's, unless he knowhimselfe well able to perform the worke,so that the craft have no slander." In thesame charges, it is prescribed that "nomaster, or fellow, shall take no apprenticefor less than seven years."

In another series of charges, whose exactdate is not ascertained, but whoselanguage and orthography indicate theirantiquity, it is said: "Ye shall ordain thewisest to be Master of the work; andneither for love nor lineage, riches norfavor, set one over the work[73] who hathbut little knowledge, whereby the Masterwould be evil served, and ye ashamed."

These charges clearly show the greatstress that was placed by our ancient

Brethren upon the necessity of skill andproficiency, and they have furnished theprecedents upon which are based all thesimilar regulations that have beensubsequently applied to SpeculativeMasonry.

In the year 1722, the Grand Lodge ofEngland ordered the "Old Charges of theFree and Accepted Masons" to becollected from the ancient records, and,having approved of them, they became apart of the Constitutions of SpeculativeFreemasonry. In these Charges, it isordained that "a younger Brother shall beinstructed in working, to prevent spoilingthe materials for want of judgment, and forincreasing and continuing of brotherlylove."

Subsequently, in 1767, it was declared bythe Grand Lodge, that "no lodge shall be

permitted to make and raise the sameBrother, at one and the same meeting,without a dispensation from the GrandMaster, or his Deputy;" and, lest toofrequent advantage should be taken of thispower of dispensation, to hurry candidatesthrough the degrees, it is added that thedispensation, "_on very particularoccasions only_, may be requested."

The Grand Lodge of England afterwardsfound it necessary to be more explicit onthis subject, and the regulation of thatbody is now contained in the followinglanguage:

"No candidate shall be permitted toreceive more than one degree on the sameday, nor shall a higher degree in Masonrybe conferred on any Brother at a lessinterval than four weeks from his receivinga previous degree, nor until he has passed

an examination in open lodge in thatdegree."[74]

This seems to be the recognized principleon which the fraternity are, at this day,acting in this country. The rule is, perhaps,sometimes, and in some places, inabeyance. A few lodges, from an impoliticdesire to increase their numericalstrength, or rapidly to advance men ofworldly wealth or influence to high stationsin the Order, may infringe it, and neglectto demand of their candidates that suitableproficiency which ought to be, in Masonry,an essential recommendation topromotion; but the great doctrine that eachdegree should be well studied, and thecandidate prove his proficiency in it by anexamination, has been uniformly set forthby the Grand Lodge of the United States,whenever they have expressed an opinionon the subject.

Thus, for instance, in 1845, the late Bro.A.A. Robertson, Grand Master of NewYork, gave utterance to the followingopinion, in his annual address to theintelligent body over which he presided:

"The practice of examining candidates inthe prior degrees, before admission to thehigher, in order to ascertain theirproficiency, is gaining the favorable noticeof Masters of lodges, and cannot be toohighly valued, nor too stronglyrecommended to all lodges in thisjurisdiction. It necessarily requires thenovitiate to reflect upon the bearing of allthat has been so far taught him, andconsequently to impress upon his mind thebeauty and utility of those sublime truths,which have been illustrated in the courseof the ceremonies he has witnessed in hisprogress in the mystic art. In a word, it will

be the means of making competentoverseers of the work--and no candidateshould be advanced, until he has satisfiedthe lodge, by such examination, that hehas made the necessary proficiency in thelower degrees."[75]

In 1845, the Grand Lodge of Iowa issued acircular to her subordinates, in which shegave the following admonition:

"To guard against hasty and improperwork, she prohibits a candidate frombeing advanced till he has madesatisfactory proficiency in the precedingdegrees, by informing himself of thelectures pertaining thereto; and to suffer acandidate to proceed who is ignorant inthis essential particular, is calculated in ahigh degree to injure the institution andretard its usefulness."

The Grand Lodge of Illinois has practicallydeclared its adhesion to the ancientregulation; for, in the year 1843, thedispensation of Nauvoo Lodge, one of itssubordinates, was revoked principally onthe ground that she was guilty "of pushingthe candidate through the second andthird degrees, before he could possibly beskilled in the preceding degree." And thecommittee who recommended therevocation, very justly remarked that theywere not sure that any length of probationwould in all cases insure skill, but theywere certain that the ancient landmarks ofthe Order required that the lodge shouldknow that the candidate is well skilled inone degree before being admitted toanother.

The Grand Lodges of Massachusetts andSouth Carolina have adopted, almost in theprecise words, the regulation of the Grand

Lodge of England, already cited, whichrequires an interval of one month to elapsebetween the conferring of degrees. TheGrand Lodge of New Hampshire requires agreater probation for its candidates; itsconstitution prescribes the followingregulation: "All Entered Apprentices mustwork five months as such, before they canbe admitted to the degree of Fellow Craft.All Fellow Crafts must work in a lodge ofFellow Crafts three months, before theycan be raised to the sublime degree ofMaster Mason. Provided, nevertheless,that if any Entered Apprentice, or FellowCraft, shall make himself thoroughlyacquainted with all the informationbelonging to his degree, he may beadvanced at an earlier period, at thediscretion of the lodge."

But, perhaps, the most stringent rule uponthis subject, is that which exists in the

Constitution of the Grand Lodge ofHanover, which is in the following words:

"No Brother can be elected an officer of alodge until he has been three years aMaster Mason. A Fellow Craft must work atleast one year in that degree, before hecan be admitted to the third degree. AnEntered Apprentice must remain at leasttwo years in that degree."

It seems unnecessary to extend thesecitations. The existence of the regulation,which requires a necessary probation incandidates, until due proficiency isobtained, is universally admitted. Theancient constitutions repeatedly assert it,and it has received the subsequentsanction of innumerable Masonicauthorities. But, unfortunately, the practiceis not always in accordance with the rule.And, hence, the object of this article is not

so much to demonstrate the existence ofthe law, as to urge upon our readers thenecessity of a strict adherence to it. Thereis no greater injury which can be inflictedon the Masonic Order (the admission ofimmoral persons excepted), than that ofhurrying candidates through the severaldegrees. Injustice is done to the institution,whose peculiar principles andexcellencies are never properlypresented--and irreparable injury to thecandidate, who, acquiring no fairappreciation of the ceremonies throughwhich he rapidly passes, or of theinstructions which he scarcely hears, isfilled either with an indifference that neverafterwards can be warmed into zeal, orwith a disgust that can never be changedinto esteem. Masonry is betrayed in suchan instance by its friends, and often losesthe influence of an intelligent member,who, if he had been properly instructed,

might have become one of its warmest andmost steadfast advocates.

This subject is so important, that I will nothesitate to add to the influence of theseopinions the great sanction of Preston'sauthority.

"Many persons," says that ablephilosopher of Masonry, "are deluded bythe vague supposition that our mysteriesare merely nominal; that the practicesestablished among us are frivolous, andthat our ceremonies may be adopted, orwaived at pleasure. On this falsefoundation, we find them hurrying throughall the degrees of the Order, withoutadverting to the propriety of one step theypursue, or possessing a singlequalification requisite for advancement.Passing through the usual formalities, theyconsider themselves entitled to rank as

masters of the art, solicit and acceptoffices, and assume the government of thelodge, equally unacquainted with the rulesof the institution they pretend to support,or the nature of the trust they engage toperform. The consequence is obvious;anarchy and confusion ensue, and thesubstance is lost in the shadow. Hencemen eminent for ability, rank, and fortune,are often led to view the honors ofMasonry with such indifference, that whentheir patronage is solicited, they eitheraccept offices with reluctance, or rejectthem with disdain."[76]

Let, then, no lodge which values its ownusefulness, or the character of ourinstitution, admit any candidate to a higherdegree, until he has made suitableproficiency in the preceding one, to bealways tested by a strict examination inopen lodge. Nor can it do so, without a

palpable violation of the laws of Masonry.

Section X.

_Of Balloting for Candidates in eachDegree._

Although there is no law, in the AncientConstitutions, which in express wordsrequires a ballot for candidates in eachdegree, yet the whole tenor and spirit ofthese constitutions seem to indicate thatthere should be recourse to such a ballot.The constant reference, in the numerouspassages which were cited in thepreceding Section, to the necessity of anexamination into the proficiency of thosewho sought advancement, wouldnecessarily appear to imply that a vote ofthe lodge must be taken on the question ofthis proficiency. Accordingly, modernGrand Lodges have generally, by specialenactment, required a ballot to be taken

on the application of an Apprentice orFellow Craft for advancement, and whereno such regulation has been explicitly laiddown, the almost constant usage of thecraft has been in favor of such ballot.

The Ancient Constitutions having beensilent on the subject of the letter of the law,local usage or regulations mustnecessarily supply the specific rule.

Where not otherwise provided by theConstitutions of a Grand Lodge or thebye-laws of a subordinate lodge, analogywould instruct us that the ballot, on theapplication of Apprentices or Fellow Craftsfor advancement, should be governed bythe same principles that regulate the balloton petitions for initiation.

Of course, then, the vote should beunanimous: for I see no reason why a

lodge of Fellow Crafts should be lessguarded in its admission of Apprentices,than a lodge of Apprentices is in itsadmission of profanes.

Again, the ballot should take place at astated meeting, so that every member mayhave "due and timely notice," and beprepared to exercise his "inherentprivilege" of granting or withholding hisconsent; for it must be remembered thatthe man who was worthy or supposed tobe so, when initiated as an EnteredApprentice, may prove to be unworthywhen he applies to pass as a Fellow Graft,and every member should, therefore, havethe means and opportunity of passing hisjudgment on that worthiness orunworthiness.

If the candidate for advancement has beenrejected once, he may again apply, if there

is no local regulation to the contrary. But,in such a case, due notice should be givento all the members, which is best done bymaking the application at one regularmeeting, and voting for it on the next. This,however, I suppose to be only necessaryin the case of a renewed application after arejection. An Entered Apprentice or aFellow Craft is entitled after due probationto make his application for advancement;and his first application may be ballotedfor on the same evening, provided it be aregular meeting of the lodge. Themembers are supposed to know what workis before them to do, and should be thereto do it.

But the case is otherwise whenever acandidate for advancement has beenrejected. He has now been set aside by thelodge, and no time is laid down in theregulations or usages of the craft for his

making a second application. He maynever do so, or he may in three months, ina year, or in five years. The members are,therefore, no more prepared to expect thisrenewed application at any particularmeeting of the lodge, than they are toanticipate any entirely new petition of aprofane. If, therefore, the secondapplication is not made at one regularmeeting and laid over to the next, thepossibility is that the lodge may be takenby surprise, and in the words of the oldRegulation, "a turbulent member may beimposed on it."

The inexpediency of any other course maybe readily seen, from a suppositions case.We will assume that in a certain lodge, A,who is a Fellow Craft, applies regularly foradvancement to the third degree. On thisoccasion, for good and sufficient reasons,two of the members, B and C, express

their dissent by depositing black balls. Hisapplication to be raised is consequentlyrejected, and he remains a Fellow Graft.Two or three meetings of the lodge passover, and at each, B and C are present;but, at the fourth meeting, circumstancescompel their absence, and the friends of A,taking advantage of that occurrence, againpropose him for advancement; the ballot isforthwith taken, and he is elected andraised on the same evening. The injusticeof this course to B and C, and the evil to thelodge and the whole fraternity, in thisimposition of one who is probably anunworthy person, will be apparent toevery intelligent and right-minded Mason.

I do not, however, believe that a candidateshould be rejected, on his application foradvancement, in consequence ofobjections to his moral worth andcharacter. In such a case, the proper

course would be to prefer charges, to tryhim as an Apprentice or Fellow Craft; and,if found guilty, to suspend, expel, orotherwise appropriately punish him. Theapplicant as well as the Order is, in such acase, entitled to a fair trial. Want ofproficiency, or a mental or physicaldisqualification acquired since thereception of the preceding degree, isalone a legitimate cause for an estoppal ofadvancement by the ballot. But this subjectwill be treated of further in the chapter onthe rights of Entered Apprentices.

Section XI.

_Of the Number to be Initiated at oneCommunication._

The fourth General Regulation decreesthat "no Lodge shall make more than fivenew Brothers at one time." This regulationhas been universally interpreted (and withgreat propriety) to mean that not morethan five degrees can be conferred at thesame communication.

This regulation is, however, subject todispensation by the Grand Master, orPresiding Grand Officer, in which case thenumber to be initiated, passed, or raised,will be restricted only by the words of thedispensation.

The following, or fifth General Regulation,

says that "no man can be made or admitteda member of a particular lodge, withoutprevious notice, one month before, givento the same lodge."

Now, as a profane cannot be admitted anEntered Apprentice, or in other words, amember of an Entered Apprentices' lodge,unless after one month's notice, so itfollows that an Apprentice cannot beadmitted a member of a Fellow Crafts'lodge, nor a Fellow Craft of a Masters',without the like probation. For the wordsof the regulation which apply to one, willequally apply to the others. And hence wederive the law, that a month at least mustalways intervene between the reception ofone degree and the advancement toanother. But this rule is also subject to adispensation.

Section XII.

_Of Finishing the Candidates of one Lodgein another._

It is an ancient and universal regulation,that no lodge shall interfere with the workof another by initiating its candidates, orpassing or raising its Apprentices andFellow Crafts. Every lodge is supposed tobe competent to manage its own business,and ought to be the best judge of thequalifications of its own members, andhence it would be highly improper in anylodge to confer a degree on a Brother whois not of its household.

This regulation is derived from a provisionin the Ancient Charges, which have veryproperly been supposed to contain thefundamental law of Masonry, and which

prescribes the principle of the rule in thefollowing symbolical language:

"None shall discover envy at theprosperity of a Brother, nor supplant himor put him out of his work, if he be capableto finish the same; for no man can finishanother's work, so much to the Lord'sprofit, unless he be thoroughly acquaintedwith the designs and draughts of him thatbegan it."

There is, however, a case in which onelodge may, by consent, legally finish thework of another. Let us suppose that acandidate has been initiated in a lodge atA----, and, before he receives his seconddegree, removes to B----, and that being,by the urgency of his business, unableeither to postpone his departure fromA----, until he has been passed and raised,or to return for the purpose of his

receiving his second and third degrees,then it is competent for the lodge at A---- togrant permission to the lodge at B---- toconfer them on the candidate.

But how shall this permission be given--bya unanimous vote, or merely by a vote ofthe majority of the members at A----? Hereit seems to me that, so far as regards thelodge at A----, the reasons for unanimity nolonger exist. There is here no danger thata "fractious member will be imposed onthem," as the candidate, when finished,will become a member of the lodge atB----. The question of consent is simply inthe nature of a resolution, and may bedetermined by the assenting votes of amajority of the members at A---. It is,however, to be understood, that if anyBrother believes that the candidate isunworthy, from character, of furtheradvancement, he may suspend the

question of consent, by preferring chargesagainst him. If this is not done, and theconsent of the lodge is obtained, that thecandidate may apply to the lodge at B---,then when his petition is read in that lodge,it must, of course, pass through the usualordeal of a month's probation, and aunanimous vote; for here the old reasonsfor unanimity once more prevail.

I know of no ancient written law upon thissubject, but it seems to me that the course Ihave described is the only one that couldbe suggested by analogy and commonsense.

Section XIII.

_Of the Initiation of Non-residents._

The subject of this section is naturallydivided into two branches:--First, as to theinitiation by a lodge of a candidate, who,residing in the same State or Grand Lodgejurisdiction, is still not an inhabitant of thetown in which the lodge to which heapplies is situated, but resides nearer tosome other lodge; and, secondly, as to theinitiation of a stranger, whose residence isin another State, or under the jurisdictionof another Grand Lodge.

1. The first of these divisions presents aquestion which is easily answered.Although I can find no ancient regulationon this subject, still, by the concurrentauthority of all Grand Lodges in this

country, at least, (for the Grand Lodge ofEngland has no such provision in itsConstitution,) every lodge is forbidden toinitiate any person whose residence isnearer to any other lodge. If, however,such an initiation should take place,although the lodge would be censurablefor its violation of the regulations of itssuperior, yet there has never been anydoubt that the initiation would be good andthe candidate so admitted regularly made.The punishment must fall upon the lodgeand not upon the newly-made Brother.

2. The second division presents a moreembarrassing inquiry, on account of thediversity of opinions which have beenentertained on the subject. Can a lodge inone State, or Grand Lodge jurisdiction,initiate the resident of another State, andwould such initiation be lawful, and theperson so initiated a regular Mason, or, to

use the technical language of the Order, aMason made "in due form," and entitled toall the rights and privileges of the Order?

The question is one of considerabledifficulty; it has given occasion to muchcontroversy, and has been warmlydiscussed within the last few years byseveral of the Grand Lodges of the UnitedStates.

In 1847, the Grand Lodge of Alabamaadopted the following regulation, whichhad been previously enacted by the GrandLodge of Tennessee:

"Any person residing within thejurisdiction of this Grand Lodge, who hasalready, or shall hereafter, travel into anyforeign jurisdiction, and there receive thedegrees of Masonry, such person shall notbe entitled to the rights, benefits, and

privileges of Masonry within thisjurisdiction, until he shall have beenregularly admitted a member of thesubordinate lodge under this GrandLodge, nearest which he at the timeresides, in the manner provided by theConstitution of this Grand Lodge for theadmission of members."

The rule adopted by the Grand Lodge ofMaryland is still more stringent. Itdeclares, "that if any individual, fromselfish motives, from distrust of hisacceptance, or other causes originating inhimself, knowingly and willfully travel intoanother jurisdiction, and there receive themasonic degrees, he shall be consideredand held as a clandestine made Mason."

The Grand Lodge of New York, especially,has opposed these regulations, inflicting apenalty on the initiate, and assigns its

reasons for the opposition in the followinglanguage:

"Before a man becomes a Mason, he issubject to no law which any Grand Lodgecan enact. No Grand Lodge has a right tomake a law to compel any citizen, whodesires, to be initiated in a particularlodge, or in the town or State of hisresidence; neither can any Grand Lodgeforbid a citizen to go where he pleases toseek acceptance into fellowship with thecraft; and where there is no right tocompel or to forbid, there can be no rightto punish; but it will be observed, that thelaws referred to were enacted to punishthe citizens of Maryland and Alabama, asMasons and Brethren, for doing somethingbefore they were Masons and Brethren,which they had a perfect right to do ascitizens and freemen; and it must certainlybe regarded as an act of deception and

treachery by a young Mason, on returninghome, to be told, that he is 'a clandestineMason,' that he 'ought to be expelled,' or,that he cannot be recognized as a Brothertill he 'joins a lodge where his residenceis,' because he was initiated in New York,in England, or in France, after havingheard all his life of the universality andoneness of the institution."[77]

It seems to us that the Grand Lodge of NewYork has taken the proper view of thesubject; although we confess that we arenot satisfied with the whole course ofreasoning by which it has arrived at theconclusion. Whatever we may be inclinedto think of the inexpediency of makingtransient persons (and we certainly dobelieve that it would be better that thecharacter and qualifications of everycandidate should be submitted to theinspection of his neighbors rather than to

that of strangers), however much we maycondemn the carelessness and facility of alodge which is thus willing to initiate astranger, without that due examination ofhis character, which, of course, in the caseof non-residents, can seldom be obtained,we are obliged to admit that such makingsare legal--the person thus made cannot becalled a clandestine Mason, because hehas been made in a legally constitutedlodge--and as he is a regular Mason, weknow of no principle by which he can berefused admission as a visitor into anylodge to which he applies.

Masonry is universal in its character, andknows no distinction of nation or ofreligion. Although each state or kingdomhas its distinct Grand Lodge, this is simplyfor purposes of convenience in carryingout the principles of uniformity andsubordination, which should prevail

throughout the masonic system. Thejurisdiction of these bodies is entirely of amasonic character, and is exercised onlyover the members of the Order who havevoluntarily contracted their allegiance. Itcannot affect the profane, who are, ofcourse, beyond its pale. It is true, that assoon as a candidate applies to a lodge forinitiation, he begins to come within thescope of masonic law. He has to submit to aprescribed formula of application andentrance, long before he becomes amember of the Order. But as this formula isuniversal in its operation, affectingcandidates who are to receive it andlodges which are to enforce it in all places,it must have been derived from someuniversal authority. The manner, therefore,in which a candidate is to be admitted, andthe preliminary qualifications which arerequisite, are prescribed by thelandmarks, the general usage, and the

ancient constitutions of the Order. And asthey have directed the _mode how_, theymight also have prescribed the _placewhere_, a man should be made a Mason.But they have done no such thing. Wecannot, after the most diligent search, findany constitutional regulation of the craft,which refers to the initiation ofnon-residents. The subject has been leftuntouched; and as the ancient anduniversally acknowledged authorities ofMasonry have neglected to legislate on thesubject, it is now too late for any modernand local authority, like that of a GrandLodge, to do so.

A Grand Lodge may, it is true, forbid--asMissouri, South Carolina, Georgia, andseveral other Grand Lodges havedone--the initiation of non-residents,within its own jurisdiction, because this is alocal law enacted by a local authority; but

it cannot travel beyond its own territory,and prescribe the same rule to anotherGrand Lodge, which may not, in fact, bewilling to adopt it.

The conclusions, then, at which we arriveno this subject are these: The ancientconstitutions have prescribed noregulation on the subject of the initiation ofnon-residents; it is, therefore, optional withevery Grand Lodge, whether it will or willnot suffer such candidates to be madewithin its own jurisdiction; the making,where it is permitted, is legal, and thecandidate so made becomes a regularMason, and is entitled to the right ofvisitation.

What, then, is the remedy, where a personof bad character, and having, in thelanguage of the Grand Lodge of Maryland,"a distrust of his acceptance" at home,

goes abroad and receives the degrees ofMasonry? No one will deny that such astate of things is productive of great evil tothe craft. Fortunately, the remedy is simpleand easily applied. Let the lodge, intowhose jurisdiction he has returned,exercise its power of discipline, and if hischaracter and conduct deserve thepunishment, let him be expelled from theOrder. If he is unworthy of remaining inthe Order, he should be removed from it atonce; but if he is worthy of continuing in it,there certainly can be no objection to hismaking use of his right to visit.

Chapter II.

Of the Rights of Entered Apprentices.

In an inquiry into the rights of EnteredApprentices, we shall not be muchassisted by the Ancient Constitutions,which, leaving the subject in the positionin which usage had established it, aresilent in relation to what is the rule. In allsuch cases, we must, as I have frequentlyremarked before, in settling the law, haverecourse to analogy, to the generalprinciples of equity, and the dictates ofcommon sense, and, with these three asour guides, we shall find but little difficultyin coming to a right conclusion.

At present, an Entered Apprentice is notconsidered a member of the Lodge, whichprivilege is only extended to MasterMasons. This was not formerly the case.Then the Master's degree was not asindiscriminately conferred as it is now. Alonger probation and greater mental ormoral qualifications were required to

entitle a candidate to this sublime dignity.None were called Master Masons but suchas had presided over their Lodges, and theoffice of Wardens was filled by FellowCrafts. Entered Apprentices, as well asFellow Crafts, were permitted to attend thecommunications of the Grand Lodge, andexpress their opinions; and, in 1718, it wasenacted that every new regulation,proposed in the Grand Lodge, should besubmitted to the consideration of even theyoungest Entered Apprentice. Brethren ofthis degree composed, in fact, at that time,the great body of the craft. But, all thesethings have, since, by the gradualimprovement of our organization,undergone many alterations; and EnteredApprentices seem now, by universalconsent, to be restricted to a very fewrights. They have the right of sitting in alllodges of their degree, of receiving all theinstructions which appertain to it, but not

of speaking or voting, and, lastly, ofoffering themselves as candidates foradvancement, without the preparatorynecessity of a formal written petition.

These being admitted to be the rights of anEntered Apprentice, few and unimportantas they may be, they are as dear to him asthose of a Master Mason are to one whohas been advanced to that degree; and heis, and ought to be, as firmly secured intheir possession. Therefore, as no Masoncan be deprived of his rights andprivileges, except after a fair and impartialtrial, and the verdict of his peers, it is clearthat the Entered Apprentice cannot bedivested of these rights without just such atrial and verdict.

But, in the next place, we are to inquirewhether the privilege of being passed as aFellow Craft is to be enumerated among

these rights? And, we clearly answer, No.The Entered Apprentice has the right ofmaking the application. Herein he differsfrom a profane, who has no such right ofapplication until he has qualified himselffor making it, by becoming an EnteredApprentice. But, if the application isgranted, it is _ex gratia_, or, by the favourof the lodge, which may withhold it, if itpleases. If such were not the case, thelodge would possess no free will on thesubject of advancing candidates; and therule requiring a probation and anexamination, before passing, would beuseless and absurd--because, the neglectof improvement or the want of competencywould be attended with no penalty.

It seems to me, then, that, when anApprentice applies for his second degree,the lodge may, if it thinks proper, refuse togrant it; and that it may express that refusal

by a ballot. No trial is necessary, becauseno rights of the candidate are affected. Heis, by a rejection of his request, left in thesame position that he formerly occupied.He is still an Entered Apprentice, in goodstanding; and the lodge may, at any time itthinks proper, reverse its decision andproceed to pass him.

If, however, he is specifically charged withany offense against the laws of Masonry, itwould then be necessary to give him atrial. Witnesses should be heard, both forand against him, and he should bepermitted to make his defense. Theopinion of the lodge should be taken, as inall other cases of trial, and, according tothe verdict, he should be suspended,expelled, or otherwise punished.

The effect of these two methods ofproceeding is very different. When, by a

ballot, the lodge refuses to advance anEntered Apprentice, there is not,necessarily, any stigma on his moralcharacter. It may be, that the refusal isbased on the ground that he has not madesufficient proficiency to entitle him to pass.Consequently, his standing as an EnteredApprentice is not at all affected. His rightsremain the same. He may still sit in thelodge when it is opened in his degree; hemay still receive instructions in thatdegree; converse with Masons on masonicsubjects which are not beyond hisstanding; and again apply to the lodge forpermission to pass as a Fellow Craft.

But, if he be tried on a specific charge, andbe suspended or expelled, his moralcharacter is affected. His masonic rightsare forfeited; and he can no longer beconsidered as an Entered Apprentice ingood standing. He will not be permitted to

sit in his lodge, to receive masonicinstruction, or to converse with Masons onmasonic subjects; nor can he again applyfor advancement until the suspension orexpulsion is removed by the spontaneousaction of the lodge.

These two proceedings work differently inanother respect. The Grand Lodge will notinterfere with a subordinate lodge incompelling it to pass an EnteredApprentice; because every lodge issupposed to be competent to finish, in itsown time, and its own way, the work that ithas begun. But, as the old regulations, aswell as the general consent of the craft,admit that the Grand Lodge alone canexpel from the rights and privileges ofMasonry, and that an expulsion by asubordinate lodge is inoperative until it isconfirmed by the Grand Lodge, it followsthat the expulsion of the Apprentice must

be confirmed by that body; and that,therefore, he has a right to appeal to it fora reversal of the sentence, if it was unjustlypronounced.

Let it not be said that this would be placingan Apprentice on too great an equalitywith Master Masons. His rights are dear tohim; he has paid for them. No man wouldbecome an Apprentice unless heexpected, in time, to be made a FellowCraft, and then a Master. He is, therefore,morally and legally wronged when he isdeprived, without sufficient cause, of thecapacity of fulfilling that expectation. It isthe duty of the Grand Lodge to see that noteven the humblest member of the craftshall have his rights unjustly invaded; andit is therefore bound, as the conservator ofthe rights of all, to inquire into the truth,and administer equity. Whenever,therefore, even an Entered Apprentice

complains that he has met with injusticeand oppression, his complaint should beinvestigated and justice administered.

The question next occurs--What number ofblack balls should prevent an Apprenticefrom passing to the second degree? Ianswer, the same number that wouldreject the application of a profane forinitiation into the Order. And why shouldthis not be so? Are the qualifications whichwould be required of one applying, for thefirst time, for admission to the degree of anApprentice more than would subsequentlybe required of the same person on hisapplying for a greater favor and a higherhonor--that of being advanced to thesecond degree? Or do the requisitions,which exist in the earlier stages ofMasonry, become less and less with everystep of the aspirant's progress? Viewingthe question in this light--and, indeed, I

know of no other in which to view it--itseems to me to be perfectly evident thatthe peculiar constitution and principles ofour Order will require unanimity in theelection of a profane for initiation, of anApprentice for a Fellow Craft, and of aFellow Craft for a Master Mason; and that,while no Entered Apprentice can beexpelled from the Order, except by duecourse of trial, it is competent for thelodge, at any time, on a ballot, to refuse toadvance him to the second degree. But, letit be remembered that the lodge whichrefuses to pass an Apprentice, on accountof any objections to his moral character, ordoubts of his worthiness, is bound to givehim the advantage of a trial, and at once toexpel him, if guilty, or, if innocent, toadvance him when otherwise qualified.

Chapter III.

Of the Rights of Fellow Crafts.

In ancient times there were undoubtedlymany rights attached to the second degreewhich have now become obsolete or beenrepealed; for formerly the great body ofthe fraternity were Fellow Crafts, andaccording to the old charges, even theGrand Master might be elected fromamong them. The Master and Wardens ofSubordinate Lodges always were. Thus weare told that no Brother can be GrandMaster, "unless he has been a Fellow Craftbefore his election," and in the ancientmanner of constituting a lodge, containedin the Book of Constitutions,[78] it is saidthat "the candidates, or the new Masterand Wardens, being yet among the FellowCrafts, the Grand Master shall ask hisDeputy if he has examined them," etc. Butnow that the great body of the Fraternityconsists of Master Masons, theprerogatives of Fellow Crafts arecircumscribed within limits nearly as

narrow as those of Entered Apprentices.While, however, Apprentices are notpermitted to speak or vote, in ancienttimes, and up, indeed, to a very late date.Fellow Crafts were entitled to take a part inany discussion in which the lodge, whileopen in the first or second degree, mightengage, but not to vote. This privilege isexpressly stated by Preston, asappertaining to a Fellow Craft, in hischarge to a candidate, receiving thatdegree.

"As a Craftsman, in our private assembliesyou may offer your sentiments andopinions on such subjects as are regularlyintroduced in the Lecture, under thesuperintendence of an experiencedMaster, who will guard the landmarkagainst encroachment."[79]

This privilege is not now, however,

granted in this country to Fellow Crafts.All, therefore, that has been said in thepreceding chapter, of the rights of EnteredApprentices, will equally apply, _mutatismutandis_, to the rights of Fellow Crafts.

Chapter IV.

Of the Rights of Master Masons.

When a Mason has reached the thirddegree, he becomes entitled to all therights and privileges of Ancient CraftMasonry. These rights are extensive andcomplicated; and, like his duties, whichare equally as extensive, require a carefulexamination, thoroughly to comprehendthem. Four of them, at least, are of so muchimportance as to demand a distinctconsideration. These are the rights ofmembership, of visitation, of relief, and ofburial. To each I shall devote a separatesection.

Section I.

_Of the Right of Membership._

The whole spirit and tenor of the GeneralRegulations, as well as the uniform usageof the craft, sustain the doctrine, that whena Mason is initiated in a lodge, he has theright, by signing the bye-laws, to becomea member without the necessity ofsubmitting to another ballot. In theConstitutions of the Grand Lodge of NewYork, this principle is asserted to be one ofthe ancient landmarks, and is announcedin the following words: "Initiation makes aman a Mason; but he must receive theMaster's degree, and sign the bye-lawsbefore he becomes a member of thelodge."[80] If the doctrine be not exactly alandmark (which I confess I am not quiteprepared to admit), it comes to us almost

clothed with the authority of one, from thesanction of universal and uninterruptedusage.

How long before he loses this right by a_non-user_, or neglect to avail himself of it,is, I presume, a question to be settled bylocal authority. A lodge, or a Grand Lodge,may affix the period according to itsdiscretion; but the general custom is, torequire a signature of the bye-laws, and aconsequent enrollment in the lodge, withinthree months after receiving the thirddegree. Should a Mason neglect to availhimself of his privilege, he forfeits it(unless, upon sufficient cause, he isexcused by the lodge), and must submit toa ballot.

The reason for such a law is evident. If aMason does not at once unite himself withthe lodge in which he was raised, but

permits an extended period of time toelapse, there is no certainty that hischaracter or habits may not have changed,and that he may not have become, sincehis initiation, unworthy of affiliation. Underthe general law, it is, therefore, necessarythat he should in such case submit to theusual probation of one month, and aninvestigation of his qualifications by acommittee, as well as a ballot by themembers.

But there are other privileges alsoconnected with this right of membership.A profane is required to apply for initiationto the lodge nearest his place of residence,and, if there rejected, can never in futureapply to any other lodge. But the rule isdifferent with respect to the application ofa Master Mason for membership.

A Master Mason is not restricted in his

privilege of application for membershipwithin any geographical limits. All that isrequired of him is, that he should be anaffiliated Mason; that is, that he should be acontributing member of a lodge, withoutany reference to its peculiar locality,whether near to or distant from his place ofresidence. The Old Charges simplyprescribe, that every Mason ought tobelong to a lodge. A Mason, therefore,strictly complies with this regulation, whenhe unites himself with any lodge, thuscontributing to the support of theinstitution, and is then entitled to all theprivileges of an affiliated Mason.

A rejection of the application of a MasterMason for membership by a lodge doesnot deprive him of the right of applying toanother. A Mason is in "good standing"until deprived of that character by theaction of some competent masonic

authority; and that action can only be bysuspension or expulsion. Rejection doesnot, therefore, affect the "good standing"of the applicant; for in a rejection there isno legal form of trial, and consequently therejected Brother remains in the sameposition after as before his rejection. Hepossesses the same rights as before,unimpaired and undiminished; and amongthese rights is that of applying formembership to any lodge that he mayselect.

If, then, a Mason may be a member of alodge distant from his place of residence,and, perhaps, even situated in a differentjurisdiction, the question then ariseswhether the lodge within whose precinctshe resides, but of which he is not amember, can exercise its discipline overhim should he commit any offenserequiring masonic punishment. On this

subject there is, among masonic writers, adifference of opinion. I, however, agreewith Brother Pike, the able Chairman of theCommittee of Correspondence ofArkansas, that the lodge can exercise suchdiscipline. I contend that a Mason isamenable for his conduct not only to thelodge of which he may be a member, butalso to any one within whose jurisdictionhe permanently resides. A lodge is theconservator of the purity and the protectorof the integrity of the Order within itsprecincts. The unworthy conduct of aMason, living as it were immediatelyunder its government, is calculated mostinjuriously to affect that purity andintegrity. A lodge, therefore, should not bedeprived of the power of coercing suchunworthy Mason, and, by salutarypunishment, of vindicating the character ofthe institution. Let us suppose, by way ofexample, that a Mason living in San

Francisco, California, but retaining hismembership in New York, behaves in suchan immoral and indecorous manner as tobring the greatest discredit upon theOrder, and to materially injure it in theestimation of the uninitiated community.Will it be, for a moment, contended that alodge in San Francisco cannot arrest theevil by bringing the unworthy Masonunder discipline, and even ejecting himfrom the fraternity, if severity like that isnecessary for the protection of theinstitution? Or will it be contended thatredress can only be sought through thedelay and uncertainty of an appeal to hislodge in New York? Even if the words ofthe ancient laws are silent on this subject,reason and justice would seem to maintainthe propriety and expediency of thedoctrine that the lodge at San Francisco isamply competent to extend its jurisdictionand exercise its discipline over the culprit.

In respect to the number of votesnecessary to admit a Master Masonapplying by petition for membership in alodge, there can be no doubt that he mustsubmit to precisely the same conditions asthose prescribed to a profane on hispetition for initiation. There is no room forargument here, for the GeneralRegulations are express on this subject.

"No man can be made or _admitted amember_ of a particular lodge," says thefifth regulation, "without previous noticeone month before given to the said lodge."

And the sixth regulation adds, that "no mancan be entered a Brother in any particularlodge, or _admitted to be a member_thereof, without the unanimous consent ofall the members of that lodge thenpresent."

So that it may be considered as settled law,so far as the General Regulations can settlea law of Masonry, that a Master Mason canonly be admitted a member of a lodgewhen applying by petition, after a month'sprobation, after due inquiry into hischaracter, and after a unanimous ballot inhis favor.

But there are other rights of Master Masonsconsequent upon membership, whichremain to be considered. In uniting with alodge, a Master Mason becomes aparticipant of all its interests, and isentitled to speak and vote upon allsubjects that come before the lodge forinvestigation. He is also entitled, if dulyelected by his fellows, to hold any office inthe lodge, except that of Master, for whichhe must be qualified by previously havingoccupied the post of a Warden.

A Master has the right in all cases of anappeal from the decision of the Master orof the lodge.

A Master Mason, in good standing, has aright at any time to demand from his lodgea certificate to that effect.

Whatever other rights may appertain toMaster Masons will be the subjects ofseparate sections.

Section II.

_Of the Right of Visit._

Every Master Mason, who is an affiliatedmember of a lodge, has the right to visitany other lodge as often as he may desireto do so. This right is secured to him by theancient regulations, and is, therefore,irreversible. In the "Ancient Charges at theConstitution of a Lodge," formerlycontained in a MS. of the Lodge ofAntiquity in London, and whose date is notlater than 1688,[81]it is directed "thatevery Mason receive and cherish strangefellows when they come over the country,and set them on work, if they will work asthe manner is; that is to say, if the Masonhave any mould stone in his place, he shallgive him a mould stone, and set him onwork; and if he have none, the Mason shall

refresh him with money unto the nextlodge."

This regulation is explicit. It not only infersthe right of visit, but it declares that thestrange Brother shall be welcomed,"received, and cherished," and "set onwork," that is, permitted to participate inthe work of your lodge. Its provisions areequally applicable to Brethren residing inthe place where the lodge is situated as totransient Brethren, provided that they areaffiliated Masons.

In the year 1819, the law was in Englandauthoritatively settled by a decree of theGrand Lodge. A complaint had beenpreferred against a lodge in London, forhaving refused admission to someBrethren who were well known to them,alleging that as the lodge was about toinitiate a candidate, no visitor could be

admitted until that ceremony wasconcluded. It was then declared, "that it isthe undoubted right of every Mason who iswell known, or properly vouched, to visitany lodge during the time it is opened forgeneral masonic business, observing theproper forms to be attended to on suchoccasions, and so that the Master may notbe interrupted in the performance of hisduty."[82]

A lodge, when not opened for "generalmasonic business," but when engaged inthe consideration of matters which interestthe lodge alone, and which it would beinexpedient or indelicate to make public,may refuse to admit a visitor. Lodgesengaged in this way, in private business,from which visitors are excluded, are saidby the French Masons to be opened "_enfamille_."

To entitle him to this right of visit, a Masonmust be affiliated, that is, he must be acontributing member of some lodge. Thisdoctrine is thus laid down in theConstitutions of the Grand Lodge ofEngland:

"A Brother who is not a subscribingmember to some lodge, shall not bepermitted to visit any one lodge in thetown or place in which he resides, morethan once during his secession from thecraft."

A non-subscribing or unaffiliated Mason ispermitted to visit each lodge once, andonce only, because it is supposed that thisvisit is made for the purpose of enablinghim to make a selection of the one withwhich he may prefer permanently to unite.But, afterwards, he loses this right of visit,to discountenance those Brethren who

wish to continue members of the Order,and to partake of its pleasures andadvantages, without contributing to itssupport.

A Master Mason is not entitled to visit alodge, unless he previously submits to anexamination, or is personally vouched forby a competent Brother present; but this isa subject of so much importance as toclaim consideration in a distinct section.

Another regulation is, that a strangeBrother shall furnish the lodge he intendsto visit with a certificate of his goodstanding in the lodge from which he lasthailed. This regulation has, in late years,given rise to much discussion. Many of theGrand Lodges of this country, and severalmasonic writers, strenuously contend forits antiquity and necessity, while others aspositively assert that it is a modern

innovation upon ancient usage.

There can, however, I think, be no doubt ofthe antiquity of certificates. That thesystem requiring them was in force nearlytwo hundred years ago, at least, will beevident from the third of the Regulationsmade in General Assembly, December 27,1663, under the Grand Mastership of theEarl of St. Albans,[83] and which is in thefollowing words:

"3. That no person hereafter who shall beaccepted a Freemason, shall be admittedinto any lodge or assembly, until he hasbrought a certificate of the time and placeof his acceptation, from the lodge thataccepted him, unto the Master of that limitor division where such a lodge is kept."This regulation has been reiterated onseveral occasions, by the Grand Lodge ofEngland in 1772, and at subsequent

periods by several Grand Lodges of thisand other countries. It is not, however, inforce in many of the Americanjurisdictions.

Another right connected with the right ofvisitation is, that of demanding a sight ofthe Warrant of Constitution. Thisinstrument it is, indeed, not only the rightbut the duty of every strange visitorcarefully to inspect, before he enters alodge, that he may thus satisfy himself ofthe legality and regularity of its characterand authority. On such a demand beingmade by a visitor for a sight of its Warrant,every lodge is bound to comply with therequisition, and produce the instrument.The same rule, of course, applies to lodgesunder dispensation, whose Warrant ofDispensation supplies the place of aWarrant of Constitution.

Section III.

_Of the Examination of Visitors._

It has already been stated, in thepreceding section, that a Master Mason isnot permitted to visit a lodge unless hepreviously submits to an examination, or ispersonally vouched for by somecompetent Brother present. Theprerogative of vouching for a Brother is animportant one, and will constitute thesubject of the succeeding section. Atpresent let us confine ourselves to theconsideration of the mode of examining avisitor.

Every visitor, who offers himself to theappointed committee of the lodge forexamination, is expected, as a preliminarystep, to submit to the Tiler's Obligation; so

called, because it is administered in theTiler's room. As this obligation forms nopart of the secret ritual of the Order, but isadministered to every person before anylawful knowledge of his being a Mason hasbeen received, there can be nothingobjectionable in inserting it here, and infact, it will be advantageous to have theprecise words of so important adeclaration placed beyond the possibilityof change or omission by inexperiencedBrethren.

The oath, then, which is administered tothe visitor, and which he may, if hechooses, require every one present to takewith him, is in the following words

"I, A. B., do hereby and hereon solemnlyand sincerely swear, that I have beenregularly initiated, passed, and raised, tothe sublime degree of a Master Mason, in a

just and legally constituted lodge of such,that I do not now stand suspended orexpelled, and know of no reason why Ishould not hold masonic communicationwith my Brethren.

This declaration having been given in themost solemn manner, the examinationmust then be conducted with thenecessary forms. The good old rule of"commencing at the beginning" should beobserved. Every question is to be askedand every answer demanded which isnecessary to convince the examiner thatthe party examined is acquainted withwhat he ought to know, to entitle him to theappellation of a Brother. Nothing is to betaken for granted--categorical answersmust be required to all that it is deemedimportant to be asked. No forgetfulness isto be excused, nor is the want of memoryto be accepted as a valid excuse for the

want of knowledge. The Mason, who is sounmindful of his duties as to have forgottenthe instructions he has received, must paythe penalty of his carelessness, and bedeprived of his contemplated visit to thatsociety whose secret modes of recognitionhe has so little valued as not to havetreasured them in his memory. While thereare some things which may be safelypassed over in the examination of one whoconfesses himself to be "rusty," or butrecently initiated, because they are detailswhich require much study to acquire, andconstant practice to retain, there are stillother things of great importance whichmust be rigidly demanded, and with theknowledge of which the examiner cannot,under any circumstances, dispense.

Should suspicions of imposture arise, letno expression of these suspicions be madeuntil the final decree for rejection is

pronounced. And let that decree beuttered in general terms, such as: "I am notsatisfied," or, "I do not recognize you," andnot in more specific terms, such as, "Youdid not answer this inquiry," or, "You areignorant on that point." The visitor is onlyentitled to know, generally, that he has notcomplied with the requisitions of hisexaminer. To descend to particulars isalways improper and often dangerous.

Above all, the examiner should never askwhat are called "leading questions," orsuch as include in themselves an indicationof what the answer is to be; nor should hein any manner aid the memory of the partyexamined by the slightest hint. If he has itin him, it will come out without assistance,and if he has it not, he is clearly entitled tono aid.

Lastly, never should an unjustifiable

delicacy weaken the rigor of these rules.Let it be remembered, that for the wisestand most evident reasons, the mercifulmaxim of the law, which says, that it isbetter that ninety-nine guilty men shouldescape than that one innocent man shouldbe punished, is with us reversed, and thatin Masonry _it is better that ninety andnine true men should be turned away fromthe door of a lodge than that one cowanshould be admitted_.

Section IV.

_Of Vouching for a Brother._

An examination may sometimes beomitted when any competent Brotherpresent will vouch for the visitor's masonicstanding and qualifications. Thisprerogative of vouching is an importantone which every Master Mason is entitled,under certain restrictions, to exercise; butit is also one which may so materially affectthe well-being of the wholefraternity--since by its injudicious useimpostors might be introduced among thefaithful--that it should be controlled by themost stringent regulations.

To vouch for one, is to bear witness forhim; and, in witnessing to truth, everycaution should be observed, lest falsehood

should cunningly assume its garb. TheBrother who vouches should, therefore,know to a certainty that the one for whomhe vouches is really what he claims to be.He should know this not from a casualconversation, nor a loose and carelessinquiry, but, as the unwritten law of theOrder expresses it, from "_strict trial, dueexamination, or lawful information_."

Of strict trial and due examination I havealready treated in the preceding section;and it only remains to say, that when thevouching is founded on the knowledgeobtained in this way, it is absolutelynecessary that the Brother so vouchingshall be _competent_ to conduct such anexamination, and that his generalintelligence and shrewdness and hisknowledge of Masonry shall be such as toplace him above the probability of beingimposed upon. The important and

indispensable qualification of a voucher is,therefore, that he shall be competent. TheMaster of a lodge has no right to accept,without further inquiry, the avouchment ofa young and inexperienced, or even of anold, if ignorant, Mason.

Lawful information, which is the remainingground for an avouchment, may bederived either from the declaration ofanother Brother, or from having met theparty vouched for in a lodge on someprevious occasion.

If the information is derived from anotherBrother, who states that he has examinedthe party, then all that has already beensaid of the competency of the one givingthe information is equally applicable. TheBrother, giving the original information,must be competent to make a rigidexamination. Again, the person giving the

information, the one receiving it, and theone of whom it is given, should be allpresent at the time; for otherwise therewould be no certainty of identity.Information, therefore, given by letter orthrough a third party, is highly irregular.The information must also be positive, notfounded on belief or opinion, but derivedfrom a legitimate source. And, lastly, itmust not have been received casually, butfor the very purpose of being used formasonic purposes. For one to say toanother in the course of a desultoryconversation: "A.B. is a Mason," is notsufficient. He may not be speaking withdue caution, under the expectation that hiswords will be considered of weight. Hemust say something to this effect: "I knowthis man to be a Master Mason," for such orsuch reasons, and you may safelyrecognize him as such. This alone willinsure the necessary care and proper

observance of prudence.

If the information given is on the groundthat the person, vouched has been seensitting in a lodge by the voucher, caremust be taken to inquire if it was a "Lodgeof Master Masons." A person may forget,from the lapse of time, and vouch for astranger as a Master Mason, when thelodge in which he saw him was onlyopened in the first or second degree.

Section V.

_Of the Right of Claiming Relief._

One of the great objects of our institutionis, to afford relief to a worthy, distressedBrother. In his want and destitution, theclaim of a Mason upon his Brethren ismuch greater than that of a profane. This isa Christian as well as a masonic doctrine."As we have therefore opportunity," saysSt. Paul, "let us do good unto all men,especially unto them who are of thehousehold of faith."

This claim for relief he may present eitherto a lodge or to a Brother Mason. The rule,as well as the principles by which it is tobe regulated, is laid down in thatfundamental law of Masonry, the OldCharges, in the following explicit words,

under the head of "Behavior towards astrange Brother:"

"You are cautiously to examine him, insuch a method as prudence shall directyou, that you may not be imposed upon byan ignorant, false pretender, whom youare to reject with contempt and derision,and beware of giving him any hints ofknowledge.

"But if you discover him to be a true andgenuine Brother, you are to respect himaccordingly; and if he is in want, you mustrelieve him if you can, or else direct himhow he may be relieved. You must employhim some days, or else recommend him tobe employed. But you are not charged todo beyond your ability, only to prefer apoor Brother, that is a good man and true,before any other people in the samecircumstances."

This law thus laid down, includes, it will beperceived, as two important prerequisites,on which to found a claim for relief, thatthe person applying shall be in distress,and that he shall be worthy of assistance.

He must be in distress. Ours is not aninsurance company, a joint stockassociation, in which, for a certainpremium paid, an equivalent may bedemanded. No Mason, or no lodge, isbound to give pecuniary or other aid to aBrother, unless he really needs. The word "benefit," as usually used in the modernfriendly societies, has no place in thevocabulary of Freemasonry. If a wealthyBrother is afflicted with sorrow or sickness,we are to strive to comfort him with oursympathy, our kindness, and our attention,but we are to bestow our eleemosynaryaid only on the indigent or the destitute.

He must also be worthy. There is noobligation on a Mason to relieve thedistresses, however real they may be, ofan unworthy Brother. The claimant mustbe, in the language of the Charge, "trueand genuine." True here is used in its goodold Saxon meaning, of "faithful" or "trusty."A true Mason is one who is mindful of hisobligations, and who faithfully observesand practices all his duties. Such a man,alone, can rightfully claim the assistance ofhis Brethren.

But a third provision is made in thefundamental law; namely, that theassistance is not to be beyond the ability ofthe giver. One of the most importantlandmarks, contained in our unwritten law,more definitely announces this provision,by the words, that the aid and assistanceshall be without injury to oneself or his

family. Masonry does not require that weshall sacrifice our own welfare to that of aBrother; but that with prudent liberality,and a just regard to our own worldlymeans, we shall give of the means withwhich Providence may have blessed us forthe relief of our distressed Brethren.

It is hardly necessary to say, that the claimfor relief of a worthy distressed Masonextends also to his immediate family.

Section VI.

_Of the Right of Masonic Burial._

After a very careful examination, I can findnothing in the old charges or GeneralRegulations, nor in any other part of thefundamental law, in relation to masonicburial of deceased Brethren. It is probablethat, at an early period, when the greatbody of the craft consisted of EnteredApprentices, the usage permitted theburial of members, of the first or seconddegree, with the honors of Masonry. As farback as 1754, processions for the purposeof burying Masons seemed to have beenconducted by some of the lodges witheither too much frequency, or some otherirregularity; for, in November of that year,the Grand Lodge adopted a regulation,forbidding them, under a heavy penalty,

unless by permission of the Grand Master,or his Deputy.[84] As there were,comparatively speaking, few MasterMasons at that period, it seems a naturalinference that most of the funeralprocessions were for the burial ofApprentices, or, at least, of Fellow Crafts.

But the usage since then, has been greatlychanged; and by universal consent, thelaw, as first committed to writing, byPreston, who was the author of our presentfuneral service, is now adopted.

The Regulation, as laid down by Preston, isso explicit, that I prefer giving it in his ownwords.[85]

"No Mason can be interred with theformalities of the Order, unless it be at hisown special request, communicated to theMaster of the Lodge of which he died a

member--foreigners and sojournersexcepted; nor unless he has beenadvanced to the third degree of Masonry,from which restriction there can be noexception. Fellow Crafts or Apprenticesare not entitled to the funeral obsequies."

This rule has been embodied in themodern Constitutions of the Grand Lodgeof England; and, as I have alreadyobserved, appears by universal consent tohave been adopted as the general usage.

The necessity for a dispensation, which isalso required by the modern EnglishConstitutions, does not seem to have metwith the same general approval, and in thiscountry, dispensations for funeralprocessions are not usually, if at all,required. Indeed, Preston himself, inexplaining the law, says that it was notintended to restrict the privileges of the

regular lodges, but that, "by the universalpractice of Masons, every regular lodge isauthorized by the Constitution to act onsuch occasions when limited to its ownmembers."[86] It is only when members ofother lodges, not under the control of theMaster, are convened, that a dispensationis required. But in America, Grand Lodgesor Grand Masters have not generallyinterfered with the rights of the lodges tobury the dead; the Master being of courseamenable to the constituted authorities forany indecorum or impropriety.

Chapter V.

Of the Rights of Past Masters.

I have already discussed the right of PastMasters to become members of a GrandLodge, in a preceding part of thiswork,[87] and have there arrived at theconclusion that no such inherent rightexists, and that a Grand Lodge may or maynot admit them to membership, accordingto its own notion of expediency. Still thefact, that they are competent by theirmasonic rank of accepting such a courtesywhen extended, in itself constitutes aprerogative; for none but Masters,Wardens, or Past Masters, can under anycircumstances become members of aGrand Lodge.

Past Masters possess a few other positiverights.

In the first place they have a right to installtheir successors, and at all timessubsequent to their installation to be

present at the ceremony of installingMasters of lodges. I should scarcely havedeemed it necessary to dwell upon soself-evident a proposition, were it not thatit involves the discussion of a questionwhich has of late years been warmlymooted in some jurisdictions, namely,whether this right of being present at aninstallation should, or should not, beextended to Past Masters, made in RoyalArch Chapters.

In view of the fact, that there are two verydifferent kinds of possessors of the samedegree, the Grand Lodge of England haslong since distinguished them as "virtual"and as "actual" Past Masters. The terms aresufficiently explicit, and have theadvantage of enabling us to avoidcircumlocution, and I shall, therefore,adopt them.

An _actual Past Master_ is one who hasbeen regularly installed to preside over asymbolic lodge under the jurisdiction of aGrand Lodge. A _virtual Past Master_ isone who has received the degree in achapter, for the purpose of qualifying himfor exaltation to the Royal Arch.

Now the question to be considered is this.Can a virtual Past Master be permitted tobe present at the installation of an actualPast Master?

The Committee of Correspondence of NewYork, in 1851, announced the doctrine, thata Chapter, or virtual Past Master, cannotlegally install the Master of a SymbolicLodge; but that there is no rule forbiddinghis being present at the ceremony. Thisdoctrine has been accepted by severalGrand Lodges, while others again refuse toadmit the presence of a virtual Past Master

at the installation-service.

In South Carolina, for instance, byuninterrupted usage, virtual Past Mastersare excluded from the ceremony ofinstallation.

In Louisiana, under the high authority ofthe late Brother Gedge, it is asserted, that"it is the bounden duty of all Grand Lodgesto prevent the possessors of the (chapter)degree from the exercise of any functionappertaining to the office and attributes ofan installed Master of a lodge of SymbolicMasonry, and refuse to recognize them asbelonging to the order of PastMasters."[88]

Brother Albert Pike, whose opinion onmasonic jurisprudence is entitled to themost respectful consideration, hasannounced a similar doctrine in one of his

elaborate reports to the Grand Chapter ofArkansas. He does not consider "that thePast Master's degree, conferred in achapter, invests the recipient with anyrank or authority, except within thechapter itself; that it no ways qualifies orauthorizes him to preside in the chair of alodge: that a lodge has no legal means ofknowing that he has received the degreein a chapter: for it is not supposed to knowanything that takes place there any morethan it knows what takes place in a Lodgeof Perfection, or a Chapter of Knights of theRose Croix;" and, of course, if the PastMasters of a lodge have no such "legalmeans" of recognition of Chapter Masters,they cannot permit them to be present atan installation.

This is, in fact, no new doctrine. Preston, inhis description of the installationceremony, says: "The new Master is then

conducted to an adjacent room, where heis regularly installed, and bound to histrust in ancient form, in the presence of atleast _three installed Masters_"[89] AndDr. Oliver, in commenting on this passage,says, "this part of the ceremony can onlybe orally communicated, nor can any but_installed_ Masters be present."[90]

And this rule appears to be founded on theprinciples of reason. There can be nodoubt, if we carefully examine the historyof Masonry in this country and in England,that the degree of Past Master wasoriginally conferred by Symbolic Lodgesas an honorarium or reward bestowedupon those Brethren who had been foundworthy to occupy the Oriental Chair. In sofar it was only a degree of office, and couldbe obtained only from the Lodge in whichthe office had been conferred. At a laterperiod it was deemed an essential

prerequisite to exaltation in the degree ofRoyal Arch, and was, for that purpose,conferred on candidates for that position,while the Royal Arch degree was under thecontrol of the symbolic Lodges, but stillonly conferred by the Past Masters of theLodge. But subsequently, when the systemof Royal Arch Masonry was greatlyenlarged and extended in this country,and chapters were organized independentof the Grand and symbolic Lodges, theseChapters took with them the Past Master'sdegree, and assumed the right ofconferring it on their candidates. Hencearose the anomaly which now exists inAmerican Masonry, of two degreesbearing the same name, and said to bealmost identical in character, conferred bytwo different bodies under entirelydifferent qualifications and for totallydifferent purposes. As was to be expected,when time had in some degree obliterated

the details of history, each party began toclaim for itself the sovereign virtue oflegitimacy. The Past Masters of theChapters denied the right of the SymbolicLodges to confer the degree, and thelatter, in their turn, asserted that thedegree, as conferred in the Chapter, wasan innovation.

The prevalence of the former doctrinewould, of course, tend to deprive theSymbolic Lodges of a vested right held bythem from the most ancient times--that,namely, of conferring an honorarium ontheir Masters elect.

On the whole, then, from this view of thesurreptitious character of the ChapterDegree, and supported by the highauthority whom I have cited, as well as bythe best usage, I am constrained to believethat the true rule is, to deny the Chapter,

or Virtual Past Masters, the right to install,or to be present at the installation of theMaster of a Symbolic Lodge. A Past Mastermay preside over a lodge in the absenceof the Master, provided he is invited to doso by the Senior Warden present. TheSecond General Regulation gave thepower of presiding, during the absence ofthe Master, to the last Past Master present,after the lodge had been congregated bythe Senior Warden; but two yearsafterwards, the rule was repealed, and thepower of presiding in such cases wasvested in the Senior Warden. Andaccordingly, in this country, it has alwaysbeen held, that in the absence of theMaster, his authority descends to theSenior Warden, who may, however, bycourtesy, offer the chair to a Past Masterpresent, after the lodge has beencongregated. Some jurisdictions havepermitted a Past Master to preside in the

absence of the Master and both Wardens,provided he was a member of that lodge.But I confess that I can find no warrant forthis rule in any portion of our fundamentallaws. The power of congregating the lodgein the absence of the Master has alwaysbeen confined to the Wardens; and ittherefore seems to me, that when both theMaster and Wardens are absent, althougha Past Master may be present, the lodgecannot be opened.

A Past Master is eligible for election to thechair, without again passing through theoffice of a Warden.

He is also entitled to a seat in the East, andto wear a jewel and collar peculiar to hisdignity.

By an ancient regulation, contained in theOld Charges, Past Masters alone were

eligible to the office of Grand Warden. TheDeputy Grand Master was also to beselected from among the Masters, or PastMasters of Lodges. No such regulation wasin existence as to the office of GrandMaster, who might be selected from themass of the fraternity. At the present time,in this country, it is usual to select theGrand officers from among the PastMasters of the jurisdiction, though I knowof no ancient law making such a regulationobligatory, except in respect to the affairsof Grand Wardens and Deputy GrandMaster.

Chapter VI.

Of Affiliation.

Affiliation is defined to be the act by whicha lodge receives a Mason among itsmembers. A profane is said to be"initiated," but a Mason is "affiliated."[91]

Now the mode in which a Mason becomesaffiliated with a lodge, in some respectsdiffers from, and in others resembles, themode in which a profane is initiated.

A Mason, desiring to be affiliated with alodge, must apply by petition; this petitionmust be referred to a committee forinvestigation of character, he must remainin a state of probation for one month, andmust then submit to a ballot, in whichunanimity will be required for hisadmission. In all these respects, there is nodifference in the modes of regulatingapplications for initiation and affiliation.The Fifth and Sixth General Regulations,upon which these usages are founded,

draw no distinction between the act ofmaking a Mason and admitting a member.The two processes are disjunctivelyconnected in the language of bothregulations. "No man can be made, _oradmitted a member_ * * * * withoutprevious notice one month before;" are thewords of the Fifth Regulation. And in asimilar spirit the Sixth adds: "But no mancan be entered a Brother in any particularlodge, _or admitted to be a member_thereof, without the unanimous consent ofall the members of that lodge."

None but Master Masons are permitted toapply for affiliation; and every Brother soapplying must bring to the lodge to whichhe applies a certificate of his regulardismission from the lodge of which he waslast a member. This document is nowusually styled a "demit," and shouldspecify the good standing of the bearer at

the time of his resignation or demission.

Under the regulations of the various GrandLodges of this country, a profane cannot,as has been already observed, apply forinitiation in any other lodge than the onenearest to his residence. No suchregulation, however, exists in relation tothe application of a Mason for affiliation.Having once been admitted into the Order,he has a right to select the lodge withwhich he may desire to unite himself. He isnot even bound to affiliate with the lodgein which he was initiated, but after beingraised, may leave it, without signing thebye-laws, and attach himself to another.

A profane, having been rejected by alodge, can never apply to any other forinitiation. But a Mason, having beenrejected, on his application for affiliation,by a lodge, is not thereby debarred from

subsequently making a similar applicationto any other.

In some few jurisdictions a local regulationhas of late years been enacted, that noMason shall belong to more than onelodge. It is, I presume, competent for aGrand Lodge to enact such a regulation;but where such enactment has not takenplace, we must be governed by theancient and general principle.

The General Regulations, adopted in 1721,contain no reference to this case; but in anew regulation, adopted on the 19thFebruary, 1723, it was declared that "noBrother shall belong to more than onelodge within the bills of mortality." Thisrule was, therefore, confined to the lodgesin the city of London, and did not affect thecountry lodges. Still, restricted as it was inits operation, Anderson remarks, "this

regulation is neglected for severalreasons, and now obsolete."[92] Customnow in England and in other parts ofEurope, as well as in some few portions ofthis country, is adverse to the regulation;and where no local law exists in aparticular jurisdiction, I know of noprinciple of masonic jurisprudence whichforbids a Mason to affiliate himself withmore than one lodge.

The only objection to it is one which mustbe urged, not by the Order, but by theindividual. It is, that his duties and hisresponsibilities are thus multiplied, as wellas his expenses. If he is willing to incur allthis additional weight in running his raceof Masonry, it is not for others to resist thisexuberance of zeal. The Mason, however,who is affiliated with more than one lodge,must remember that he is subject to theindependent jurisdiction of each; may for

the same offense be tried in each, and,although acquitted by all except one, that,if convicted by that one, his conviction will,if he be suspended or expelled, work hissuspension or expulsion in all the others.

Chapter VII.

Of Demitting.

To demit from a lodge is to resign one'smembership, on which occasion acertificate of good standing and a releasefrom all dues is given to the applicant,which is technically called a _demit_.

The right to demit or resign never has,until within a few years, been denied. In1853, the Grand Lodge of Connecticutadopted a regulation "that no lodge shouldgrant a demit to any of its members,except for the purpose of joining someother lodge; and that no member shall beconsidered as having withdrawn from onelodge until he has actually become amember of another." Similar regulationshave been either adopted or proposed bya few other Grand Lodges, but I muchdoubt both their expediency and theirlegality. This compulsory method ofkeeping Masons, after they have oncebeen made, seems to me to be as

repugnant to the voluntary character of ourinstitution as would be a compulsory modeof making them in the beginning. Theexpediency of such a regulation is alsohighly questionable. Every candidate isrequired to come to our doors "of his ownfree will and accord," and surely weshould desire to keep none among us afterthat free will is no longer felt. We are allfamiliar with the Hudibrastic adage, that

"A man convinced against his will, Isof the same opinion still,"

and he who is no longer actuated by thatardent esteem for the institution whichwould generate a wish to continue hismembership, could scarcely have hisslumbering zeal awakened, or hiscoldness warmed by the bolts and bars ofa regulation that should keep him areluctant prisoner within the walls from

which he would gladly escape. Masonswith such dispositions we can gladly sparefrom our ranks.

The Ancient Charges, while they assertthat every Mason should belong to alodge, affix no penalty for disobedience.No man can be compelled to continue hisunion with a society, whether it bereligious, political, or social, any longerthan will suit his own inclinations or senseof duty. To interfere with this inalienableprerogative of a freeman would be aninfringement on private rights. A Mason'sinitiation was voluntary, and hiscontinuance in the Order must be equallyso.

But no man is entitled to a demit, unless atthe time of demanding it he be in goodstanding and free from all charges. Ifunder charges for crime, he must remain

and abide his trial, or if in arrears, mustpay up his dues.

There is, however, one case of demissionfor which a special law has been enacted.That is, when several Brethren at the sametime request demits from a lodge. As thisaction is sometimes the result of pique oranger, and as the withdrawal of severalmembers at once might seriously impairthe prosperity, or perhaps even endangerthe very existence of the lodge, it has beenexpressly forbidden by the GeneralRegulations, unless the lodge has becometoo numerous for convenient working; andnot even then is permitted except by aDispensation. The words of this law are tobe found in the Eighth General Regulation,as follows:

"No set or number of Brethren shallwithdraw or separate themselves from the

lodge in which they were made Brethren,or were afterwards admitted members,unless the lodge becomes too numerous;nor even then, without a dispensation fromthe Grand Master or his Deputy; and whenthey are thus separated, they must eitherimmediately join themselves to such otherlodge as they shall like best, with theunanimous consent of that other lodge towhich they go, or else they must obtain theGrand Master's warrant to join in forming anew lodge."

It seems, therefore, that, although a lodgecannot deny the right of a single memberto demit, when a sort of conspiracy may besupposed to be formed, and severalBrethren present their petitions for demitsat one and the same time, the lodge maynot only refuse, but is bound to do so,unless under a dispensation, whichdispensation can only be given in the case

of an over-populous lodge.

With these restrictions and qualifications, itcannot be doubted that every MasterMason has a right to demit from his lodgeat his own pleasure. What will be the resultupon himself, in his future relations to theOrder, of such demission, will constitutethe subject of the succeeding chapter.

Chapter VIII.

Of Unaffiliated Masons.

An unaffiliated Mason is one who is notconnected by membership with any lodge.There can be no doubt that such a positionis contrary to the spirit of our institution,and that affiliation is a duty obligatory onevery Mason. The Old Charges, whichhave been so often cited as thefundamental law of Masonry, say on thissubject: "every Brother ought to belong toa lodge and to be subject to its bye-lawsand the General Regulations."

Explicitly as this doctrine has beenannounced, it has been too little observed,in consequence of no precise penaltyhaving been annexed to its violation. In alltimes, unaffiliated Masons haveexisted--Masons who have withdrawn fromall active participation in the duties andresponsibilities of the Order, and who,when in the hour of danger or distress,have not hesitated to claim its protection or

assistance, while they have refused in theday of their prosperity to add anything toits wealth, its power, or its influence. In thiscountry, the anti-masonic persecutions of1828, and a few years subsequently, bycausing the cessation of many lodges,threw a vast number of Brethren out of alldirect connection with the institution; onthe restoration of peace, and the renewalof labor by the lodges, too many of theseBrethren neglected to reunite themselveswith the craft, and thus remainedunaffiliated. The habit, thus introduced,was followed by others, until the sin ofunaffiliation has at length arrived at such apoint of excess, as to have become aserious evil, and to have attracted theattention and received the condemnationof almost every Grand Lodge.

A few Grand Lodges have denied the rightof a Mason permanently to demit from the

Order. Texas, for instance, has declaredthat "it does not recognize the right of aMason to demit or separate himself fromthe lodge in which he was made, or mayafterwards be admitted, except for thepurpose of joining another lodge, or whenhe may be about to remove without thejurisdiction of the lodge of which he maybe a member."[93] A few other GrandLodges have adopted a similar regulation;but the prevailing opinion of theauthorities appears to be, that it iscompetent to interfere with the right todemit, certain rights and prerogativesbeing, however, lost by such demission.

Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and one or twoother Grand Lodges, while not positivelydenying the right of demission, have atvarious times levied a tax or contributionon the demitted or unaffiliated Masonswithin their respective jurisdictions. This

principle, however, has also failed toobtain the general concurrence of otherGrand Lodges, and some of them, asMaryland, have openly denounced it. Aftera careful examination of the authorities, Icannot deny to any man the _right_ ofwithdrawing, whensoever he pleases, froma voluntary association--the laws of theland would not sustain us in theenforcement of such a regulation; and ourown self-respect should prevent us fromattempting it. If, then, he has a right towithdraw, it clearly follows that we have noright to tax him, which is only one mode ofinflicting a fine or penalty for an act, theright to do which we have acceded. In thestrong language of the Committee ofCorrespondence of Maryland:[94] "Theobject of Masonry never was to extort,_nolens volens,_ money from its votaries.Such are not its principles or teaching. Theadvocating such doctrines cannot advance

the interest or reputation of the institution;but will, as your committee fear, do muchto destroy its usefulness. Compulsivemembership deprives it of the title, _Free_and Accepted."

But as it is an undoubted precept of theOrder that every Mason should belong to alodge, and contribute, so far as his meanswill allow, to the support of the institution,and as, by his demission, for other thantemporary purposes, he violates theprinciples and disobeys the precepts ofthe Order, it naturally follows that hiswithdrawal must place him in a differentposition from that which he would occupyas an affiliated Mason. It is now time for usto inquire what that new position is.

We may say, then, that, whenever a Masonpermanently withdraws his membership,he at once, and while he continues

unaffiliated, dissevers all connectionbetween himself and the _Lodgeorganization_ of the Order. He, by this act,divests himself of all the rights andprivileges which belong to him as amember of that organization. Among theserights and privileges are those ofvisitation, of pecuniary aid, and of masonicburial. Whenever he approaches the doorof a lodge, asking to enter or seeking forassistance, he is to be met in the light of aprofane. He may knock, but the door mustnot be opened--he may ask, but he is notto receive. The work of the lodge is not tobe shared by those who have thrown asidetheir aprons and their implements, andabandoned the labors of the Temple--thefunds of the lodge are to be distributedonly among these who are aiding, by theirindividual contributions, to the formationof similar funds in other lodges.

But from the well-known anduniversally-admitted maxim of "once aMason, and always a Mason," it follows thata demitted Brother cannot by suchdemission divest himself of all his masonicresponsibilities to his Brethren, nor bedeprived of their correlative responsibilityto him. An unaffiliated Mason is still boundby certain obligations, of which he cannot,under any circumstances, divest himself,and by similar obligations are thefraternity bound to him. These relate to theduties of secrecy and of aid in theimminent hour of peril. Of the first of thesethere can be no doubt; and as to the last,the words of the precept directing it leavesus no option; nor is it a time when theG.H.S. of D. is thrown out to inquire intothe condition of the party.

Speaking on this subject, Brother AlbertPike, in his report to the Grand Lodge of

Arkansas, says "if a person appeals to us asa Mason in imminent peril, or suchpressing need that we have not time toinquire into his worthiness, then, lest wemight refuse to relieve and aid a worthyBrother, we must not stop to inquire _as toanything_." But I do not think that thelearned Brother has put the case in thestrongest light. It is not alone "lest wemight refuse to relieve and aid a worthyBrother," that we are in cases of "imminentperil" to make no pause for deliberation.But it is because we are bound by ourhighest obligations at all times, and to allMasons, to give that aid when _duly_called for.

I may, then, after this somewhat protracteddiscussion, briefly recapitulate theposition, the rights and the responsibilitiesof an unaffiliated Mason as follows:

1. An unaffiliated Mason is still bound byall his masonic duties and obligations,excepting those connected with theorganization of the lodge.

2. He has a right to aid in imminent perilwhen _he asks for that aid in the_ proper_and conventional way_.

3. He loses the right to receive pecuniaryrelief.

4. He loses the general right to visit[95]lodges, or to walk in masonic processions.

5. He loses the right of masonic burial.

6. He still remains subject to thegovernment of the Order, and may betried and punished for any offense as anaffiliated Mason would be, by the lodgewithin whose geographical jurisdiction he

resides.

Book Fourth.

Of Masonic Crimes and Punishments.

Chapter I.

Of What Are Masonic Crimes.

The division of wrongs, by the writers onmunicipal law, into private and public, orcivil injuries and crimes andmisdemeanors, does not apply to thejurisprudence of Freemasonry. Here allwrongs are crimes, because they are aviolation of the precepts of the institution;and an offense against an individual ispunished, not so much because it is abreach of his private rights, as because itaffects the well-being of the whole masoniccommunity.

In replying to the question, "what aremasonic crimes?" by which is meant whatcrimes are punishable by the constitutedauthorities, our safest guide will be thatfundamental law which is contained in theOld Charges. These give a concise, butsuccinct summary of the duties of a Mason,and, of course, whatever is a violation ofany one of these duties will constitute a

masonic crime, and the perpetrator will beamenable to masonic punishment.

But before entering on the consideration ofthese penal offenses, it will be well that weshould relieve the labor of the task, byinquiring what crimes or offenses are notsupposed to come within the purview ofmasonic jurisprudence.

Religion and politics are subjects which itis well known are stringently forbidden tobe introduced into Masonry. And hencearises the doctrine, that Masonry will nottake congnizance of religious or politicaloffenses.

Heresy, for instance, is not a masoniccrime. Masons are obliged to use thewords of the Old Charges, "to that religionin which all men agree, leaving theirparticular opinions to themselves;" and,

therefore, as long as a Masonacknowledges his belief in the existence ofone God, a lodge can take no action on hispeculiar opinions, however heterodoxthey may be.

In like manner, although all the mostancient and universally-received preceptsof the institution inculcate obedience to thecivil powers, and strictly forbid anymingling in plots or conspiracies againstthe peace and welfare of the nation, yet nooffense against the state, which is simplypolitical in its character, can be noticed bya lodge. On this important subject, the OldCharges are remarkably explicit. Theysay, putting perhaps the strongest case byway of exemplifying the principle, "that if aBrother should be a rebel against the State,he is not to be countenanced in hisrebellion, however he may be pitied as anunhappy man; and, if convicted of no other

crime, though the loyal Brotherhood mustand ought to disown his rebellion, andgive no umbrage or ground of politicaljealousy to the government for the timebeing, _they cannot expel him from thelodge, and his relation to it remainsindefeasible_"

The lodge can, therefore, take nocognizance of religious or politicaloffenses.

The first charge says: "a Mason is obligedby his tenure to obey the moral law." Now,although, in a theological sense, the tencommandments are said to embrace andconstitute the moral law, because they areits best exponent, yet jurists have given tothe term a more general latitude, indefining the moral laws to be "the eternal,immutable laws of good and evil, to whichthe Creator himself, in all dispensations,

conforms, and which he has enabledhuman reason to discover, so far as theyare necessary for the conduct of humanactions."[96] Perhaps the well knownsummary of Justinian will give the bestidea of what this law is, namely, that we"should live honestly, (that is to say,without reproach,)[97] should injurenobody, and render to every one his justdue."

If such, then, be the meaning of the morallaw, and if every Mason is by his tenureobliged to obey it, it follows, that all suchcrimes as profane swearing or greatimpiety in any form, neglect of social anddomestic duties, murder and itsconcomitant vices of cruelty and hatred,adultery, dishonesty in any shape, perjuryor malevolence, and habitual falsehood,inordinate covetousness, and in short, allthose ramifications of these leading vices

which injuriously affect the relations ofman to God, his neighbor, and himself, areproper subjects of lodge jurisdiction.Whatever moral defects constitute the badman, make also the bad Mason, andconsequently come under the category ofmasonic offenses. The principle is so plainand comprehensible as to need no furtherexemplification. It is sufficient to say that,whenever an act done by a Mason iscontrary to or subsersive of the three greatduties which he owes to God, hisneighbor, and himself, it becomes at oncea subject of masonic investigation, and ofmasonic punishment.

But besides these offenses against theuniversal moral law, there are many othersarising from the peculiar nature of ourinstitution. Among these we may mention,and in their order, those that areenumerated in the several sections of the

Sixth Chapter of the Old Charges. Theseare, unseemly and irreverent conduct inthe lodge, all excesses of every kind,private piques or quarrels brought into thelodge; imprudent conversation in relationto Masonry in the presence of uninitiatedstrangers; refusal to relieve a worthydistressed Brother, if in your power; andall "wrangling, quarreling, back-biting,and slander."

The lectures in the various degrees, andthe Ancient Charges read on theinstallation of the Master of a lodge, furnishus with other criteria for deciding what arepeculiarly masonic offenses. All of themneed not be detailed; but among them maybe particularly mentioned the following:All improper revelations, unduesolicitations for candidates, angry andover-zealous arguments in favor ofMasonry with its enemies, every act which

tends to impair the unsullied purity of theOrder, want of reverence for andobedience to masonic superiors, theexpression of a contemptuous opinion ofthe original rulers and patrons of Masonry,or of the institution itself; all countenanceof impostors; and lastly, holding masoniccommunion with clandestine Masons, orvisiting irregular lodges.

From this list, which, extended as it is,might easily have been enlarged, it will bereadily seen, that the sphere of masonicpenal jurisdiction is by no means limited. Itshould, therefore, be the object of everyMason, to avoid the censure or reproach ofhis Brethren, by strictly confining himselfas a point within that circle of duty which,at his first initiation, was presented to himas an object worthy of his consideration.

Chapter II.

Of Masonic Punishments.

Having occupied the last chapter in aconsideration of what constitute masoniccrimes, it is next in order to inquire howthese offenses are to be punished; andaccordingly I propose in the followingsections to treat of the various modes inwhich masonic law is vindicated,commencing with the slightest mode ofpunishment, which is censure, andproceeding to the highest, or expulsionfrom all the rights and privileges of theOrder.

Section I.

_Of Censure._

A censure is the mildest form ofpunishment that can be inflicted by alodge; and as it is simply the expression ofan opinion by the members of the lodge,that they do not approve of the conduct ofthe person implicated, in a particular pointof view, and as it does not in any degreeaffect the masonic standing of the onecensured, nor for a moment suspend orabridge his rights and benefits, I have nodoubt that it may be done on a meremotion, without previous notice, andadopted, as any other resolution, by a baremajority of the members present.

Masonic courtesy would, however, dictatethat notice should be given to the Brother,

if absent, that such a motion of censure isabout to be proposed or considered, toenable him to show cause, if any he have,why he should not be censured. But suchnotice is not, as I have said, necessary tothe legality of the vote of censure.

A vote of censure will sometimes,however, be the result of a trial, and in thatcase its adoption must be governed by therules of masonic trials, which are hereafterto be laid down.

Section II.

_Of Reprimand._

A reprimand is the next mildest form ofmasonic punishment. It should never beadopted on a mere motion, but shouldalways be the result of a regular trial, inwhich the party may have the opportunityof defense.

A reprimand may be either private orpublic. If to be given in private, noneshould be present but the Master and theoffender; or, if given by letter, no copy ofthat letter should be preserved.

If given in public, the lodge is the properplace, and the reprimand should be givenby the Master from his appropriate station.

The Master is always the executive officerof the lodge, and in carrying out thesentence he must exercise his ownprudent discretion as to the mode ofdelivery and form of words.

A reprimand, whether private or public,does not affect the masonic standing of theoffender.

Section III.

_Of Exclusion from the Lodge._

Exclusion from a lodge may be of variousdegrees.

1. A member may for indecorous orunmasonic conduct be excluded from asingle meeting of the lodge. This may bedone by the Master, under a provision ofthe bye-laws giving him the authority, oron his own responsibility, in which case heis amenable to the Grand Lodge for thecorrectness of his decision. Exclusion inthis way does not affect the masonicstanding of the person excluded, and doesnot require a previous trial.

I cannot entertain any doubt that theMaster of a lodge has the right to exclude

temporarily any member or Mason, whenhe thinks that either his admission, ifoutside, or his continuance within, ifpresent, will impair the peace andharmony of the lodge. It is a prerogativenecessary to the faithful performance of hisduties, and inalienable from his greatresponsibility to the Grand Lodge for theproper government of the Craft intrustedto his care. If, as it is described in theancient manner of constituting a lodge, theMaster is charged "to preserve the cementof the Lodge," it would be folly to give himsuch a charge, unless he were investedwith the power to exclude an unruly ordisorderly member. But as Masters areenjoined not to rule their lodges in anunjust or arbitrary manner, and as everyMason is clearly entitled to redress for anywrong that has been done to him, it followsthat the Master is responsible to the GrandLodge for the manner in which he has

executed the vast power intrusted to him,and he may be tried and punished by thatbody, for excluding a member, when themotives of the act and the othercircumstances of the exclusion were notsuch as to warrant the exercise of hisprerogative.

2. A member may be excluded from hislodge for a definite or indefinite period, onaccount of the non-payment of arrears.This punishment may be inflicted indifferent modes, and under differentnames. It is sometimes called, _suspensionfrom the lodge,_ and sometimes _erasurefrom the roll_. Both of these punishments,though differing in their effect, arepronounced, not after a trial, but by aprovision of the bye-laws of the lodge. Forthis reason alone, if there were no other, Ishould contend, that they do not affect thestanding of the member suspended, or

erased, with relation to the craft ingeneral. No Mason can be deprived of hismasonic rights, except after a trial, withthe opportunity of defense, and a verdictof his peers.

But before coming to a definite conclusionon this subject, it is necessary that weshould view the subject in another point ofview, in which it will be seen that asuspension from the rights and benefits ofMasonry, for the non-payment of dues, isentirely at variance with the true principlesof the Order.

The system of payment of lodge-dues doesnot by any means belong to the ancientusages of the fraternity. It is a moderncustom, established for purposes ofconvenience, and arising out of othermodifications, in the organization of theOrder. It is not an obligation on the part of

a Mason, to the institution at large, but is inreality a special contract, in which the onlyparties are a particular lodge and itsmembers, of which the fraternity, as amass, are to know nothing. It is notpresented by any general masonic law,nor any universal masonic precept. NoGrand Lodge has ever yet attempted tocontrol or regulate it, and it is thus tacitlyadmitted to form no part of the generalregulations of the Order. Even in that OldCharge in which a lodge is described, andthe necessity of membership in isenforced, not a word is said of the paymentof arrears to it, or of the duty ofcontributing to its support. Hence thenon-payment of arrears is a violation of aspecial and voluntary contract with alodge, and not of any general duty to thecraft at large. The corollary from all this is,evidently, that the punishment inflicted insuch a case should be one affecting the

relations of the delinquent with theparticular lodge whose bye-laws he hasinfringed, and not a general one, affectinghis relations with the whole Order. After aconsideration of all these circumstances, Iam constrained to think that suspensionfrom alodge, for non-payment of arrears,should only suspend the rights of themember as to his own lodge, but shouldnot affect his right of visiting other lodges,nor any of the other privileges inherent inhim as a Mason. Such is not, I confess, thegeneral opinion, or usage of the craft inthis country, but yet I cannot but believethat it is the doctrine most consonant withthe true spirit of the institution. It is thepractice pursued by the Grand Lodge ofEngland, from which most of our GrandLodges derive, directly or indirectly, theirexistence. It is also the regulation of theGrand Lodge of Massachusetts. The GrandLodge of South Carolina expressly forbids

suspension from the rights and benefits ofMasonry for non-payment of dues, and theGrand Lodge of New York has a similarprovision in its Constitution.

Of the two modes of exclusion from alodge for non-payment of dues, namely,suspension and erasure, the effects arevery different. Suspension does notabrogate the connection between themember and his lodge, and places hisrights in abeyance only. Upon the paymentof the debt, he is at once restored withoutother action of the lodge. But erasure fromthe roll terminates all connection betweenthe delinquent and the lodge, and heceases to be a member of it. Payment ofthe dues, simply, will not restore him; for itis necessary that he should again beelected by the Brethren, upon formalapplication.

The word exclusion has a meaning inEngland differing from that in which it hasbeen used in the present section. Therethe prerogative of expulsion is, as I thinkvery rightly, exercised only by the GrandLodge. The term "expelled" is thereforeused only when a Brother is removed fromthe craft, by the Grand Lodge. Theremoval by a District Grand Lodge, or asubordinate lodge, is called "exclusion."The effect, however, of the punishment ofexclusion, is similar to that which has beenhere advocated.

Section IV.

_Of Definite Suspension._

Suspension is a punishment by which aparty is temporarily deprived of his rightsand privileges as a Mason. It does notterminate his connection with the craft, butonly places it in abeyance, and it mayagain be resumed in a mode hereafter tobe indicated.

Suspension may be, in relation to time,either definite or indefinite. And as theeffects produced upon the delinquent,especially in reference to the manner ofhis restoration, are different, it is properthat each should be separatelyconsidered.

In a case of definite suspension, the time

for which the delinquent is to besuspended, whether for one month, forthree, or six months, or for a longer orshorter period, is always mentioned in thesentence.

At its termination, the party suspended isat once restored without further action ofthe lodge. But as this is a point upon whichthere has been some difference of opinion,the argument will be fully discussed in thechapter on the subject of _Restoration._

By a definite suspension, the delinquent isfor a time placed beyond the pale ofMasonry. He is deprived of all his rights asa Master Mason--is not permitted to visitany lodge, or hold masonic communicationwith his Brethren--is not entitled tomasonic relief, and should he die duringhis suspension, is not entitled to masonicburial. In short, the amount of punishment

differs from that of indefinite suspension orexpulsion only in the period of time forwhich it is inflicted.

The punishment of definite suspension isthe lightest that can be inflicted of thosewhich affect the relations of a Mason withthe fraternity at large. It must always bepreceded by a trial, and the prevalentopinion is, that it may be inflicted by atwo-thirds vote of the lodge.

Section V.

_Of Indefinite Suspension._

Indefinite suspension is a punishment bywhich the person suspended is deprivedof all his rights and privileges as a Mason,until such time as the lodge which hassuspended him shall see fit, by a specialaction, to restore him.

All that has been said of definitesuspension in the preceding section, willequally apply to indefinite suspension,except that in the former case thesuspended person is at once restored bythe termination of the period for which hewas suspended; while in the latter, as noperiod of termination had been affixed, aspecial resolution of the lodge will benecessary to effect a restoration.

By suspension the connection of the partywith his lodge and with the institution is notsevered; he still remains a member of hislodge, although his rights as such areplaced in abeyance. In this respect itmaterially differs from expulsion, and, asan inferior grade of punishment, isinflicted for offenses of a lighter characterthan those for which expulsion isprescribed.

The question here arises, whether the duesof a suspended member to his lodgecontinue to accrue during his suspension? Ithink they do not. Dues or arrears arepayments made to a lodge for certainrights and benefits--the exercise andenjoyment of which are guaranteed to themember, in consideration of the dues thuspaid. But as by suspension, whetherdefinite or indefinite, he is for the time

deprived of these rights and benefits, itwould seem unjust to require from him apayment for that which he does not enjoy. Ihold, therefore, that suspension from therights and benefits of Masonry, includesalso a suspension from the payment ofarrears.

No one can be indefinitely suspended,unless after a due form of trial, and uponthe vote of at least two-thirds of themembers present.

Section VI.

_Of Expulsion._[98]

Expulsion is the very highest penalty thatcan be inflicted upon a delinquent Mason.It deprives the party expelled of all themasonic rights and privileges that he everenjoyed, not only as a member of thelodge from which he has been ejected, butalso of all those which were inherent inhim as a member of the fraternity at large.He is at once as completely divested of hismasonic character as though he had neverbeen admitted into the institution. He canno longer demand the aid of his Brethren,nor require from them the performance ofany of the duties to which he was formerlyentitled, nor visit any lodge, nor unite inany of the public or private ceremonies ofthe Order. No conversation on masonic

subjects can be held with him, and he is tobe considered as being completelywithout the pale of the institution, and to belooked upon in the same light as a profane,in relation to the communication of anymasonic information.

It is a custom too generally adopted in thiscountry, for subordinate lodges to inflictthis punishment, and hence it is supposedby many, that the power of inflicting it isvested in the subordinate lodges. But thefact is, that the only proper tribunal toimpose this heavy penalty is a GrandLodge. A subordinate may, indeed, try itsdelinquent member, and if guilty declarehim expelled. But the sentence is of noforce until the Grand Lodge, under whosejurisdiction it is working, has confirmed it.And it is optional with the Grand Lodge todo so, or, as is frequently done, to reversethe decision and reinstate the Brother.

Some of the lodges in this country claimthe right to expel independently of theaction of the Grand Lodge, but the claim isnot valid. The very fact that an expulsion isa penalty, affecting the general relations ofthe punished party with the wholefraternity, proves that its exercise nevercould, with propriety, be intrusted to abody so circumscribed in its authority as asubordinate lodge. Besides, the generalpractice of the fraternity is against it. TheEnglish Constitutions vest the power toexpel exclusively in the Grand Lodge.[99]

The severity of the punishment will at onceindicate the propriety of inflicting it onlyfor the most serious offenses, such, forinstance, as immoral conduct, that wouldsubject a candidate for initiation torejection.

As the punishment is general, affecting the

relation of the one expelled with the wholefraternity, it should not be lightly imposed,for the violation of any masonic act notgeneral in its character. The commission ofa grossly immoral act is a violation of thecontract entered into between each Masonand his Order. If sanctioned by silence orimpunity, it would bring discredit on theinstitution, and tend to impair itsusefulness. A Mason who is a bad man, isto the fraternity what a mortified limb is tothe body, and should be treated with thesame mode of cure--he should be cut off,lest his example spread, and disease bepropagated through the constitution.

The punishment of expulsion can only beinflicted after a due course of trial, andupon the votes of at least two-thirds of themembers present, and should always besubmitted for approval and confirmation tothe Grand Lodge.

One question here arises, in respect notonly to expulsion but to the other masonicpunishments, of which I have treated in thepreceding sections:--Does suspension orexpulsion from a Chapter of Royal ArchMasons, an Encampment of KnightsTemplar, or any other of what are calledthe higher degrees of Masonry, affect therelations of the expelled party to Symbolicor Ancient Craft Masonry? I answer,unhesitatingly, that it does not, and forreasons which, years ago, I advanced, inthe following language, and which appearto have met with the approval of the mostof my contemporaries:--

"A chapter of Royal Arch Masons, forinstance, is not, and cannot be, recognizedas a masonic body, by a lodge of MasterMasons. 'They hear them so to be, but theydo not know them so to be,' by any of the

modes of recognition known to Masonry.The acts, therefore, of a Chapter cannot berecognized by a Master Masons' lodge,any more than the acts of a literary orcharitable society wholly unconnectedwith the Order. Again: By the presentorganization of Freemasonry, GrandLodges are the supreme masonictribunals. If, therefore, expulsion from aChapter of Royal Arch Masons involvedexpulsion from a Blue Lodge, the right ofthe Grand Lodge to hear and determinecauses, and to regulate the internalconcerns of the institution, would beinterfered with by another body beyondits control. But the converse of thisproposition does not hold good. Expulsionfrom a Blue Lodge involves expulsion fromall the higher degrees; because, as theyare composed of Blue Masons, themembers could not of right sit and holdcommunications on masonic subjects with

one who was an expelled Mason."[100]

Chapter III.

Of Masonic Trials.

Having thus discussed the penalties whichare affixed to masonic offenses, we arenext to inquire into the process of trial bywhich a lodge determines on the guilt orinnocence of the accused. This subject willbe the most conveniently considered by adivision into two sections; first, as to theform of trial; and secondly, as to thecharacter of the evidence.

Section I.

_Of the Form of Trial._

Although the authority for submittingmasonic offenses to trials by lodges isderived from the Old Charges, none of theancient regulations of the Order haveprescribed the details by which thesetrials are to be governed. The form of trialmust, therefore, be obtained from thecustoms and usages of the craft, and fromthe regulations which have been adoptedby various Grand Lodges. The presentsection will, therefore, furnish a summaryof these regulations as they are generallyobserved in this country.

A charge or statement of the offenseimputed to the party is always apreliminary step to every trial.

This charge must be made in writing,signed by the accuser, and delivered tothe Secretary, who reads it at the nextregular communication of the lodge. Atime and place are then appointed by thelodge for the trial.

The accused is entitled to a copy of thecharge, and must be informed of the timeand place that have been appointed for histrial.

Although it is necessary that the accusationshould be preferred at a statedcommunication, so that no one may betaken at a disadvantage, the trial may takeplace at a special communication. Butample time and opportunity should alwaysbe given to the accused to prepare hisdefense.

It is not essential that the accuser shouldbe a Mason. A charge of immoral conductcan be preferred by a profane; and if theoffense is properly stated, and if it comeswithin the jurisdiction of the Order or thelodge, it must be investigated. It is not theaccuser but the accused that Is to be put ontrial, and the lodge is to look only to thenature of the accusation, and not to theindividual who prefers it. The motives ofthe accuser, but not his character, may beexamined.

If the accused is living beyond thejurisdiction of the lodge--that is to say, if hebe a member and have removed to someother place without withdrawing hismembership, not being a member, or if,after committing the offense, he has left thejurisdiction, the charge must betransmitted to his present place ofresidence, by mail or otherwise, and a

reasonable time be allowed for his answerbefore the lodge proceeds to trial.

The lodge should be opened in the highestdegree to which the accused has attained;and the examinations should take place inthe presence of the accused and theaccuser (if the latter be a Mason); but thefinal decision should always be made inthe third degree.

The accused and the accuser have a rightto be present at all examinations ofwitnesses, whether those examinations aretaken in open lodge or in a committee, andto propose such relevant questions as theydesire.

When the trial is concluded, the accusedand accuser should retire, and the Masteror presiding officer must then put thequestion of guilty or not guilty to the

lodge. Of course, if there are severalcharges or specifications, the questionmust be taken on each separately. For thepurposes of security and independence inthe expression of opinion, it seemsgenerally conceded, that this questionshould be decided by ballot; and theusage has also obtained, of requiringtwo-thirds of the votes given to be black,to secure a conviction. A white ball, ofcourse, is equivalent to acquittal, and ablack one to conviction.

Every member present is bound to vote,unless excused by unanimous consent.

If, on a scrutiny, it is found that the verdictis guilty, the Master or presiding officermust then put the question as to the amountand nature of the punishment to beinflicted.

He will commence with the highestpenalty, or expulsion, and, if necessary, bythat punishment being negatived, proceedto propose indefinite and then definitesuspension, exclusion, public or privatereprimand, and censure.

For expulsion or either kind of suspension,two-thirds of the votes present arenecessary. For either of the other andlighter penalties, a bare majority will besufficient.

The votes on the nature of the punishmentshould be taken by a show of hands.

If the residence of the accused is notknown, or if, upon due summons, herefuses or neglects to attend, the lodgemay, nevertheless, proceed to trial withouthis presence.

In trials conducted by Grand Lodges, it isusual to take the preliminary testimony in acommittee; but the final decision mustalways be made in the Grand Lodge.

Section II.

_Of the Evidence in Masonic Trials._

In the consideration of the nature of theevidence that is to be given in masonictrials, it is proper that we should firstinquire what classes of persons are to bedeemed incompetent as witnesses.

The law of the land, which, in this instance,is the same as the law of Masonry, hasdeclared the following classes of person tobe incompetent to give evidence.

1. Persons who have not the use of reason,are, from the infirmity of their nature,considered to be utterly incapable ofgiving evidence.[101] This class includesidiots, madmen, and children too young tobe sensible of the obligations of an oath,

and to distinguish between good and evil.

2. Persons who are entirely devoid of anysuch religious principle or belief as wouldbind their consciences to speak the truth,are incompetent as witnesses. Hence, thetestimony of an atheist must be rejected;because, as it has been well said, such aperson cannot be subject to that sanctionwhich is deemed an indispensable test oftruth. But as Masonry does not demand ofits candidates any other religiousdeclaration than that of a belief in God, itcannot require of the witnesses in its trialsany profession of a more explicit faith. Buteven here it seems to concur with the lawof the land; for it has been decided byChief Baron Willes, that "an infidel whobelieves in a God, and that He will rewardand punish him in this world, but does notbelieve in a future state, may be examinedupon oath."

3. Persons who have been renderedinfamous by their conviction of greatcrimes, are deemed incompetent to giveevidence. This rule has been adopted,because the commission of an infamouscrime implies, as Sir William Scott hasobserved, "such a dereliction of moralprinciple on the part of the witness, ascarries with it the conclusion that he wouldentirely disregard the obligation of anoath." Of such a witness it has been said,by another eminent judge,[102] that "thecredit of his oath is over-balanced by thestain of his iniquity."

4. Persons interested in the result of thetrial are considered incompetent to giveevidence. From the nature of humanactions and passions, and from the fact thatall persons, even the most virtuous, areunconsciously swayed by motives of

interest, the testimony of such persons israther to be distrusted than believed. Thisrule will, perhaps, be generally of difficultapplication in masonic trials, although in acivil suit at law it is easy to define what isthe interest of a party sufficient to renderhis evidence incompetent. But whenever itis clearly apparent that the interests of awitness would be greatly benefited byeither the acquittal or the conviction of theaccused, his testimony must be entirelyrejected, or, if admitted, its value must beweighed with the most scrupulous caution.

Such are the rules that the wisdom ofsuccessive generations of men, learned inthe law, have adopted for theestablishment of the competency orincompetency of witnesses. There isnothing in them which conflicts with theprinciples of justice, or with theConstitutions of Freemasonry; and hence

they may, very properly, be considered asa part of our own code. In determining,therefore, the rule for the admission ofwitnesses in masonic trials, we are to begoverned by the simple proposition thathas been enunciated by Mr. JusticeLawrence in the following language:

"I find no rule less comprehensive thanthis, that all persons are admissiblewitnesses who have the use of theirreason, and such religious belief as to feelthe obligation of an oath, who have notbeen convicted of any infamous crime, andwho are not influenced by interest."

The peculiar, isolated character of ourinstitution, here suggests as an importantquestion, whether it is admissible to takethe testimony of a profane, or person whois not a Freemason, in the trial of a Masonbefore his lodge.

To this question I feel compelled to reply,that such testimony is generallyadmissible; but, as there are special casesin which it is not, it seems proper to qualifythat reply by a brief inquiry into thegrounds and reasons of this admissibility,and the mode and manner in which suchtestimony is to be taken.

The great object of every trial, in Masonry,as elsewhere, is to elicit truth; and, in thespirit of truth, to administer justice. Fromwhatever source, therefore, this truth canbe obtained, it is not only competent thereto seek it, but it is obligatory on us so todo. This is the principle of law as well as ofcommon sense. Mr. Phillips, in thebeginning of his great "Treatise on the Lawof Evidence," says: "In inquiries upon thissubject, the great end and object oughtalways to be, the ascertaining of the most

convenient and surest means for theattainment of truth; the rules laid down arethe means used for the attainment of thatend."

Now, if A, who is a Freemason, shall havecommitted an offense, of which B and Calone were cognizant as witnesses, shall itbe said that A must be acquitted for wantof proof, because B and C are notmembers of the Order? We apprehendthat in this instance the ends of justicewould be defeated, rather than subserved.If the veracity and honesty of B and C areunimpeached, their testimony as to the factcannot lawfully be rejected on any ground,except that they may be interested in theresult of the trial, and might be benefitedby the conviction or the acquittal of thedefendant. But this is an objection thatwould hold against the evidence of aMason, as well as a profane.

Any other rule would be often attendedwith injurious consequences to ourinstitution. We may readily suppose a caseby way of illustration. A, who is a memberof a lodge, is accused of habitualintemperance, a vice eminently unmasonicin its character, and one which will alwaysreflect a great portion of the degradationof the offender upon the society whichshall sustain and defend him in itsperpetration. But it may happen--and thisis a very conceivable case--that inconsequence of the remoteness of hisdwelling, or from some other supposablecause, his Brethren have no opportunity ofseeing him, except at distant intervals.There is, therefore, no Mason, to testify tothe truth of the charge, while his neighborsand associates, who are daily and hourly inhis company, are all aware of his habit ofintoxication.

If, then, a dozen or more men, all ofreputation and veracity, should come, orbe brought before the lodge, ready andwilling to testify to this fact, by whatprocess of reason or justice, or under whatmaxim of masonic jurisprudence, couldtheir testimony be rejected, simplybecause they were not Masons? And ifrejected--if the accused with this weight ofevidence against him, with this infamyclearly and satisfactorily proved by thesereputable witnesses, were to be acquitted,and sent forth purged of the charge, upona mere technical ground, and thustriumphantly be sustained in thecontinuation of his vice, and that in the faceof the very community which wascognizant of his degradation of life andmanners, who could estimate thedisastrous consequences to the lodge andthe Order which should thus support and

uphold him in his guilty course? The worldwould not, and could not appreciate thecauses that led to the rejection of suchclear and unimpeachable testimony, and itwould visit with its just reprobation theinstitution which could thus extend itsfraternal affections to the support ofundoubted guilt.

But, moreover, this is not a question ofmere theory; the principle of accepting thetestimony of non-masonic witnesses hasbeen repeatedly acted on. If a Mason hasbeen tried by the courts of his country onan indictment for larceny, or any otherinfamous crime, and been convicted bythe verdict of a jury, although neither thejudge nor the jury, nor the witnesses wereMasons, no lodge after such convictionwould permit him to retain hismembership, but, on the contrary, it wouldpromptly and indignantly expel him from

the Brotherhood. If, however, the lodgeshould refuse to expel him, on the groundthat his conviction before the court wasbased on the testimony of non-masonicwitnesses, and should grant him a lodgetrial for the same offense, then, on theprinciple against which we arecontending, the evidence of thesewitnesses as "profanes" would be rejected,and the party be acquitted for want ofproof; and thus the anomalous anddisgraceful spectacle would presentitself--of a felon condemned and punishedby the laws of his country for an infamouscrime, acquitted and sustained by a lodgeof Freemasons.

But we will be impressed with theinexpediency and injustice of thisprinciple, when we look at its operationfrom another point of view. It is said to be abad rule that will not work both ways; and,

therefore, if the testimony of non-masonicwitnesses against the accused is rejectedon the ground of inadmissibility, it mustalso be rejected when given in his favor.Now, if we suppose a case, in which aMason was accused before his lodge ofhaving committed an offense, at a certaintime and place, and, by the testimony ofone or two disinterested persons, he couldestablish what the law calls an _alibi_, thatis, that at that very time he was at afar-distant place, and could not, therefore,have committed the offense chargedagainst him, we ask with what show ofjustice or reason could such testimony berejected, simply because the partiesgiving it were not Masons? But if theevidence of a "profane" is admitted infavor of the accused, rebutting testimonyof the same kind cannot with consistencybe rejected; and hence the rule isdetermined that in the trial of Masons, it is

competent to receive the evidence ofpersons who are not Masons, but whosecompetency, in other respects, is notdenied.

It must, however, be noted, that thetestimony of persons who are not Masonsis not to be given as that of Masons is,within the precincts of the lodge. They arenot to be present at the trial; and whatevertestimony they have to adduce, must betaken by a committee, to be afterwardsaccurately reported to the lodge. But in allcases, the accused has a right to bepresent, and to interrogate the witnesses.

The only remaining topic to be discussedis the method of taking the testimony, andthis can be easily disposed of.

The testimony of Masons is to be takeneither in lodge or in committee, and under

the sanction of their obligations.

The testimony of profanes is always to betaken by a committee, and on oathadministered by a competent legalofficer--the most convenient way of takingsuch testimony is by affidavit.

Chapter IV.

Of the Penal Jurisdiction of a Lodge.

The penal jurisdiction of a lodge is thatjurisdiction which it is authorized toexercise for the trial of masonic offenses,and the infliction of masonic punishment. Itmay be considered as either geographicalor personal.

The geographical jurisdiction of a lodgeextends in every direction, half way to thenearest lodge. Thus, if two lodges besituated at the distance of sixteen milesfrom each other, then the penaljurisdiction of each will extend for thespace of eight miles in the direction of theother.

The personal jurisdiction of a lodge is thatjurisdiction which a lodge may exerciseover certain individuals, respective orirrespective of geographical jurisdiction.This jurisdiction is more complicated thanthe other, and requires a more detailed

enumeration of the classes over whom it isto be exercised.

1. A lodge exercises penal jurisdictionover all its members, no matter where theymay reside. A removal from thegeographical jurisdiction will not, in thiscase, release the individual from personaljurisdiction. The allegiance of a member tohis lodge is indefeasible.

2. A lodge exercises penal jurisdictionover all unaffiliated Masons, living withinits geographical jurisdiction. Anunaffiliated Mason cannot release himselffrom his responsibilities to the Order. Andif, by immoral or disgraceful conduct, heviolates the regulations of the Order, ortends to injure its reputation in theestimation of the community, he isamenable to the lodge nearest to his placeof residence, whether this residence be

temporary or permanent, and may bereprimanded, suspended, or expelled.

This doctrine is founded on the wholesomereason, that as a lodge is the guardian ofthe purity and safety of the institution,within its own jurisdiction, it must, toexercise this guardianship with success,be invested with the power of correctingevery evil that occurs within its precincts.And if unaffiliated Masons were exemptedfrom this control, the institution might beseriously affected in the eyes of thecommunity, by their bad conduct.

3. The personal jurisdiction of a lodge, forthe same good reason, extends over allMasons living in its vicinity. A MasterMason belonging to a distant lodge, butresiding within the geographicaljurisdiction of another lodge, becomesamenable for his conduct to the latter, as

well as to the former lodge. But if his ownlodge is within a reasonable distance,courtesy requires that the lodge nearwhich he resides should rather make acomplaint to his lodge than itself instituteproceedings against him. But thereputation of the Order must not bepermitted to be endangered, and a casemight occur, in which it would beinexpedient to extend this courtesy, andwhere the lodge would feel compelled toproceed to the trial and punishment of theoffender, without appealing to his lodge.The geographical jurisdiction will, in allcases, legalize the proceedings.

4. But a lodge situated near the confines ofa State cannot extend its jurisdiction overMasons residing in a neighboring State,and not being its members, however nearthey may reside to it: for no lodge canexercise jurisdiction over the members of

another Grand Lodge jurisdiction. Itsgeographical, as well as personaljurisdiction, can extend no further than thatof its own Grand Lodge.

5. Lastly, no lodge can exercise penaljurisdiction over its own Master, for he isalone responsible for his conduct to theGrand Lodge. But it may act as his accuserbefore that body, and impeach him for anyoffense that he may have committed.Neither can a lodge exercise penaljurisdiction over the Grand Master,although under other circumstances itmight have both geographical andpersonal jurisdiction over him, from hisresidence and membership.

Chapter V.

Of Appeals.

Every Mason, who has been tried andconvicted by a lodge, has an inalienableright to appeal from that conviction, andfrom the sentence accompanying it, to theGrand Lodge.

As an appeal always supposes thenecessity of a review of the whole case, thelodge is bound to furnish the Grand Lodgewith an attested copy of its proceedings onthe trial, and such other testimony in itspossession as the appellant may deemnecessary for his defense.

The Grand Lodge may, upon investigation,confirm the verdict of its subordinate. Inthis case, the appeal is dismissed, and thesentence goes into immediate operationwithout any further proceedings on thepart of the lodge.

The Grand Lodge may, however, only

approve in part, and may reduce thepenalty inflicted, as for instance, fromexpulsion to suspension. In this case, theoriginal sentence of the lodge becomesvoid, and the milder sentence of the GrandLodge is to be put in force. The sameprocess would take place, were the GrandLodge to increase instead of diminishingthe amount of punishment, as fromsuspension to expulsion. For it iscompetent for the Grand Lodge, on anappeal, to augment, reduce or whollyabrogate the penalty inflicted by itssubordinate.

But the Grand Lodge may take no directaction on the penalty inflicted, but maysimply refer the case back to thesubordinate for a new trial. In this case, theproceedings on the trial will becommenced _de novo_, if the referencehas been made on the ground of any

informality or illegality in the previoustrial. But if the case is referred back, notfor a new trial, but for furtherconsideration, on the ground that thepunishment was inadequate--either toosevere, or not sufficiently so--in this case,it is not necessary to repeat the trial. Thediscussion on the nature of the penalty tobe inflicted should, however, be reviewed,and any new evidence calculated to throwlight on the nature of the punishmentwhich is most appropriate, may bereceived.

Lastly, the Grand Lodge may entirelyreverse the decision of its subordinate,and decree a restoration of the appellantto all his rights and privileges, on theground of his innocence of the chargeswhich had been preferred against him.But, as this action is often highly importantin its results, and places the appellant and

the lodge in an entirely different relativeposition, I have deemed its considerationworthy of a distinct chapter.

During the pendency of an appeal, thesentence of the subordinate lodge is heldin abeyance, and cannot; be enforced. Theappellant in this case remains in theposition of a Mason "under charges."

Chapter VI.

Of Restoration.

The penalties of suspension and expulsionare terminated by restoration, which maytake place either by the action of the lodgewhich inflicted them, or by that of theGrand Lodge.

Restoration from definite suspension isterminated without any special action ofthe lodge, but simply by the termination ofthe period for which the party wassuspended. He then at once reenters intothe possession of all the rights, benefits,and functions, from which he had beentemporarily suspended.

I have myself no doubt of the correctnessof this principle; but, as it has been deniedby some writers, although a very largemajority of the authorities are in its favor, itmay be well, briefly, to discuss its merits.

Let us suppose that on the 1st of January

A.B. had been suspended for threemonths, that is, until the 1st day of April. Atthe end of the three months, that is to say,on the first of April, A.B. would no longerbe a suspended member--for thepunishment decreed will have beenendured; and as the sentence of the lodgehad expressly declared that hissuspension was to last until the 1st of April,the said sentence, if it means anything,must mean that the suspension was, on thesaid 1st of April, to cease and determine. Ifhe were, therefore, to wait until the 1st ofMay for the action of the lodge, declaringhis restoration, he would suffer apunishment of four months' suspension,which was not decreed by his lodge uponhis trial, and which would, therefore, bemanifestly unjust and illegal.

Again: if the offense which he hadcommitted was, upon his trial, found to be

so slight as to demand only a dismissal forone night from the lodge, will it becontended that, on his leaving thelodge-room pursuant to his sentence, heleaves not to return to it on the succeedingcommunication, unless a vote shouldpermit him? Certainly not. His punishmentof dismissal for one night had beenexecuted; and on the succeeding night hereentered into the possession of all hisrights. But if he can do so after a dismissalor suspension of one night, why not afterone or three, six or twelve months? Thetime is extended, but the principleremains the same.

But the doctrine, that after the expiration ofthe term of a definite suspension, an actionby the lodge is still necessary to acomplete restoration, is capable ofproducing much mischief and oppression.For, if the lodge not only has a right, but is

under the necessity of taking up the caseanew, and deciding whether the personwho had been suspended for threemonths, and whose period of suspensionhas expired, shall now be restored, itfollows, that the members of the lodge, inthe course of their inquiry, are permittedto come to such conclusion as they maythink just and fit; for to say that they, afterall their deliberations, are, to vote only inone way, would be too absurd to requireany consideration. They may, therefore,decide that A.B., having undergone thesentence of the lodge, shall be restored,and then of course all would be well, andno more is to be said. But suppose thatthey decide otherwise, and say that A.B.,having undergone the sentence ofsuspension of three months, _shall not_ berestored, but must remain suspended untilfurther orders. Here, then, a party wouldhave been punished a second time for the

same offense, and that, too, after havingsuffered what, at the time of his conviction,was supposed to be a competentpunishment--and without a trial, andwithout the necessary opportunities ofdefense, again found guilty, and hiscomparatively light punishment ofsuspension for three months changed intoa severer one, and of an indefinite period.The annals of the most arbitrarygovernment in the world--the history of themost despotic tyrant that ever lived--couldnot show an instance of more unprincipledviolation of law and justice than this. Andyet it may naturally be the result of thedoctrine, that in a sentence of definitesuspension, the party can be restored onlyby a vote of the lodge at the expiration ofhis term of suspension. If the lodge canrestore him, it can as well refuse to restorehim, and to refuse to restore him would beto inflict a new punishment upon him for an

old and atoned-for offense.

On the 1st of January, for instance, A.B.,having been put upon his trial, witnesseshaving been examined, his defense havingbeen heard, was found guilty by his lodgeof some offense, the enormity of which,whatever it might be, seemed to require asuspension from Masonry for just threemonths, neither more nor less. If the lodgehad thought the crime still greater, itwould, of course, we presume, havedecreed a suspension of six, nine, ortwelve months. But considering, after afair, impartial, and competentinvestigation of the merits of the case (forall this is to be presumed), that theoffended law would be satisfied with asuspension of three months, thatpunishment is decreed. The court isadjourned _sine die_; for it has done allthat is required--the prisoner undergoes

his sentence with becoming contrition, andthe time having expired, the bond havingbeen paid, and the debt satisfied, he istold that he must again undergo the ordealof another trial, before another court,before he can reassume what was onlytaken from him for a definite period; andthat it is still doubtful, whether thesentence of the former court may not evennow, after its accomplishment, bereversed, and a new and more severe onebe inflicted.

The analogy of a person who has beensentenced to imprisonment for a certainperiod, and who, on the expiration of thatperiod, is at once released, has beenreferred to, as apposite to the case of adefinite suspension. Still moreappropriately may we refer to the case of aperson transported for a term of years, andwho cannot return until that term expires,

but who is at liberty at once to do so whenit has expired. "Another capital offenseagainst public justice," says Blackstone, "isthe returning from transportation, or beingseen at large in Great Britain _before theexpiration of the term for which theoffender was sentenced to betransported." _ Mark these qualifyingwords: "before the expiration of the term:"they include, from the very force oflanguage, the proposition that it is nooffense to return _after_ the expiration ofthe term. And so changing certain words tomeet the change of circumstances, butleaving the principle unchanged, we maylay down the law in relation to restorationsfrom definite suspensions, as follows:

_It is an offense against the masonic codeto claim the privileges of Masonry, or toattempt to visit a lodge after having beensuspended, before the expiration of the

term for which the offender wassuspended_.

Of course, it is no crime to resume theseprivileges after the term has expired; forsurely he must have strange notions of thepowers of language, who supposes thatsuspension for three months, and no more,does not mean, that when the three monthsare over the suspension ceases. And, if thesuspension ceases, the person is no longersuspended; and, if no longer suspendedhe is in good standing, and requires nofurther action to restore him to good moraland masonic health.

But it is said that, although originally onlysuspended for three months, at theexpiration of that period, his conductmight continue to be such as to render hisrestoration a cause of public reproach.What is to be done in such a case? It seems

strange that the question should be asked.The remedy is only too apparent. Let newcharges be preferred, and let a new trialtake place for his derelictions of dutyduring the term of his suspension. Then,the lodge may again suspend him for a stilllonger period, or altogether expel him, if itfinds him deserving such punishment. Butin the name of justice, law, and commonsense, do not insiduously and unmanfullycontinue a sentence for one and a formeroffense, as a punishment for another and alater one, and that, too, without the dueforms of trial.

Let us, in this case, go again for an analogyto the laws of the land. Suppose anoffender had been sentenced to animprisonment of six months for a larceny,and that while in prison he had committedsome new crime. When the six months ofhis sentence had expired, would the

Sheriff feel justified, or even the Judge whohad sentenced him, in saying: "I will notrelease you; you have guilty of anotheroffense during your incarceration, andtherefore, I shall keep you confined sixmonths longer?" Certainly not. The Sheriffor the Judge who should do sohigh-handed a measure, would soon findhimself made responsible for the violationof private rights. But the course to bepursued would be, to arrest him for thenew offense, give him a fair trial, and, ifconvicted again, imprison or otherwisepunish him, according to his newsentence, or, if acquitted, discharge him.

The same course should be pursued with aMason whose conduct during the period ofhis suspension has been liable to reproachor suspicion. Masons have rights as well ascitizens--every one is to be consideredinnocent until he is proved guilty--and no

one should suffer punishment, even of thelightest kind, except after an impartial trialby his peers.

But the case of an indefinite suspension isdifferent. Here no particular time has beenappointed for the termination of thepunishment. It may be continued duringlife, unless the court which haspronounced it think proper to give adeterminate period to what was beforeindeterminate, and to declare that on sucha day the suspension shall cease, and theoffender be restored. In a case of this kind,action on the part of the lodge is necessaryto effect a restoration.

Such a sentence being intended to lastindefinitely--that is to say, during thepleasure of the lodge--may, I conceive, bereversed at any legal time, and theindividual restored by a mere majority

vote the of lodge. Some authorities think avote of two-thirds necessary; but I see noreason why a lodge may not, in this as inother cases, reverse its decision by a voteof a simple majority. The AncientConstitutions are completely silent on thisand all its kindred points; and, therefore,where a Grand Lodge has made no localregulation on the subject, we must beguided by the principles of reason andanalogy, both of which direct us to theconclusion that a lodge may express itswill, in matters unregulated by theConstitutions, through the vote of amajority.

But the restoration of an expelled Masonrequires a different action. By expulsion,as I have already said, all connection withthe Order is completely severed. Theindividual expelled ceases to be a Mason,so far as respects the exercise of any

masonic rights or privileges. Hisrestoration to the Order is, therefore,equivalent to the admission of a profane.Having ceased on his expulsion to be amember of the lodge which had expelledhim, his restoration would be theadmission of a new member. The expelledMason and the uninitiated candidate are tobe placed on the same footing--both areequally unconnected with theinstitution--the one having never been init, and the other having been completelydischarged from it.

The rule for the admission of newmembers, as laid down in the Thirty-nineRegulations, seems to me, therefore, to beapplicable in this case; and hence, Iconceive that to reverse a sentence ofexpulsion and to restore an expelledMason will require as unanimous a vote asthat which is necessary on a ballot for

initiation.

Every action taken by a lodge forrestoration must be done at a statedcommunication and after due notice, that ifany member should have good andsufficient reasons to urge against therestoration, he may have an opportunity topresent them.

In conclusion, the Grand Lodge mayrestore a suspended or expelled Mason,contrary to the wishes of the lodge.

In such case, if the party has beensuspended only, he, at once, resumes hisplace and functions in the lodge, fromwhich, indeed, he had only beentemporarily dissevered.

But in the case of the restoration of anexpelled Mason to the rights and

privileges of Masonry, by a Grand Lodge,does such restoration restore him tomembership in his lodge? This question isan important one, and has very generallybeen decided in the negative by theGrand Lodges of this country. But as Iunfortunately differ from these highauthorities, I cannot refrain, as an apologyfor this difference of opinion, frompresenting the considerations which haveled me to the conclusion which I haveadopted. I cannot, it is true, in the face ofthe mass of opposing authority, offer thisconclusion as masonic law. But I would fainhope that the time is not far distant when itwill become so, by the change on the partof Grand Lodges of the contrary decisionswhich they have made.

The general opinion in this country is, thatwhen a Mason has been expelled by hislodge, the Grand Lodge may restore him

to the rights and privileges, but cannotrestore him to membership in his lodge.My own opinion, in contradiction to this, is,that when a Grand Lodge restores anexpelled Mason, on the ground that thepunishment of expulsion from the rightsand privileges of Masonry was too severeand disproportioned to the offense, it mayor may not restore him to membership inhis lodge. It might, for instance, refuse torestore his membership on the ground thatexclusion from his lodge is an appropriatepunishment; but where the decision of thelodge as to the guilt of the individual isreversed, and the Grand Lodge declareshim to be innocent, or that the chargeagainst him has not been proved, then Ihold, that it is compelled by a just regardto the rights of the expelled member torestore him not only to the rights andprivileges of Masonry, but also tomembership in his lodge.

I cannot conceive how a Brother, whoseinnocence has been declared by theverdict of his Grand Lodge, can bedeprived of his vested rights as themember of a particular lodge, without aviolation of the principles of justice. Ifguilty, let his expulsion stand; but, ifinnocent, let him be placed in the sameposition in which he was before thepassage of the unjust sentence of the lodgewhich has been reversed.

The whole error, for such I conceive it tobe, in relation to this question ofrestoration to membership, arises, Isuppose, from a misapprehension of anancient regulation, which says that "noman can be entered a Brother in anyparticular lodge, or admitted a memberthereof, without the unanimous consent ofall the members"--which inherent

privilege is said not to be subject todispensation, "lest a turbulent membershould thus be imposed upon them, whichmight spoil their harmony, or hinder thefreedom of their communication, or evenbreak and disperse the Lodge." But itshould be remembered that this regulationaltogether refers to the admission of newmembers, and not to the restoration of oldones--to the granting of a favor which thecandidate solicits, and which the lodgemay or may not, in its own good pleasure,see fit to confer, and not to the resumptionof a vested and already acquired right,which, if it be a right, no lodge canwithhold. The practical working of thissystem of incomplete restoration, in a byno means extreme case, will readily showits absurdity and injustice. A memberhaving appealed from expulsion by hislodge to the Grand Lodge, that bodycalmly and fairly investigates the case. It

finds that the appellant has been falselyaccused of an offense which he has nevercommitted; that he has been unfairly tried,and unjustly convicted. It declares himinnocent--clearly and undoubtedlyinnocent, and far freer from any sort ofcondemnation than the prejudiced jurorswho convicted him. Under thesecircumstances, it becomes obligatory thatthe Grand Lodge should restore him to theplace he formerly occupied, and reinvesthim with the rights of which he has beenunjustly despoiled. But that it cannot do. Itmay restore him to the privileges ofMasonry in general; but, innocent thoughhe be, the Grand Lodge, in deference tothe prejudices of his Brethren, mustperpetuate a wrong, and punish thisinnocent person by expulsion from hislodge. I cannot, I dare not, while Iremember the eternal principles of justice,subscribe to so monstrous an exercise of

wrong--so flagrant an outrage upon privaterights.

Index.

A.

Accused, to what he is entitled Act passedin the reign of Henry VI., anno 1425 "" " it was never enforced ActualPast Master, term defined Adjournment, aterm not recognized in Masonry "motion for, cannot be entertained AffiliatedMasons only, can visit lodges Affiliation,what it is " mode of " requiresunanimity " Master Masons onlyentitled to it " rejected applicationfor, may be renewed in other lodges "

may be made with more than one lodgeAge, qualifications of candidates as toAppeal from Grand Master not permitted" not to be entertained in a lodge "cannot be taken from the chair "doctrine of, discussed " from the Master,must be to the Grand Lodge " everyMason has a right to one, to the Grand

Lodge " pending one, the sentence is inabeyance Apprentices, rights of _(seeEntered Apprentice_) Arrears,non-payment of " to lodges, history oftheir origin " do not accrue duringsuspension Assembly, general-one held in287 by St. Alban " " " in 926 atYork " " governed the craft fornearly 800 years " " howorganized Atheist cannot be a MasonAuthorities for masonic law

B.

Balloting for candidates every membermust take a part in it secrecy of,inviolable must be unanimous Masonirresponsible for it to the lodge notdisfranchised of it by non-payment ofarrears mode of Balloting in each degree

not actually prescribed in the ancientconstitutions, but implied must beunanimous Ballot, reconsideration ofmotion for, out of order cannot begranted by dispensation Black ball is thebulwark of Masonry Brother, a title to bealways used in lodge Burial, masonic, rightof must be requested except for strangers

Master Masons only entitled to itdispensation for, not usually requiredBusiness, order of may be suspended atany time by the Master By-laws must beapproved and confirmed by Grand Lodge

C.

Calling from labor to refreshmentCensure, a masonic punishmentCertificates, masonic Chaplain, Grand(_see Grand Chaplain_) Charges ofaccusation, how to be made Closing lodgeis at the discretion of the MasterCommittee of investigation on character ofcandidates Committees to be appointedby the Master Master is chairman of,when present Communication of a lodge,how terminated Consecration of a lodgehow performed meaning of Constituting alodge, ceremony of meaning ofConstitutions, how to be altered " Gothic,adopted in 926, Corn, wine, and oil,masonic elements of consecration, " " "why elements, Crimes, masonic, " "definition of, " " enumeration of

D.

Deacons, " two in each lodge, " areappointed officers, " not removable byMaster or Senior Warden " Grand _(seeGrand Deacons_) Dedication of a lodge,how performed " to whom, and why, "meaning of Definite suspension " "restoration from Degrees, no candidatecan receive more than two at onecommunication Demitting " right of, notdenied until recently, " regulationsconcerning " of many at one time may berefused Deputy Grand Master, duties andprerogatives of " " office of, not veryancient " " exercises prerogatives ofGrand Master in his absence "" cannot bemore than one "" originally appointed byGrand Master Discussions, how to beconducted in lodge, Dispensation whatand where to be granted "for a lodge "" "

tenure of its duration "" " difference from aWarrant District Deputy Grand Master, amodern invention Dotage adisqualification of candidates " meaning ofthe term Dues to lodges, a modern usage "non-payment of, does not disqualify fromvoting for candidates

E.

Emergency, rule upon the subject EnteredApprentice, rights of formerly a memberof his lodge formerly permitted to attendthe Grand Communications may sit in alodge of his degree cannot speak or votecannot be deprived of his rights without

trial after trial may appeal to the GrandLodge Erasure from lodge, a masonicpunishment Evidence in masonic trialsExamination of visitors how to beconducted Exclusion, a masonicpunishment Executive powers of a GrandLodge Expulsion is masonic deathExpulsion, a masonic punishment shouldbe inflicted by Grand Lodge or with itsapproval from higher degrees, its effectrestoration from Extinct lodges, funds of,revert to the Grand Lodge

F.

Family distressed, of a Mason, entitled torelief Fellow Craft, rights of they formerlyconstituted the great body of the Fraternity

formerly permitted to speak, but not voteFinishing candidates of one lodge inanother Fool cannot be a Mason Free, acandidate must be, at the time of makingFree-born, a Mason must be reason forthe rule Funds of extinct lodges revert tothe Grand Lodge

G.

General Assembly. (_See Assembly,General._) God, belief in, a qualification ofa candidate Gothic constitutions adoptedin 926 Grand Chaplain, office establishedin 1775 duties of Grand Deacons officemore ancient than Oliver supposes dutiesof how appointed Grand Lodge held in1717 mode of organizing one threelodges necessary to organize onedormant may be revived if a Grand Officerremains, all the Craft formerly membersof Masters and Wardens of lodges aremembers Grand Officers are alsomembers Past Masters are not membersby inherent right its powers andprerogatives may make new regulationsmust observe the landmarks GrandLodges, historical sketch of arecomparatively modern institutions Grand

Marshal appointed by the Grand Masterduties of Grand Master, duties andprerogatives of office of has existed sincethe origin of Masonry an elective officerby whom to be installed prerogatives of,derived from two sources no appeal fromhis decision may convene Grand Lodgewhen he chooses entitled to two voteshow to be punished may grantdispensations Grand Master may makeMasons at sight may constitute newlodges cannot dispense with requisiteforms in making Masons his own lodgecannot exercise jurisdiction over himGrand Pursuivant Grand Secretary officeof established in 1723 duties of GrandSecretary, may appoint an assistant GrandStewards " " first mentioned in 1721" " duties of " " appointed byJunior Grand Warden Grand Stewards'Lodge Grand Sword-Bearer " "duties of " " office of, constituted in

1731 Grand Tiler " " office of, musthave existed from the earliest times " "must not be a member of the Grand Lodge

" " sometimes appointed, andsometimes elected Grand Treasurer " "

office of, established in 1724 " "duties of " " has always been electedGrand Wardens " " originallyappointed by the Grand Master " "succeed the Grand Master and Deputy

H.

Heresy not a masonic crime Higherdegrees, effect of expulsion fromHistorical sketch

I.

Idiot cannot be made a Mason Impostor,how to be treated in examinationIncompetent witnesses, who they areIndefinite suspension " "restoration from Innovations cannot bemade in the body of Masonry Insanity, ifperfectly cured, no disqualification of acandidate Installation " whence theterm derived " necessary to legalexistence of an officer " of a Masterof a lodge " of the Grand MasterInstruction of representatives, right of, isvested in a lodge Investigation ofcharacter must be by a committeeIrreligious libertine cannot be a Mason "" definition of the term

J.

Judicial powers of a Grand Lodge, JuniorGrand Warden Junior Warden, " "presides in absence of Master and SeniorWarden, " " does not take the West inabsence of Senior Warden, " " presidesover the craft during refreshment " "appoints the stewards Jurisdiction of alodge " geographical or personal " isover all its members " " " unaffiliatedMasons in its vicinity " cannot extendbeyond State lines, " none over its Master

K.

Knowledge of reading and writingnecessary to a Mason

L.

Labor, calling from, to refreshmentLandmarks, what they are, " ritual andlegislative " must be observed by theGrand Lodge Law of Grand Lodges "subordinate lodges " individuals Lawfulinformation, what it is Laws, how to beinterpreted " of Masonry are of twokinds--written and unwritten " written,whence derived " unwritten, whencederived " " same as ancient usageLegislative powers of a Grand LodgeLibertine, irreligious, cannot be a Masonmeaning of the term Lodge, subordinatedefinition of how organized must havebeen congregated by some superiorauthority Lodge, under dispensationdefinition of generally precedes awarranted lodge how formed cannotmake by-laws cannot elect officers

cannot install officers cannot electmembers Lodge, warranted its powersand rights must be consecrated must bededicated must be constituted itsofficers must be installed ceremony ofinstallation in its powers are inherent in it

its reserved rights are secured by theregulations an assembly of the craft intheir primary capacity may select its ownmembers elects its own officers whatofficers of, are elected in England mayinstall its officers Master of, must beinstalled by a past Master may berepresented in the Grand Lodgerepresentatives of may instruct itsrepresentatives may frame by-laws maysuspend or exclude a member maydeclare a member expelled, the sentenceto be approved by the Grand Lodge maylevy annual contributions may select itsname cannot select its number duties ofcannot alter the ritual must elect officers

at a particular time Lodge, warranted,cannot interfere with business of anotherlodge " " cannot initiate withoutprevious notice " " cannot confermore than two degrees on the samecandidate at one time " " cannotmake more than five new Brothers at thesame time " " must meet once amonth " " neglecting to meetforfeits its warrant " " cannotremove from the town, without the consentof the Grand Lodge " " may removefrom one part of the town to another, underrestrictions " " officers of

M.

Madmen cannot be Masons Maims, how fardisqualifying candidates " reason for therule relating to Mass meeting of the craftcannot organize a Grand Lodge Master,Grand. _(See Grand Master_.) MasterMason, rights of " " becomes amember by signing the by-laws " "how this right is forfeited " " mayapply to any lodge for membership " "

to whom subject for discipline " "may speak and vote on all questions " "

may hold any office to which elected "" but to serve as Master must have been

a Warden " " may appeal to theGrand Lodge " " may visit any lodge,after examination Master of a lodge " "

" must have previously served asWarden " " " must see Grand Lodgeregulations enforced " " " must be

installed by a Past Master " " " hasthe warrant in charge " " " may callspecial meetings of his lodge " " "may close his lodge at any time " " "presides over business as well as labor "

" " is supreme in his lodge Master of alodge, no appeal from his decision exceptto Grand Lodge moral qualifications ofintellectual qualifications of who is tojudge of them is a member of the GrandLodge may exclude a membertemporarily Membership, right ofMembers of Grand Lodge are Masters andWardens with the Grand Officers Minutes,when to be read how to be amended notto be read at special communicationsformula for keeping Moral law, what it isa Mason must obey it Motions, when to beentertained

N.

Name of a lodge to be selected by itselfNon-residents, initiation of Number of alodge regulates its precedency ofcandidates to be initiated at onecommunication

O.

Office, can be vacated only by death,removal, or expulsion not vacated bysuspension Officers of a Grand Lodgesubordinate lodge warranted lodgemust be installed how to be installedtime of election determined by GrandLodge elected annually vacancies in,how to be supplied cannot resign Order,rules of whence derived

P.

Parliamentary law not applicable toMasonry Past Masters rights of notmembers of the Grand Lodge by inherentright may install their successors of twokinds--actual and virtual may preside in alodge eligible to election to the chairentitled to a seat in the East eligible to beelected Deputy Grand Master, or GrandWarden virtual, cannot be present atinstalling a Master Penal jurisdiction of alodge Perfect youth, meaning of the termPerfection, physical, why required of acandidate Petition of candidate must beread at a regular communication referredto a committee of three reported on atnext regular communication report on,cannot be made at a specialcommunication renewal of, in case ofrejection how to be renewed, if rejected

for advancement to a higher degree ifrejected, how to be renewed Petitioners,not less than seven to form a lodge whatthey must set forth must berecommended by nearest lodge Politicaloffenses not cognizable by a lodgePolitical qualifications of candidatesPostponed business, when to be called upPrecedency of lodges, regulated by theirnumbers Presiding in a lodge, who has theright of officer, has the prerogatives ofthe Master, for the time Previous question,unknown in Masonry Probation ofcandidates for initiation foradvancement Proceedings of a regularcommunication cannot be amended at aspecial one Profanes, testimony of, how tobe taken in trials Proficiency of candidatesProficiency of candidates, must be suitablePunishments, masonic Pursuivant, a titleequivalent to Sword-Bearer

Q.

Qualifications of a Master of a lodge ofcandidates, moral religious physicalintellectual political, 184 Quarterlycommunications of Grand Lodge, orderedin 1717 Question, how to be taken on amotion

R.

Reading, a qualification of candidatesRecommendation of nearest lodge,necessary to form a new one ofcandidate, must be by two membersReconsideration of ballot motion for, isout of order, cannot be granted bydispensation Rejected candidate cannotapply to any other lodge renewedpetition of, when to be made, Relief, rightof claiming it unworthy Masons notentitled to it Religion of a Mason, what it isrequired to be Religious offenses notcognizable by a lodge Removal of a lodge,rule on the subject of Representatives of alodge, who they are Reprimand, a masonicpunishment Restoration from definitesuspension indefinite supensionexpulsion must be at a statedcommunication may be by Grand Lodge

requires a unanimous vote tomembership discussed

S.

Secretary, Grand. (_See GrandSecretary._) of a lodge his duty is arecording, corresponding, and receivingofficer is a check upon the treasureroften receives compensation in case ofdeath, or expulsion, a successor may beelected but not in case of removal, orsickness Senior Grand Warden. (_SeeGrand Wardens._) Senior Wardenpresides in absence of Master may invitea Past Master to preside presides over thecraft during labor appoints the JuniorDeacon Sentence in trials, how to beobtained ---- is in abeyance pending anappeal Stewards, Grand. (_See GrandStewards._) of a lodge appointed byJunior Warden duties of not removableby Junior Warden Stranger, initiation ofSuspension definite indefinite Sword

Bearer, Grand. (_See Grand SwordBearer._)

T.

Testimony, how to be taken on masonictrials Tiler, Grand. (_See Grand Tiler._) ofa lodge office existed from beginning ofthe institution no lodge can be withoutone must be a worthy Master Mason if amember, the office does not disfranchisehim when voting, Junior Deacon takes hisplace may be removed for misconductTiler's obligation, form of it Transientpersons, initiation of Treasurer, Grand._(See Grand Treasurer_.) " " of alodge " " duties of " " is theonly banker of the lodge " " is adisbursing officer " " a Brother ofworldly substance usually selected "" in case of death, a successor may beelected " " but not in case ofsickness, or removal Trials, masonic "" form of " " evidence in

U.

Unaffiliated Masons " " taxsometimes levied on " " position,rights, and duties of Unaffiliation, contraryto the spirit of Masonry " effect of,on a Mason Unanimity in the ballotrequired by the ancient constitutionsUneducated candidates not forbidden bypositive enactment " " theiradmission opposed to the spirit of theinstitution

V.

Virtual Past Masters, who they are Visit,right of " only affiliated Mason entitled

to it " must be preceded by anexamination " requires a certificate toinsure it Visitors, examination of,described " must take the Tiler'sobligation Voting must always be by ashow of hands Voting in trials, obligatoryon all members present Voucher must be acompetent Mason Vouching for a visitor

W.

Wardens, Grand. (_See Grand Wardens._)of a lodge are assistants of the Master

entitled to membership in Grand LodgeWarden, Senior. (_See Senior Warden._)Warden, Junior. (_See Junior Warden._)Warrant of constitution what it is itsdifference from a dispensation can berevoked only by the Grand Lodge conferspowers of installation and succession notnecessary before 1717 cannot beresigned by a majority of the lodgeWarranted lodges. (_See Lodges,Warranted._) Witnesses in masonic trials,qualifications of definition of incompetentones Woman cannot be made a MasonWriting, a qualification of candidates

Y.

Yeas and nays, calling for, unmasonicYoung man under age cannot be made aMason Youth, perfect, meaning of the term

Footnotes

[1] They will be found in Oliver's edition ofPreston, p. 71, note, (U.M.L., vol. iii., p. 58),or in the American edition by Richards,Appendix i., note 5.

[2] Found in Ol. Preston, n. 3 (p. 162.U.M.L., vol. iii., p. 134).

[3] In all references to, or citations from,Anderson's Constitutions, I have used,unless otherwise stated, the first editionprinted at London in 1723--a fac simile ofwhich has recently been published by Bro.John W. Leonard, of New York. I have,however, in my possession the subsequenteditions of 1738, 1755, and 1767, and havesometimes collated them together.

[4] The Gothic Constitutions are that codeof laws which was adopted by the GeneralAssembly at York, in the year 926. Theyare no longer extant, but portions of them

have been preserved by Anderson,Preston, and other writers.

[5] Preston, book iv., sec, 2., p. 132, n.(U.M.L.,vol. iii., p. 109).

[6] General Regulations, art. xxxix.

[7] Chancellor Walworth, in his profoundargument on the New York difficulties,asserted that this fact "does not distinctlyappear, although it is, pretty evident thatall voted."--p. 33. The language ofAnderson does not, however, admit of ashadow of a doubt. "The Brethren," hesays, "by a majority of hands, elected," &c.

[8] Opinion of Chancellor Walworth uponthe questions connected with the latemasonic difficulties in the State of NewYork, p. 37. There is much historicallearning displayed in this little pamphlet.

[9] Preston, p. 131, n., Oliver's Edit.(U.M.L., vol. iii.,p. 109).

[10] Of the thirty-six Grand Masters whohave presided over the craft in Englandsince the revival of Masonry in 1717, thirtyhave been noblemen, and three princes ofthe reigning family.

[11] Article xxxiv.

[12] His most important prerogatives areinherent or derived from ancient usage.

[13] Proceedings G.L. Maryland, 1849, p.25.

[14] Art. xxxix.

[15] The word "time" has been interpretedto mean _communication_.

[16] And this is not because such pastofficer has an inherent right to themastership, but because as long as such anone is present and willing to serve, theredoes not exist such an emergency aswould authorize a dispensation of the law.

[17] What further concerns a lodge underdispensation is referred to a specialchapter in a subsequent part of the work.

[18] It is well known, although it cannot bequoted as authority, that the AtholConstitutions expressly acknowledged theexistence of this prerogative. SeeDermott's Ahiman Rezon.

[19] Book of Constitutions, edit. 1767, p.222.

[20] Book of Const., p. 233.

[21] Book of Const., p. 313.

[22] Book of Constitutions, p. 319.

[23] Preston, p. 237, ed. 1802, (U.M.L., vol.iii., p. 223).

[24] Book of Constitutions, p. 247

[25] The existence of this prerogative isdenied by the Grand Lodges of Missouri,Tennessee, Louisiana, and Massachusetts,while it is admitted by those of New York,Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina,Wisconsin, Vermont, Mississippi, Ohio,New Hampshire, Maryland, Indiana, Texasand Florida; in the last two, however,subject to limitation.

[26] That is, the one who has longest beena Freemason.

[27] Book of the Lodge, p. 115 (U.M.L., vol.i., book 2, p. 78).

[28] It was abolished in New York in 1854.

[29] This is a small chest or coffer,representing the ark of the covenant, andcontaining the three great lights ofMasonry.

[30] "What man is there that hath a newhouse and hath not dedicated it? Let himgo and return to his house, lest he die inthe battle and another man dedicate it."Deut. xx. 5.

[31] De Syned. Vet. Ebr�r., 1. iii., c. xiv., �1.

[32] Cicero, Brut. i.

[33] See such a form of Dispensation inCole's Masonic Library, p. 91.

[34] Preston, Append., n. 4 (U.M.L., vol.iii., pp. 150, 151).

[35] Book of Constitutions, orig. ed, p., 70(U.M.L., vol. xv., book 1, p. 70).

[36] General Regulations of 1722. Asubsequent regulation permitted theelection of a candidate, if there were notmore than three black balls against him,provided the lodge desired such arelaxation of the rule. The lodges of thiscountry, however, very generally, and, as Ithink, with propriety, require unanimity.The subject will be hereafter discussed.

[37] Every lodge shall annually elect itsMaster and Treasurer by ballot. SuchMaster having been regularly appointed

and having served as Warden of awarranted lodge for one year._Constitutions of the Ancient Fraternity ofFree and Accepted Masons, published byauthority of the United Grand Lodge ofEngland_, 1847, _p_. 58 (U.M.L., vol. ix.,book 1).

[38] The Wardens, or officers, of a lodgecannot be removed, unless for a causewhich appears to the lodge to be sufficient;but the Master, if he be dissatisfied withthe conduct of any of his officers, may laythe cause of complaint before the lodge;and, if it shall appear to the majority of theBrethren present that the complaint bewell founded, he shall have power todisplace such officer, and to nominateanother. _English Constitutions, as above,p._ 80 (U.M.L., vol. ix., book 1).

[39] It is not necessary that he should be a

Past Master of the lodge.

[40] No master shall assume the Master'schair, until he shall have been regularlyinstalled, though he may in the interim rulethe lodge. _English Constitutions_ (U.M.L.,vol. ix., book 1).

[41] Every Warranted Lodge is aconstituent part of the Grand Lodge, inwhich assembly all the power of thefraternity resides. _English Constitutions,p_. 70 (U.M.L., vol. ix., book 1).

[42] We shall not here discuss the questionwhether Past Masters are members of theGrand Lodge, by inherent right, as thatsubject will be more appropriatelyinvestigated when we come to speak of theLaw of Grand Lodges, in a future chapter.They are, however clearly, not therepresentatives of their lodge.

[43] Preston, p. 167 (U.M.L., vol. iii., p.151).

[44] General Regulations. Of the duty ofmembers, Art. X, (U.M.L., vol. xv., book 1,p. 61).

[45] English Constitutions, p. 59 (U.M.L.,vol. ix., book 1).

[46] In selecting the name, the modernConstitutions of England make theapprobation of the Grand Master orProvincial Grand Master necessary.

[47] Such is the doctrine of the modernEnglish Constitutions.

[48] "No Brother can be a Warden until hehas passed the part of a Fellow Craft; nor aMaster until he has acted as a

Warden."--_Old Charges_, IV. (U.M.L., vol.xv., book 1, p. 52).

[49] Regulations on Installation of a Master,No. III. Preston, p. 74 (U.M.L., vol. iii., p.61).

[50] Hats. quoted in Jefferson, p. 14.

[51] One of the ancient charges, whichPreston tells us that it was the constantpractice of our Ancient Brethren torehearse at the opening and closing of thelodge, seems to refer to this rule, when itsays, "the Master, Wardens, and Brethrenare just and faithful, and _carefully finishthe work they begin_."--Oliver's Preston,p. 27, _note_ (U.M.L., vol. iii., p. 22).

[52] Proceedings of G.L. of Tennessee,1850. Appendix A, p. 8.

[53] Book of Constitutions, edition of 1755,p. 282.

[54] If it is an extra communication, thisitem of the transaction is, of course,omitted, for minutes are only to beconfirmed at regular communications.

[55] Oliver's Preston, p. 163, note (U.M.L.,vol. iii., p. 135).

[56] Such is the provision in the modernconstitutions of England, but the 4th of the39 Regulations required the candidate tobe at least twenty-five.

[57] See these regulations in Preston, p.162, Oliver's ed. (U.M.L., vol. iii., p. 135).

[58] Oliver's Preston, p. 72, (U.M.L., vol.iii., p. 59).

[59] Blackstone, Com. I., Introd., � 2.

[60] In an able report on this subject, in theproceedings of the Grand Lodge ofGeorgia for 1852. In accordance with theviews there expressed, Bro. Rockwelldecided officially, as District DeputyGrand Master, in 1851, that a man who hadlost one eye was not admissible.

[61] Potter, 184.

[62] Page 18. In December, 1851, theCommittee of Correspondence of NorthCarolina, unregardful of the rigid rule oftheir predecessors, decided that maimedcandidates might be initiated, "providedtheir loss or infirmity will not prevent themfrom making full proficiency in Masonry."

[63] Proceedings of the G.L. of Mo. for1823, p. 5. The report and resolution were

on the petitions of two candidates to beinitiated, one with only one arm, and theother much deformed in his legs.

[64] When the spirit of expediency oncebegins, we know not where it will stop.Thus a blind man has been initiated inMississippi, and a one-armed one inKentucky; and in France a few years since,the degrees were conferred bysign-language on a deaf mute!

[65] Namely, the incorrectly presumedoperative origin of the Order. The whole ofthis report, which is from the venerableGiles F. Yates, contains an able andunanswerable defense of the ancient law inopposition to any qualification.

[66] See proceedings of New York, 1848,pp. 36, 37.

[67] Such is the formula prescribed by theConstitutions of England as well as all theMonitors in this country.

[68] See Mackey's Lexicon ofFreemasonry, 3d Edit., art, _Ballot_.

[69] Book of Constitutions. Edit. 1755, p.312.

[70] See Mackey's Lexicon ofFreemasonry, 3d Edit., art. _Ballot_

[71] Except when there is but one blackball, in which case the matter lies overuntil the next stated meeting. Seepreceding Section.

[72] Masonry founded on Scripture, aSermon preached in 1752, by the Rev. W.Williams.

[73] That is, advance him, from thesubordinate position of a serving man orApprentice, to that of a Fellow Craft orjourneyman.

[74] This is also the regulation of the GrandLodge of South Carolina.

[75] Proceedings of Grand Lodge of NewYork, for 1845. He excepts, of course, fromthe operation of the rule, those made bydispensation; but this exception does notaffect the strength of the principle.

[76] Preston, edition of Oliver, p. 12(U.M.L., vol. iii., p. 10).

[77] Transactions of the G.L. of New York,anno 1848, p. 73.

[78] Edition of 1723, page 71 (U.M.L., vol.xv., book 1, p. 71).

[79] Preston, p. 48 (U.M.L., vol, iii., p. 40).

[80] Const. New York, 1854, p. 13. TheConstitutions of the Grand Lodge ofEngland (p. 64) have a similar provision;but they require the Brother to express hiswish for membership on the day of hisinitiation.

[81] Preston, Oliver's Ed., p. 71, _note_(U.L.M., vol. iii., p. 60).

[82] See Oliver, note in Preston, p. 75(U.M.L., vol. iii, p. 61).

[83] Oliver's Preston, p. 162 (U.M.L., vol.iii., p. 135.)

[84] See Anderson's Const., 3d Edit., 1755,page 303.

[85] Preston, Oliver's Edit., p. 89 (U.M.L.,vol. iii., p. 72).

[86] Preston, Oliver's Edit" p. 90 (U.M.L.,vol. iii., p. 73).

[87] Book I., chap. iii.

[88] Proceedings of Louisiana, an. 1852.

[89] Preston, Oliver's Edit., p. 76 (U.M.L.,vol. iii, p. 62).

[90] Ibid

[91] See Mackey's Lexicon ofFreemasonry, _in voce_.

[92] Constitutions, Second Edition of 1738,p. 154.

[93] Proceedings for 1853.

[94] Proceedings for 1847.

[95] The right to visit is restricted to once,by many Grand Lodges to enable him tobecome acquainted with the character ofthe lodge before he applies formembership.

[96] Blackstone, Introd., � i.

[97] For so we should interpret the word"honeste."

[98] I have treated this subject of expulsionso fully in my "Lexicon of Freemasonry,"and find so little more to say on thesubject, that I have not at all varied fromthe course of argument, and very littlefrom the phraseology of the article in thatwork.

[99] In England, ejection from amembership by a subordinate lodge iscalled "exclusion," and it does not deprivethe party of his general rights as a memberof the fraternity.

[100] Lexicon of Freemasonry.

[101] Phillips, on Evidence, p. 3.

[102] Chief Baron Gilbert.

www.mybebook.comImagination.makes.creation