صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

But what is the practice under the rule? Or, in other words, is the rule generally observed? We suppose that, as a general thing, it is. But there are exceptions; and these seem to have been anticipated at the early stages of the organization of R. A. Masonry, or of the introduction of the Order of High Priesthood into this country. It was at first simply made the "duty of a Companion, as soon after his election to the office of H. Priest, as was consistent with his personal convenience, to apply for admission to the Order of High Priesthood, that he might be fully qualified properly to govern his Chapter." This loose requirement led to a corresponding looseness of practice. There were at that day very few High Priests who knew anything of the Order of High Priesthood. The possession of it was not generally esteemed to be an essential prerequisite for the presiding officer. And we are bound to say, that this view of the case is still extensively entertained and practised upon, notwithstanding a more stringent rule has been adopted, and is sanctioned by the authority of the General Grand Chapter. The probability is, that a very considerable portion of the presiding officers of Chapters at this time, in all parts of the country-in some more than others, of course-are Companions who have never received the degree. This is attributable, not to any unwillingness to take the degree, but to the difficulty in obtaining it. In order to confer it, the regulations very properly require that there shall be present at least three persons who have received it,—a requirement, particularly in the case of new Chapters, very difficult to comply with. Besides, our own observation and experience assure us, that there are very few High Priests who, though they may have themselves received the degree, are qualified to confer it on others. It may be said that it can always be obtained at the meetings of the Grand Chapter. But this, unfortunately, is not strictly true; for it will, in spite of our wishes, sometimes fall out that Grand officers are not the most skillful workmen. But suppose they are, and that they are always prepared to perform any duty that may be required of them, the candidate is not always ready at the moment required-the elections in the Chapters do not always take place at the precise season when the newly elected High Priest can avail himself of the opportunity; nor is it always convenient, or practicable even, for him to attend the meeting of the Grand Chapter for the special purpose of being qualified for installation. Under such circumstances, what is to be done? The new High Priest cannot be installed in the manner prescribed by the General Grand Chapter; and he cannot enter upon the performance of his duty until he has been installed. Here is the dilemma which has led to a partial disregard of the rule, in the omission of the “ necessary ceremo nies" before spoken of. How far the circumstances justify this irregularity in the proceeding, is a question in respect to which it is natural that

there should be a difference of opinion among intelligent and experienced Companions. But we presume that there is an entire unity of opinion as to the only strictly correct course to be pursued ; and that that is to fol low the instructions given in the General Grand Constitution.

ADMISSION OF

CANDIDATES

WHO HAVE

BEEN ONCE REJECTED.

BR. MOORE:

Macon, Miss., Jan. 18, 1848.

Is there any specified time for an individual to wait, before he may petition a Lodge the second time, after his petition has been once rejected? E. W. FERRIS.

Yours, &c.,

There is not. The written law of the Fraternity is silent on the subject; and the practice is not uniform. In some of the States, it is regulated by the Grand Lodges in their Constitutions; and in others, it is left to the local regulations of the subordinate Lodges. The periods usually fixed in such cases, are six and twelve months. But we are not favorably disposed towards this way of adjusting the matter. It is too loose and uncertain. It might happen that the cause of the rejection of a candidate may be satisfactorily explained and removed in twenty four hours after the ballot is taken. In such case, the Lodge should be at liberty to avail itself of the earliest opportunity to heal the wound it has causelessly, though unintentionally, inflicted on the feelings of an upright and honorable man. Under such circumstances, the delay would be cruelty. On the other hand, a candidate may not be any better qualified to receive the degrees after the expiration of a year of probation, than when he was first proposed and rejected.

The most just to all parties, and, in our judgment, the safest course for the Institution, would be for each Grand Lodge, within its own jurisdiction, to prohibit, by Constitutional enactment, the initiation of a candidate, who has been once rejected, in any other Lodge than that to which he originally applied for admission,-except he obtain the written recommendation of at least six members of the Lodge rejecting him, three of whom should be the Master and Wardens.

This is the regulation of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, and it leaves the matter where it properly belongs-in the hands of those who best understand it. And what to our mind is of weighty consideration, it enables the Lodge to correct immediately any error into which it may be inadvertently led. The exception in favor of the candidate, allowing him the privilege of the recommendation of six members of the Lodge, is intended to protect him, so far as regulations can avail, against individual

prejudice or malice; for, we regret to be obliged to admit, that Masons. are not always entirely free from the influence of these vices, though we believe they prevail among them to a much less extent than in any other class of the community.

If a rejected candidate leaves the State and applies for admission elsewhere, it is the duty of the Lodge to which he applies, to communicate immediately with the Lodge in which he was rejected. The fact that he has been rejected, is brought out by the usual test; which ought never to be omitted in the case of one who has recently become a resident in the town where the Lodge to which he applies for admission, is located.

MEMBERS OF LODGES UNDER DISPENSA.

ΤΙΟΝ.

Aberdeen, Miss., Jan. 8, 1848.

BR. C. W. MOORE :We are in a prosperous state here. The Lodge has not done the same amount of work the past year that it did the preceding, but has conferred some twentythree or twenty four degrees. Our Chapter, (styled Euphemia Chapter,) has just surrendered its dispensation, and is enjoying a season of repose, to which it seems well entitled, having exalted thirtythree Companions from the 3d of March to the 22d of December,—all good men and true, if I may be permitted to speak of a band in which I have the honor of being numbered myself.

Our whole number in the Chapter is forty four; in the Lodge, seventy odd; some half dozen of whom, however, for a year past, have been pursuing their labors at Buena Vista, under the Mastership of Lt. Col. John A. Wilcox, a member of our Lodge. And here I would like to propose a query, premising that members of our Lodge, twelve months in arrears, are ipso facto suspended from the Lodge; but that we have exempted volunteers, while absent in the army, from the payment of dues. Several of our members are in the 2d Regiment Mississippi Rifles, and have united with other Masons in the Regiment, in procuring a Dispensation (or Charter?) for a military Lodge, of which they are members and even officers. Was it proper for them to do so, before demitting from Aberdeen Lodge? And, we knowing the fact, (from letters received from them giving a list of officers, and from newspaper accounts giving a list of members,) ought we to return them to the Grand Lodge as members of our Lodge, or drop them from our list as virtually demitted?

We have already had a little confusion from an occurrence of a similar nature. This Lodge recommended a petition for a Dispensation for a new Lodge in our neighborhood, some of the petitioners being members of our own Lodge. On becoming Secretary, being ignorant of that fact, I continued to charge these Brethren with dues until one of them who was in arrears to some small amount previous to the time of obtaining the dispensation, fell into suspension for non-payment of dues. The Brethren concerned, on learning this, insisted that, by recommending their petition, we had granted them a demit, and we finally compromised the matter; but I want your opinion how it should have been done from the first.

Fraternally, yours,

REUREN NASON,

Sec'y Aberdeen Lodge, No. 32.

The Lodges attached to the volunteer regiments in Mexico, are all,

probably, temporary; and, from their very nature, cannot be expected to comply in strict exactness with all the technicalities which would be required of local Lodges. If the Lodge attached to the 2d regiment Miss. Rifles, is working under a Dispensation, the fact of being members of it does not discharge the Brethren referred to from their connection with Aberdeen Lodge; because, a Lodge cannot be constituted under a Dispensation, which merely authorizes a certain number of Brethren to assemble and make Masons, for a specified time. These Brethren may be members of the Lodge or not. If a Charter was granted, then the Brethren ought to have regularly "demitted" from Aberdeen Lodge. In the former case, we should return their names to the Grand Lodge. In the latter, we should not; but would discharge them and overlook the irregularity; and on their return and the dissolution of the army Lodge, place the survivors on the roll of honorary membership.

The recommendation, in the second case stated by our correspondent, did not necessarily discharge the petitioners from membership, or release them from any of their liabilities to Aberdeen Lodge. They were holden for their dues until they had obtained a Charter for the new Lodge, or had been regularly discharged from that of which they were members.

The reasons on which this decision is based, are given in the fifth volume of the Magazine, (page 257,) to which we respectfully refer our correspondent.

DOORS IN A LODGE ROOM.

A******, Jan. 20, 1848.

BR. MOORE:-Will you have the goodness to answer the following questions:
Should a Blue Lodge Masonic Hall have more than one door or entrance?
If but one, where should it be situated?

If two, where should the second be situated?

The Brethren in this village contemplate preparing a hall in a large building about to be erected, and they differ in opinion on the above questions. Your views would probably unite them.

[blocks in formation]

We think there can be no valid reasons assigned why there should not be two doors to a Lodge room, and find it very difficult to conjecture on what grounds the objection is raised. On the contrary, we think there is a decided propriety, as well as convenience, in having two doors—one for a common entrance, and the other for special Lodge purposes. This plan is not always practicable; but where it is, we should most certainly adopt it.

Where it is impracticable to have more than one door, that will be found to be most convenient, if placed in the northwest or southwest; that is, on the right or left of the S. W. Where two can be had, we should place them in both those positions-one opening, (and it is immaterial which,) from the ante-room,-used for the accommodation of the work,— and the other from the visitors' room, as a common entrance.

EFFECT OF EXPULSION FROM A CHAPTER, ON A LODGE.

Selma, Ala., Jan. 15, 1848.

DEAR SIR AND BRO.:-As your Magazine is considered very high authority in questions concerning Masonry, please give me your opinion on the following: 1st. Does the expulsion or suspension of a member of a Chapter, imply an expulsion or suspension from a Blue Lodge? That is, suppose a man is a member of the Chapter at this place, and a member also of the Blue Lodge at a place some twentyfive or thirty miles distant, and that he has been guilty of conduct for which he is suspended by our Chapter: Does the action of our Chapter cut him off from the benefits which he is entitled to as a member of the Lodge? Does it act as a suspension from the Blue Lodge?

2d. Is it the duty of the Chapter from which he has been expelled, to make known that fact to the Lodge of which he is a member, or must the Blue Lodge first make inquiry of the Chapter?

I remain fraternally, yours,

E. M. GANTT.

1. It does not. The Chapter cannot legislate for the Lodge. The ancient Constitutions know nothing of R. A. Chapters. They make a Mason amenable only to his Master and Lodge. Lodges and Chapters, in this country, are distinct and independent bodies, acting under different organizations, and subject, in a very considerable degree, to different laws and regulations; and it is not competent for one to legislate for the other. A contrary principle, we think, cannot in safety be recognized.

2. It is the duty of the members of the Chapter, as Masons, to make known to the Lodge that it has an unworthy member on its roll, and thus enable it to protect itself. This is usually done by direction of the Chapter, through the Secretary. The fact of the reputed unworthiness of one of its members being communicated, the Lodge will inquire into the nature of the alleged offence, and be governed in its action and decision solely by its own regulations, the laws of the Grand Lodge, and the ancient Constitutions and usages of Masonry; having no reference to the peculiar local regulations adopted for the government of the Chapters.

We have so often and fully discussed the questions proposed, that our correspondent will excuse our not entering more in detail into their consideration at this time.

« السابقةمتابعة »